CN FORUMS ARCHIVE Telescope Reviews: Refractor vs. Reflector ?

Nothing would please me more than if the Newtonian were given its due reverence, manufactured properly, with the same design thoughtfulness that we see in the Teleport, and AP refractors for example. The Newtonian is my favourite telescope design. I have seen what it can do on many occasions. It is sometimes quite amusing to see the jaws drop when owners of 6" APOs look at Saturn through a cooled 14.5" Teleport. You are quite right about making the effort to reduce thermals and to minimise contrast loss by the use of curves. All these things help improve the performance, although I still maintain that for me, the optics are paramount. Taking the primary and flat from a Chinese 8" f/5 Newtonian and placing them in a wider tube, with curved vanes, a fan at the rear and any other tweak you might want to add, will no doubt improve the performance. The image will still be so-so. Even if Newtonian owners are inspired to make changes to their tubes, there is still one overwhelming issue which will maintain the belief that refractors are the 'cool' telescope for planets. The 'jewelry factor'. There is no getting away from it, refractors look cool.....and.... fortunately for refractor owners, they produce great images.
Having said all that, I actually think the Teleport with the carbon fibre struts, the Spandex accordian shroud, stainless steel mini counterweights, and stainless corners and plaque looks cool. I also think that the Astrosystems Telekit truss tube Dobs, in a light wood with that cute wooden finder also looks cool. But for most astronomers, Newtonians are not 'instrumenty' enough, and do not have the appearence of a precision engineered beautiful tool.
Amateur astronomers who are proud of their telescopes can be placed into two catagories, a.) Don't give a *bleep* what it looks like or what size it is, as long as the image is emotionally involving (here is the key), b.) I want a refractor or an SCT or a Russian Mak or a Mewlon because they look so sexy, and this aspect is the emotional involvement.
The importance of emotional involvement with any product we purchase or want to own should never be underestimated. Whether we like to admit it or not, we are all captives of emotional involvment with regards to decision making. I do not really want to bring aspects of the Sociology of Conspicuous Consumerism into this debate, but it does lie at the heart of this issue.
Most of the time in modern life, content takes a back seat to presentation. It is the main reason, I would suggest, that Newtonians have such poor press when it comes to ultimate imaging tools. If it were not the case, there would have been a movement within amateur astronomy many years ago, to elevate the humble Newtonian to a position where it is generally accepted as the ultimate imager, because of the aperture for money aspect.
The initial spark of intrigue and excitement that this thread has aroused, is because of the statements surrounding the refractor-beating images of the properly designed Newtonians. This is the 'orgasm' (for want of a better word) of any visual astronomical experience. The sheer aesthetic of a great contrasty image.
I see it and hear it all the time within my own group of observing friends. "7 inches is the ultimate aperture for the planets in the UK". "My Mak Newt or my APO gives the best images of all the telescopes on this observing field". (Justification for owning a cool looking APO or an 'instrumenty' Mak Newt, or a statement of fact)? I would suggest the former. I have often found that such people are either blind to reality or self deluding, although to be fair, quite often it is simple inexperience, yes, even amongst those who can afford all the high end gear. People see what they want to see at the eyepiece of another's telescope, in order to feel content with their own. Its that emotional involvement thing again.
Sure the APO and the Mak Newts are great instruments for stable contrast images....but....they are 6" and 7" and 8" apertures. So what? Take the power up to 300X or 400X and you have reached empty magnification.
Now....take a 10" f/7 or 12" f/6 mirror from Zerodur, or AstroSital or Quartz, have CZ figure it, get a small Protostar quartz flat. Now make a wide tube that looks like the tube from a Tak 10" Mewlon, with the nice sexy curve to the end of the tube. Make a matching dewshield from the same material and same product finishing, so that it looks like a giant refractor. A dewshield on a Newtonian? Yes, a dewshield on a Newtonian. Try it, it works well. Make sure the paintwork and product finishing is beautiful and immaculate, give it great baffling, pay attention to detail, in other words, design its looks not just its function. Chrome plate the fixtures and fittings, or at least brushed aluminimun or stainless. Now introduce your curved vanes and fans. Turn the secondary holder into a work of art, something that you would actually want to look at. The same for the rear cell. Place a low profile Starlight or Moonlight Crayford on the side, an FS60C as a finder, place the OTA in running-rail tube rings.
Now you have a Newtonian that you want to sleep with...Now you have a Newtonian that appeals to the refractor lovers...Now you have Newtonians appearing on AP 1200s... Now everyone can suddenly see how good a Newtonian can be. Of course we all knew it all along didn't we?? Refractor? For the planets? Why, when I can use my 12" crowdpuller? Sir Isaac's ghost at Woolsthorpe would be saying - "Well I could have told you all that if anyone had listened in the first place".
Here endeth the rant.