Jump to content


Photo

You ever go to the Refractor forum by mistake?

  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#1 TFiebig

TFiebig

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 29 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Gamma Quadrant, Sector 4

Posted 30 November 2012 - 06:44 PM

:gotpopcorn:

#2 Gastrol

Gastrol

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1344
  • Joined: 04 Nov 2011
  • Loc: los angeles

Posted 30 November 2012 - 06:50 PM

All the time. The words look similar and one's directly on top of the other.

#3 FirstSight

FirstSight

    Duke of Deneb

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9909
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Raleigh, NC

Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:00 PM

We go there not by mistake, but quite deliberately for discussions on how best to chose and use our casual grab n'go toys for the nights when it's not worthwhile bringing out our "serious" big-aperture reflectors.
*sniff*
:grin: :step:

#4 auriga

auriga

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1343
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2006

Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:06 PM

There are always far more people logged in to the refractor forum. They seem to start with small refractors and gradually increase the size until they end up with three or four refractors, none of which is large enough to satisfy them for visual work. A few are affluent enough to get a seven or eight inch apo, and they are the envy of the others.

We on the reflector forum have the same longing for larger aperture but the difference is that we are at the same time well pleased with the aperture we do have since it is typically ten inches or more.

Bill

#5 ThreeD

ThreeD

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1029
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Sacramento suburbs

Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:09 PM

Yup. Once in a while I click the wrong link and I go :foreheadslap: then quickly hit the back button...

#6 cliff mygatt

cliff mygatt

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1704
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kitsap County, WA

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:10 PM

I do go by accident but I do have 2 refractors!

#7 d.sireci51

d.sireci51

    Arachnoid

  • *****
  • Posts: 863
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2009
  • Loc: The Tholian Web [S. Wisconsin]

Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:59 PM

There are always far more people logged in to the refractor forum. They seem to start with small refractors and gradually increase the size until they end up with three or four refractors, none of which is large enough to satisfy them for visual work. A few are affluent enough to get a seven or eight inch apo, and they are the envy of the others.

We on the reflector forum have the same longing for larger aperture but the difference is that we are at the same time well pleased with the aperture we do have since it is typically ten inches or more.

Bill


OH????????? :question: I get it NOW!!!!!!!! Not to punt any phrases but is it: Size doesnt matter??? :roflmao: OR; Bigger is better??????? :question: :help: :foreheadslap: :tonofbricks:

#8 ausastronomer

ausastronomer

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1838
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Kiama NSW (Australia)

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:04 PM

Won't ever happen. The 4 refractors I own are all sitting on newtonians as finderscopes.

Cheers,

#9 Ed D

Ed D

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2010
  • Loc: Sunny South Florida

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:30 PM

Guess which one I prefer!

<=====<<< (hint)

Ed D

#10 kfiscus

kfiscus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Albert Lea, MN, USA

Posted 30 November 2012 - 10:20 PM

I've gone over there to cause trouble a couple of times.

#11 careysub

careysub

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Posted 30 November 2012 - 10:29 PM

To me, in the refractor world, smaller and shorter is better.

Reflectors are challenged in the wide-angle viewing world. You just can't fill an ES100 25mm field stop (43.6 mm IIRC) with an acceptably small secondary mirror on an F/4 450 mm FL scope. To get real wide angle you need to go with a refractor.

I started with these handy small binoviewing refractors ("binoculars" I believe they are called), going as large as an 80mm there. For single scopes I started with a large 102mm F/9.8 achromat ($200 at Costco right now) and am now moving back down to a 80mm F/5 (the Orion ST80) and am contemplating moving farther down to an even wider-angle build using a 70mm F/4.3 objective (formerly a Celestron SkyMaster binocular objective).

Someday I may follow Mr.Bill's 127mm f/5.5 Istar achromat bino-box build. Probably the biggest (and most expensive) refractor I would ever own.

For true apochromats though nothing beats the reflector.

#12 mark cowan

mark cowan

    Vendor (Veritas Optics)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 4122
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2005
  • Loc: salem, OR

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:04 PM

There's a Refractor forum?

Best,
Mark

#13 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44302
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

I rarely go to the refractor forum by mistake though it happens, but I go there on purpose a great deal.

I appreciate both small scopes and large scopes and find that in general, refractors are the best small scopes and reflectors are the best large scopes. Telescopes are like camera lenses, it is important to pick the tool for the job. A pristine 4.5 degree TFoV just ain't gonna happen in a reflector... one is not going to resolve small globulars in a refractor.

Jon

#14 frito

frito

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1183
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Fremont, CA

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:04 AM

haha i just did that twice in a row. the second time i was like ahh how did i do that again!!

#15 george golitzin

george golitzin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1796
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2006

Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:30 AM

Yes but I don't stay long.

-geo

#16 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 344
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Midlothian, Virginia

Posted 01 December 2012 - 02:44 AM

Ooops! How did I get here? I was looking for telescopes that aren't made out of plywood and cardboard, and don't need to be painted each year when I seal the deck ... :rofl2:

#17 Asbytec

Asbytec

    Guy in a furry hat

  • *****
  • Posts: 8333
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2007
  • Loc: La Union, PI

Posted 01 December 2012 - 04:58 AM

In the other forum, 6" is pretty big.

#18 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44302
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:10 AM

Ooops! How did I get here? I was looking for telescopes that aren't made out of plywood and cardboard, and don't need to be painted each year when I seal the deck ... :rofl2:


They're here, the scope in the photo, it's original and more than 30 years old.

But you're probably looking for pea-shooters and spit-wad straws... Best to head over to the refractor forum for those.

:ubetcha:

Jon

Posted Image

#19 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5757
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:54 AM

To me, in the refractor world, smaller and shorter is better.



And it is galaxy-free :grin:

#20 Meadeball

Meadeball

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 344
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Midlothian, Virginia

Posted 01 December 2012 - 09:14 AM

Jon, j/k of course. That's a beautiful scope.

Look at my signature; you'll see I swing both ways. And remember, you reflector guys get your guidance from leeeeetle refractors ... :tounge:

Meade

#21 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5345
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 01 December 2012 - 11:02 AM

And it is galaxy-free :grin:



Nonsense!

Posted Image

Markarian's Chain, observed with my WO 72mm f/6 ED, April 2011. Baader Maxbright binoviewer, 21x - 53x, single eyepiece 67x and 84x, to get the faintest little buggers. Field is about 2.5° wide, as seen with my 25mm TS Kellners, at 21x.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#22 Jim Romanski

Jim Romanski

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2256
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Guilford, Connecticut

Posted 01 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

It's really weird there. They talk about taking their scopes out and seeing planetary detail and splitting the double double before having to wait for the scope to cool down or be collimated.

They even claim to be able to see M31 and the Pleiades within 4 degrees FOV. Like anybody can really see that much. ;)

#23 rguasto

rguasto

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 810
  • Joined: 18 Nov 2010
  • Loc: Long Island, NY

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

They're all just rationalizing aperture issues. :p

#24 Pinbout

Pinbout

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8007
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2010
  • Loc: nj

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:01 PM


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And it is galaxy-free


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Nonsense!



but it was still funny. :p

#25 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5345
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:06 PM

but it was still funny. :p


:grin: It was. It just wasn't true.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics