Jump to content


Photo

You ever go to the Refractor forum by mistake?

  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#26 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 43461
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:17 PM

but it was still funny. :p


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


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark


No doubt about it... I think we are just trying to be as silly as the SRFs.

(SRF = Slobbering Refractor Freaks)

Jon

#27 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5085
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:36 PM

I think we are just trying to be as silly as the SRFs.


We're not doing a very good job at it, are we? ;)


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#28 howard929

howard929

    Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 3427
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Low End of High Ground

Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:11 PM

Only twice by mistake and I got outta there both times as fast as I would falling in boiling water.

Though I did get loads of help and support there with a 60mm refractor I used to have. IMO they're a good group and why wouldn't they be.

#29 csrlice12

csrlice12

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10476
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:15 PM

Say Wha?

Attached Files



#30 careysub

careysub

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1892
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Posted 01 December 2012 - 08:54 PM

Exactly! Viewing the Markarian Chain & etc. is a favorite of mine. Best galaxy concentration visible from Earth.

#31 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5597
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 02 December 2012 - 12:04 AM

No doubt about it... I think we are just trying to be as silly as the SRFs.

(SRF = Slobbering Refractor Freaks)

Jon


Exactly.

And in the interest of full disclosure, I own a 4.7" refractor. (And it's an Astro-Physics, but I try not to slobber.)

#32 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10255
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 02 December 2012 - 01:16 AM

I like all the scope forums as all designs have their advantages though the refractor camp does from time to time bash other designs but it always smacks of envy to me in most cases. Some points are valid but I see a. little too much isolation of controllable circumstances like thermals or horrendous seeing making for these hollow arguments against reflectors and the like. A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete

#33 Dick Jacobson

Dick Jacobson

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 898
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Plymouth, Minnesota, USA

Posted 02 December 2012 - 10:32 AM

In 2007 I participated in a brief discussion on Astromart that went as follows:

PC: ...will compete against APO refrectors in color free high power views.

DJ: "refrector" - is this a new type of catadioptric scope, or a Japanese Newtonian? Sorry, I just couldn't resist. This reminds me of when I was searching Japanese patent records, trying to use the auto-translation, and got the error message: "Cannot transrate your request."

PC: It's just my Engrish.

By the way, a couple of years ago I built a periscope accessory for my Newtonian that contains a small refractor. I suppose you could call the resulting hybrid scope a "refrector".

#34 d.sireci51

d.sireci51

    Arachnoid

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

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:44 AM

A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete [/quote]

That I'd like to See!!!!!!

#35 Mike B

Mike B

    Starstruck

  • *****
  • Posts: 9926
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2005
  • Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:49 AM

And it is galaxy-free



If i saw that in a 'fractor, i'd be tempted to clean the objective & try again... rule out the most plausible first before boasting of a sighting.
:poke:

You ever go to the Refractor forum by mistake?

No, but i went to the binoculars forum by mistake TWICE ... does that count?

And it's an Astro-Physics, but I try not to slobber.


In all seriousness, if i had an 4.7" AP 'fractor, i'd be tryin' hard myself... might still need a napkin.
:bow:

#36 Pinbout

Pinbout

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7550
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2010
  • Loc: nj

Posted 02 December 2012 - 02:45 PM

Daniel Mounsey did a comparison of his Ceravolo HD145 against a TEC140

#37 Dennis_S253

Dennis_S253

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1682
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Central Florida

Posted 03 December 2012 - 12:31 AM

maybe I should have stayed in the beginner forum, my 6" don't sound big enough for you.

#38 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 43461
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 03 December 2012 - 03:43 AM

[quote name="d.sireci51"] A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete [/quote]

That I'd like to See!!!!!! [/quote]

What would the point be? They would be such different scopes that the result would be obvious from the outset.

Jon

#39 csrlice12

csrlice12

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10476
  • Joined: 22 May 2012
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:37 AM

Just think of the gasps (awe, astonishment, disbelief, who knows; they're refractor folk) when you mount that $8K refractor to the Newt/Dob as a finder scope....... :lol:

at least they can console themselves that at $8K, the coloring should be minimal...unlike us poor dob folks, whose idea of coloring involves paper and crayons........

#40 Mike B

Mike B

    Starstruck

  • *****
  • Posts: 9926
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2005
  • Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:59 AM

...unlike us poor dob folks, whose idea of coloring involves paper and crayons........



Hey! I deeply represent that remark!
:john:

#41 droid

droid

    rocketman

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7161
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2004
  • Loc: Conneaut, Ohio

Posted 03 December 2012 - 01:07 PM

maybe I should have stayed in the beginner forum, my 6" don't sound big enough for you.


Im either case a inch scope is plenty large, never owned a 6 inch refractor ,but had a deep space conquerer that blew my socks off. The double stars, galaxys, planets, the moon. Oh yeah

#42 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 43461
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 03 December 2012 - 01:18 PM

Just think of the gasps (awe, astonishment, disbelief, who knows; they're refractor folk) when you mount that $8K refractor to the Newt/Dob as a finder scope....... :lol:

at least they can console themselves that at $8K, the coloring should be minimal...unlike us poor dob folks, whose idea of coloring involves paper and crayons........


I know this thread is mixed with both humorous and serious posts...

This is a serious post... :)

I own a refractor that cost someone about $4000 and I own a reflector that cost someone considerably more than $4000.

I use them side by side. Comparing them to each other would be like doing a comparison between a 1000cc MV Augusta motorcycle and a Peterbuilt... If you want to go 175mph, the MV Augusta is a good choice. If you want to haul 30 tons over the mountains, I would go with the Peterbuilt...

A formal comparison between the two is not really necessary to make this determination.

Jon

#43 Sean Cunneen

Sean Cunneen

    Let Me Think

  • *****
  • Posts: 3215
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Blue Island Illinois

Posted 03 December 2012 - 10:37 PM

Sometimes I come here and I'm like "Why are they all on ladders?" or "what the heck is collimation and why are there always 6 threads at once on it?"

The last thing I coated glass with was Budweiser...
and last but not least...

Did you here about the guy that mixed up his tent poles and his truss poles? It took him an hour to collimate his air mattress.

#44 Mike B

Mike B

    Starstruck

  • *****
  • Posts: 9926
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2005
  • Loc: shake, rattle, & roll, CA

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:10 PM

:rimshot:

It took him an hour to collimate his air mattress.

This is best left to professionals: the Mattress Police... airborn division.

#45 cheapersleeper

cheapersleeper

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3163
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2010
  • Loc: Sachse TX

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:27 PM

Telrads wwere invented so that we can avoid touching refractors.

#46 ///^**^\\\

///^**^\\\

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2010
  • Loc: Deep Dark Blackness of central Idaho nights@ 6000ft alt.

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:07 PM

Yup happened to me. So I figured "What what the heck I'll post something here and see if they can help me out."

They didn't seem too responsive to my looking for a 4" finderscope for my Dob.

#47 echoes1961

echoes1961

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 204
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2012

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:16 PM

Whats a ReeeFraCtoR?? :p

#48 orion61

orion61

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4503
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Birthplace James T Kirk

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:45 PM

[quote name="Jon Isaacs"][quote] A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete [/quote]
30" vs 7"
that 10" off axis mask would still beat the refractor

That I'd like to See!!!!!! [/quote]

What would the point be? They would be such different scopes that the result would be obvious from the outset.

Jon [/quote]

#49 d.sireci51

d.sireci51

    Arachnoid

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

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:36 PM

[quote name="orion61"][quote][quote] A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete [/quote]
30" vs 7"
that 10" off axis mask would still beat the refractor

That I'd like to See!!!!!! [/quote]

What would the point be? They would be such different scopes that the result would be obvious from the outset.

Jon [/quote] [/quote]

There wouldnt be any point. But those guys would sure try to find one to argue! I would figure its time to break out the Popcorn!!!!!

#50 auriga

auriga

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1342
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2006

Posted 05 December 2012 - 06:32 PM

[quote name="d.sireci51"] A far fairer argument would be a dollar for dollar scope comparison like an$8000 refractor versus and $8000 reflector.

Pete [/quote]


That I'd like to See!!!!!! [/quote]


Jon,
I have seen something like that. A friend with a supreb TEC 140mm f/7 Apo compared it to my 11" Dob side by side, on M13. The view was much brighter and more detailed, and equally contrasty, in the Dob.And it is stil better in my 16" Dob though I have not made a direct comparison to the TEC. The TEC 140 plus mount costs about the same as my 16" Dob and a few thousand more than my 11"Dob.

I don't go in much for direct comparisons, though, and I always compliment people on their scopes, I am glad if they enjoy what they have. But if they don't have a scope, I recommend a Dob of appropriate size.

On the other hand, if I wanted to see the entire Veil in one field of view, I would choose a small refractor with an OIII filter.

A small refractor could show M12 and M14 in the same field of view.
But a larger premium Dob gives a far more sastisfying image of each globular, in separate fields of view.

I think that in the desert or mountainous southwest, a small refractor will show a lot, but in average Midwest conditions, it is not too good for deep sky. I found that al friend's fine 90mm Apo showed much too faint an image of IC 4565 to suit me, so I canceled my order for a similar scope.

Many years ago I first saw Saturn through a small refractor, with the Junior Astronomy Club of New York's Hayden Planetarium. from a site in Sheep Meadow in Central Park. I was transfixed by the image and immediately hooked on amateur astronomy. The image was stunning.

Many years laster I looked at Saturn through a 3.5 inch Questar and I was surprised at how sharp the image was. Then, out of curiosity, I walked over the the club scope, a 14" reflector with a Wessling mirror. I was shocked at how much sharper the 14" was, the little Questar image seemed blurry by comparison.

I had a friend who was a fine maker of reflector optics, who called small refractors "toy telescopes." I am told that Albert Highe, a very innovative telescope designer, won't look through an aperture smaller than six inches. I am pretty sympathetic to these views, given my Midwestern skies.

I will say, though, that the 4.5 inch aperture of my Starblast has proven very good for grab and go views and for views of very widefield objects like the Perseus OB association.

But I think scopes, reflectors or refractors, with apertures less than about 3.5 inches will prove disappointing to most people in most observing situations.

But, chacun a son gout, everyone to this own taste and his own situation.

Bill






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics