![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) V.D. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ValeryD" wrote in message
om... One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) In my house I use smoke detectors to detect smoke. I have a CO detector in the garage because of the kerosene heater. But for optics, Valery is a human BS detector. The alarm sound may be a bit like the smoke detector (which is intended to wake you up if needed), but it works. Yeah Valery, that report sounds a bit much. I suspect all of us have convinced ourselves we saw something we really didn't, but some get more carried away. BTW, did you see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040117.html Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try the Lunar Observing Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ ************************************ V.D. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ValeryD" wrote in message
om... One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) In my house I use smoke detectors to detect smoke. I have a CO detector in the garage because of the kerosene heater. But for optics, Valery is a human BS detector. The alarm sound may be a bit like the smoke detector (which is intended to wake you up if needed), but it works. Yeah Valery, that report sounds a bit much. I suspect all of us have convinced ourselves we saw something we really didn't, but some get more carried away. BTW, did you see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040117.html Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try the Lunar Observing Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ ************************************ V.D. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ValeryD" wrote in message
om... One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) In my house I use smoke detectors to detect smoke. I have a CO detector in the garage because of the kerosene heater. But for optics, Valery is a human BS detector. The alarm sound may be a bit like the smoke detector (which is intended to wake you up if needed), but it works. Yeah Valery, that report sounds a bit much. I suspect all of us have convinced ourselves we saw something we really didn't, but some get more carried away. BTW, did you see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040117.html Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try the Lunar Observing Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ ************************************ V.D. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ValeryD" wrote in message
om... One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) In my house I use smoke detectors to detect smoke. I have a CO detector in the garage because of the kerosene heater. But for optics, Valery is a human BS detector. The alarm sound may be a bit like the smoke detector (which is intended to wake you up if needed), but it works. Yeah Valery, that report sounds a bit much. I suspect all of us have convinced ourselves we saw something we really didn't, but some get more carried away. BTW, did you see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040117.html Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try the Lunar Observing Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ ************************************ V.D. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 17 Jan 2004 12:12:15 -0800, (ValeryD)
wrote: One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) The most I've ever seen with the ring tilt obscuring the majority of one of the hemispheres is five--counting the polar cap. I drew it back a couple of years ago using a 9.6" newtonian. Five can plainly be seen on this drawing, where I tried to reproduce the bands' actual contrast as seen through the eyepiece. http://community.webshots.com/photo/...12021722sTdEvG Seeing was P6-7; good, but not good enough for the Enke gap :-( Dan C. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 17 Jan 2004 12:12:15 -0800, (ValeryD)
wrote: One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) The most I've ever seen with the ring tilt obscuring the majority of one of the hemispheres is five--counting the polar cap. I drew it back a couple of years ago using a 9.6" newtonian. Five can plainly be seen on this drawing, where I tried to reproduce the bands' actual contrast as seen through the eyepiece. http://community.webshots.com/photo/...12021722sTdEvG Seeing was P6-7; good, but not good enough for the Enke gap :-( Dan C. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 17 Jan 2004 12:12:15 -0800, (ValeryD)
wrote: One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) The most I've ever seen with the ring tilt obscuring the majority of one of the hemispheres is five--counting the polar cap. I drew it back a couple of years ago using a 9.6" newtonian. Five can plainly be seen on this drawing, where I tried to reproduce the bands' actual contrast as seen through the eyepiece. http://community.webshots.com/photo/...12021722sTdEvG Seeing was P6-7; good, but not good enough for the Enke gap :-( Dan C. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Chuck Taylor" wrote in message ...
"ValeryD" wrote in message om... One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted in a 7" APO at 175x(only!). I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no zones seen). If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some zones should be not wider, than 1/2"! Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-) In my house I use smoke detectors to detect smoke. I have a CO detector in the garage because of the kerosene heater. But for optics, Valery is a human BS detector. The alarm sound may be a bit like the smoke detector (which is intended to wake you up if needed), but it works. Yeah Valery, that report sounds a bit much. I suspect all of us have convinced ourselves we saw something we really didn't, but some get more carried away. BTW, did you see http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040117.html Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Hi Chuck, Yes, I saw this image. And I count only 15 zones here, some of them are not wider, than 0.4" and much less contrasty, than Enke division! How such zones can be seen true tiny 175mm scope at 175x??? Here are several another pearls from the same source: #1. "Sun A comparison was made between the Zeiss 10mm, 6mm, and 4mm with the XXX 10mm, 6mm, and 4mm using my friend's AP 92mm equipped with Baader white light solar filter. The XXX provided a sharper, brighter and contrastier images, with less light scatter around the edge of the sun. This helped to bring out the detail better in the sunspots, as well as in the facula." Aha, Zeiss Abbe Orthos obsorbing so much light, that EJ can clearly see, that our sun looks _BRIGHTER_ in another eyepieces! LOLT! #2. Moon A few days after I received the XXX eyepieces I observed the moon with my friend using his 92mm and compared the Zeiss 10mm and Pentax 9mm with the XXX 10mm, as well as the XXX 8mm with the Pentax 9mm and 7mm, and the TV 8mm. The moon during these tests was a couple of days past full and the sunset terminator was near Mare Crisium and Palus Somnii. Due to the better contrast and sharpness in the XXX the elevation between the mare and mountainous wall surrounding it seemed higher and more 3 dimensional than in the other eyepieces. In addition the color of the lunar features appeared whiter, brighter, and much more natural in the XXX than we had seen before. For example the bright rays which radiate out from the crater Proculus and border Palus Somnii appeared whiter. Because of the very natural appearance to the moon, we almost like we were looking at a NASA photograph, or were orbiting the moon in a spacecraft, rather than observing it through a telescope. I especially likes this: "In addition the color of the lunar features appeared whiter, brighter, and much more natural in the XXX than we had seen before" Aha, where do you know real colors rendering of the moon? Colors were whiter? And this is _MUCH more natural_? Did you ever saw the natural surface of the moon? LOLT. For "reviewer"'s instance, we measured Pentax' eyepieces color transmittion curve. No additional colorration vs light source. Measurement has +/- 0.3% precision. And final #3. Impressive! Due to the better contrast and sharpness in the XXX the elevation between the mare and mountainous wall surrounding it seemed higher and more 3 dimensional than in the other eyepieces. Because of the very natural appearance to the moon, we almost like we were looking at a NASA photograph, or were orbiting the moon in a spacecraft, rather than observing it through a telescope. Really, after reading this adverticement BS, we should believe, that only two more air-glass surfaces in eyepiece (even if they were made by Zeiss) dramatically decrease contrast and that without additional lens 3-D effect will disappear, colors on the moon will be much less white and unnatural, sun will be significantly dimmer and less contrasty etc etc etc. These observations were done through oiled triplet objectives - they do have only 2 air-glass surfaces. However, what we should guess from such brave reporters if they will use XXX refractors with triplet air-spaced objectives, where 4(!) extra air-glass surfaces vs oiled triplet objectives. Does it mean, that looking through XXX super-ED refractors with XXX monocentrics in them, we will see MUCH less natural colors on the moon, much dimmer sun, lesser details on planets, than in refractors with triplet oiled objectives and ZAO or Pentax orthos in them???? The same in the same with doublet APO objectives and ZAO and Pentax orthos in them? When I read such reviews, I know - the reviewer is sold for the manufacturer and his credibility is not worth of electronic "paper" they were written on. It is the same as speaking, that short eye-relief and significantly narrower FOV is a big plus in planetary and lunar observings. LOLT. V.D. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Astronomical Observations - Parts 1 & 2 | Fact Finder | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | August 25th 03 04:52 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 24th 03 08:22 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | August 24th 03 08:22 PM |
NASA artist illustrations and cutaways of Saturn vehicles | Rusty Barton | History | 3 | August 24th 03 11:39 AM |