60mm refractors are good

On Monday, 2 January 2017 19:41:24 UTC+1, wrote:

WHY do you expect such things to be inexpensive?

Last response to non-constructive discussion:
Because they have no need of being expensive.
They are expensive because of the way they are made and marketed.
Amateur astronomers are used to being fleeced:
They will pay for junk with large denomination bills/notes or plastic.
They will pay the price of a new car or motorcycle for a telescope mounting.
The number of precision components and materials in the car and motorcycle completely dwarf the telescope mounting.
If it's a matter of production scale then redesign or rethink the mounting.
Is its expense cosmetic [to impress] or purely functional?
Does it need to be made that way or even look like it does?
As the price of optics falls steadily the mounting goes on getting much more expensive.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 2:34:17 AM UTC-5, Chris.B wrote:
On Monday, 2 January 2017 19:41:24 UTC+1, wrote:

WHY do you expect such things to be inexpensive?

Last response to non-constructive discussion:

Non-constructive, perhaps, because you are evasive in your answers.


Because they have no need of being expensive.

Build and demonstrate a prototype and show how it can be made inexpensively.

They are expensive because of the way they are made and marketed.

Details? Examples?

Amateur astronomers are used to being fleeced:
They will pay for junk with large denomination bills/notes or plastic.

Examples?

They will pay the price of a new car or motorcycle for a telescope mounting.

Cars and motorcycles benefit from economy of scale.

The number of precision components and materials in the car and motorcycle completely dwarf the telescope mounting.

And?

If it's a matter of production scale then redesign or rethink the mounting.

Done.

Is its expense cosmetic [to impress] or purely functional?

To what particular telescope mounts are you referring?

Does it need to be made that way or even look like it does?

Possibly not, but show us your prototype.

As the price of optics falls steadily the mounting goes on getting much more expensive.

To what particular telescope mounts are you referring?

On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 9:01:45 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 1:34:12 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

If only altazimuth mountings with drives and Goto became the norm. The small
refractor market could be transformed if only they would junk the CRAPPY
equatorials.

But if you want to take a long-exposure photograph, you need an equatorial.

Or you could take many short exposures and stack them.

On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 4:29:29 AM UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Sunday, January 1, 2017 at 9:38:35 AM UTC-8, wrote:
For all of you whom Santa brought 60mm refractors for Christmas, time to visit your local astronomy clubs, en masse, and get useful advice on how to use those scopes, if you or your kids are new to the hobby.

Those with "GoTo" telescopes are also strongly encouraged to attend.

Plenty to see up there in January! First quarter Moon later this week.

---

Clear skies.


60 mm is OK for planets or other bright objects and terrestrial seeing.

Exactly. Newbies need to start somewhere, but if faced with a large initial expenditure, few will ever test the waters.

That's one reason why 60mm refractors are good. There are other reasons too.

On 03/01/2017 11:18, wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 9:01:45 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 1:34:12 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

If only altazimuth mountings with drives and Goto became the norm. The small
refractor market could be transformed if only they would junk the CRAPPY
equatorials.

Not sure it makes that much difference in practice. There is a slight
advantage for a beginner in having only one knob to adjust to track an
object on the sky (assuming that they can find the north pole).

But once you add a relatively cheap computer goto system and two (or
more) star alignment even a beginner can find almost anything easily.

But if you want to take a long-exposure photograph, you need an equatorial.

Or you could take many short exposures and stack them.

Meade used to do a field derotator but it is now discontinued.

https://www.optcorp.com/meade-1220-f...e-rotator.html

That is how most of the big professional scopes do it since the hefty
mount is invariably altazimuth and the observing programme has to be
checked to make sure the exposure doesn't go too close to the zenith or
put too many twists into the detectors umbilical cord.

AFAIK Palomar 200" Hale horseshoe mount remains the largest scope that
is equatorially mounted today - albeit on an exotic design.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 8:56:16 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 03/01/2017 11:18, wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 9:01:45 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 1:34:12 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

If only altazimuth mountings with drives and Goto became the norm. The small
refractor market could be transformed if only they would junk the CRAPPY
equatorials.

I didn't write that. Get the attributions correct and try again.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:22:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 4:29:29 AM UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Sunday, January 1, 2017 at 9:38:35 AM UTC-8, wrote:
For all of you whom Santa brought 60mm refractors for Christmas, time to visit your local astronomy clubs, en masse, and get useful advice on how to use those scopes, if you or your kids are new to the hobby.

Those with "GoTo" telescopes are also strongly encouraged to attend.

Plenty to see up there in January! First quarter Moon later this week.

---

Clear skies.


60 mm is OK for planets or other bright objects and terrestrial seeing.

Exactly. Newbies need to start somewhere, but if faced with a large initial expenditure, few will ever test the waters.

That's one reason why 60mm refractors are good. There are other reasons too.

That's correct! For a 15 year old, interested in science, a 60-80mm department store refractor is a perfect gift for Christmas or birth day.

On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 2:52:46 PM UTC-8, StarDust wrote:

That's correct! For a 15 year old, interested in science, a 60-80mm department store refractor is a perfect gift for Christmas or birth day.

How about a 55mm refractor in the hands of an expert and very experienced observer?

http://www.jayreynoldsfreeman.com/Au...RSaga.text.pdf

On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 5:52:46 PM UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:22:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 4:29:29 AM UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Sunday, January 1, 2017 at 9:38:35 AM UTC-8, wrote:
For all of you whom Santa brought 60mm refractors for Christmas, time to visit your local astronomy clubs, en masse, and get useful advice on how to use those scopes, if you or your kids are new to the hobby.

Those with "GoTo" telescopes are also strongly encouraged to attend.

Plenty to see up there in January! First quarter Moon later this week.

---

Clear skies.


60 mm is OK for planets or other bright objects and terrestrial seeing.

Exactly. Newbies need to start somewhere, but if faced with a large initial expenditure, few will ever test the waters.

That's one reason why 60mm refractors are good. There are other reasons too.

That's correct! For a 15 year old, interested in science, a 60-80mm department store refractor is a perfect gift for Christmas or birth day.

Why wouldn't it be?

On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 6:38:29 PM UTC-5, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 2:52:46 PM UTC-8, StarDust wrote:

That's correct! For a 15 year old, interested in science, a 60-80mm department store refractor is a perfect gift for Christmas or birth day.

How about a 55mm refractor in the hands of an expert and very experienced observer?

http://www.jayreynoldsfreeman.com/Au...RSaga.text.pdf

Without a doubt, observing the Herschel list with, say, a 12-inch Dob would be a more interesting -experience- than with that small refractor.

His 55mm refractor wasn't exactly cheap, especially when needed accessories are included.

Rather few examples of his telescope were sold and you should really stop to consider why.

This sort of "stunt" (no offense intended) is not likely to be particularly impressive or inspiring to a potential newbie, whereas first-hand views of the Moon, Saturn, Jupiter or the Orion Nebula, etc, through a modestly priced, small, obtainable telescope probably would be.