To Refract or to SC

Morgoth wrote:

I've used a apo-flourite-kitchen-sink-refractor. It was nice, and it
was usable, but for a refractor to be usable it needs to be of small
aperature (large aperature refractors are all but unusuable, IMHO). At
the end of the day, what's most important in a telescope is aperture,
followed closely by usability, and a 5" to 8" SCT blows away an
equivalent refractor easily, in terms of performance.

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

Try reading the posts rather than just skim and spew.

Cheers

Martin

--------------
Martin Frey
N 51 02 E 0 47
--------------

What about the new Orion 80mm apo for £399 ?

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 15:45:41 +0100, Martin Frey
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote:

I've used a apo-flourite-kitchen-sink-refractor. It was nice, and it
was usable, but for a refractor to be usable it needs to be of small
aperature (large aperature refractors are all but unusuable, IMHO). At
the end of the day, what's most important in a telescope is aperture,
followed closely by usability, and a 5" to 8" SCT blows away an
equivalent refractor easily, in terms of performance.

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

Try reading the posts rather than just skim and spew.


I have. I'm recommending that the original poster doesn't touch a
refractor with abestos gloves and a 20' bargepole, never mind a 10'
bargepole. An SCT of an equivalent aperture is cheaper, and more
easily used and has almost the same performance, and an SCT of the
same price is likely to be of much greater aperture.

Best,
Dave



Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 16:05:57 +0100, "Geoff Smith"
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

What about the new Orion 80mm apo for £399 ?


It's only 80mm. That's the problem.

Best,
Dave

Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

Morgoth wrote:

I have.

But have you?

Poster already has a 10 inch which he is happy with for deepsky and
wants a replacement of the Tal for planets, doubles and clusters.

So you write

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

But even the doohickey etc was after a post advising top quality
rather than max aperture.

I'm recommending that the original poster doesn't touch a
refractor with abestos gloves and a 20' bargepole, never mind a 10'
bargepole. An SCT of an equivalent aperture is cheaper, and more
easily used and has almost the same performance, and an SCT of the
same price is likely to be of much greater aperture.

and less contrasty: quite a consideration on planets.

Cheers

Martin

--------------
Martin Frey
N 51 02 E 0 47
--------------

"Morgoth" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:20:30 +0100, Martin Frey
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote:

SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

That's fighting talk for a *humble* opinion.


Yep.

I've used a apo-flourite-kitchen-sink-refractor. It was nice, and it
was usable, but for a refractor to be usable it needs to be of small
aperature (large aperature refractors are all but unusuable, IMHO). At
the end of the day, what's most important in a telescope is aperture,
followed closely by usability, and a 5" to 8" SCT blows away an
equivalent refractor easily, in terms of performance.

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

Best,
Dave


Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

But my dear Morgoth

I already own a 10" reflector that provides exellent deep sky views.
Im looking for a planetary / double / GC / OC scope and the few SC's
ive looked through where actually worse than the TAL 4" refractor.
Including a 10" meade LX, a celestron 8" and an Orion Starmax.

It will take a lot of perswading to make me buy a Schmitt of any kind!

Rob

You might want to check out the off-axis refractors from dgm optics
(www.dgmoptics.com). It gets a sparkling review in October Astronomy
magazine.

It is also supposed to be what you're looking for, i.e. contrast, cheap and
for planetary/doubles etc.




"Robert Geake" wrote in message
...
Hello Chaps

My little TAL recently met an untimley end, i am looking to buy another
scope.
I already have a Eurpoa 250 so a reflector is not required.

I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary /
cluster
observations from experience(The little tal eats the Europa for brekkie
when it comes to that kind of observing).

The omly thing im not sure of now is the performance of SC's and other
Schmidt type. I have looked throug a couple of SC/SN's but didnt really
like what i saw that much.

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

My current / ex-current setup seems great compared to any SC's. The
combination of big light bucket and small refrator gives the best of both
worlds. If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC 200.

My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without
going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge
firm
like
meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company
that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

I know beacon hill do doubleets and triplets but they are a bit pricey and
a
review
is impossible to find.

Any info / suggestions you can give will be recieved with an open mind..

Rob

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 17:45:19 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Geake"
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:


"Morgoth" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:20:30 +0100, Martin Frey
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote:

SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

That's fighting talk for a *humble* opinion.


Yep.

I've used a apo-flourite-kitchen-sink-refractor. It was nice, and it
was usable, but for a refractor to be usable it needs to be of small
aperature (large aperature refractors are all but unusuable, IMHO). At
the end of the day, what's most important in a telescope is aperture,
followed closely by usability, and a 5" to 8" SCT blows away an
equivalent refractor easily, in terms of performance.

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

Best,
Dave
But my dear Morgoth

I already own a 10" reflector that provides exellent deep sky views.
Im looking for a planetary / double / GC / OC scope and the few SC's
ive looked through where actually worse than the TAL 4" refractor.
Including a 10" meade LX, a celestron 8" and an Orion Starmax.

It will take a lot of perswading to make me buy a Schmitt of any kind!

Rob


Oh, if you already have a light-bucket then fair enough, but why go
for another scope? Why not outfit the bucket with say, a couple of
Radians. Apeture wins every time.

Best,
Dave

Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

That's 'reflector' not refractor!


"Frazer" wrote in message
...
You might want to check out the off-axis refractors from dgm optics
(www.dgmoptics.com). It gets a sparkling review in October Astronomy
magazine.

It is also supposed to be what you're looking for, i.e. contrast, cheap
and
for planetary/doubles etc.




"Robert Geake" wrote in message
...
Hello Chaps

My little TAL recently met an untimley end, i am looking to buy another
scope.
I already have a Eurpoa 250 so a reflector is not required.

I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary /
cluster
observations from experience(The little tal eats the Europa for brekkie
when it comes to that kind of observing).

The omly thing im not sure of now is the performance of SC's and other
Schmidt type. I have looked throug a couple of SC/SN's but didnt really
like what i saw that much.

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

My current / ex-current setup seems great compared to any SC's. The
combination of big light bucket and small refrator gives the best of
both
worlds. If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC
200.

My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without
going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge
firm
like
meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy
anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company
that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

I know beacon hill do doubleets and triplets but they are a bit pricey
and
a
review
is impossible to find.

Any info / suggestions you can give will be recieved with an open mind..

Rob

"Robert Geake" wrote in message
...
Hello Chaps

My little TAL recently met an untimley end, i am looking to buy another
scope.
I already have a Eurpoa 250 so a reflector is not required.

I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary /
cluster
observations from experience(The little tal eats the Europa for brekkie
when it comes to that kind of observing).

The omly thing im not sure of now is the performance of SC's and other
Schmidt type. I have looked throug a couple of SC/SN's but didnt really
like what i saw that much.

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

My current / ex-current setup seems great compared to any SC's. The
combination of big light bucket and small refrator gives the best of both
worlds. If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC 200.

My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without
going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge
firm
like
meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company
that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

I know beacon hill do doubleets and triplets but they are a bit pricey and
a
review
is impossible to find.

Any info / suggestions you can give will be recieved with an open mind..

Rob



Forgot about these little chappies.

http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/borg/

Hmm,