Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Cats & Casses

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)
Jeff B
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 12/30/06

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666073 - 02/06/13 09:41 PM

Of course, there is the Mak-Newt....I'm just say'n.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666118 - 02/06/13 10:03 PM

Quote:


At least one person understood my post.




Well that's an irony isn't it. Your exhibiting a narrow field of view in making that statement.

Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott BeithAdministrator
SRF
*****

Reged: 11/26/03

Loc: Frederick, MD
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Mark Costello]
      #5666179 - 02/06/13 10:39 PM

Quote:


Scott, if all you had were that SV80mmF6 refractor (was it the old Night Hawk) and the 127mm apo, I'd say you had two nicely complementary telescopes. I may do that on a larger scale, my 5" achro and maybe a 7"F15 Mak. I'm not sure....




It was a SV Nighthawk (excellent little achromat).
The 5" Mak gave way to an Orion ED80 which was sold for my current SV 102V.

I am a refractor guy with a strong appreciation for Maks.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
pogobbler
professor emeritus


Reged: 09/30/08

Loc: Central Indiana, USA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Scott Beith]
      #5666407 - 02/07/13 02:37 AM

My response to the "But Maks have a narrow FOV" comment is... "Yeah... so?". Though I have a couple scopes that can give fields in excess of 2 degrees, I've never had a problem with the capabilities of a scope that'll only give a (relatively) narrow field of view, like a Mak. I like a wide field view, but a narrow field of view only eliminates a small minority of potential targets, so if I can't get all of the Pleiades in the eyepiece or can only view part of M31 at one time, or can't scan the Milky Way 2-4 degrees at a time, I can live with that.

I do think it gets said rather too often... I mean, sure, a beginner might not realize that, but most people on here do realize that the potential field of view is limited on a Mak. I mean, come on... yes, we know it, and there's a lot more to astronomy than just wide field viewing and the capability is more important to some than others... and may very well not be important at all to many of us who have scopes or binoculars that give fields of view measured in degrees rather than arc-minutes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cheapersleeper
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/22/10

Loc: Sachse TX
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: pogobbler]
      #5666423 - 02/07/13 03:02 AM

Gents, I think you may be missing the fact that our hobby has been blitzed with Ad hype and new products for several decades that either infer or actually claim outright that the wider the field, theh happier you will be. It's part of astro culture by now. As such, people are going to constantly reinforce it.

The Mak is an attack on orthodoxy!!

B


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff B
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 12/30/06

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666546 - 02/07/13 07:06 AM

Of course, the other sour grapes story is that inch-for-inch, the image in the Mak is dimmer.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jeff B]
      #5666566 - 02/07/13 07:19 AM

I think that's true in any cassegrain system - though Celestrons XLT coatings have me rethinking that. I'm a guy whose happy as pie with an 1800mm fl x 8" aperture used for deepsky. When I had deepsky sky's I was fearless with it - Abell planetaries, galaxies through the summer Milky Way, it was a true performer. I swear I've seen more detail in m51 than in sketches others have on the Internet with substantially larger aperture. The real unsung upside to maks and long focus instruments with smaller CO's is the star fields are stunning. No you don't get the wider angle views compared to an f/4 but the generous fields you do get have beautiful star images and if you need to bring the power up to view a difficult clusters fainter members all the better. I love the deepsky capability of larger aperture on faint objects like galaxies but the stars are too often comparitively hideous.

Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: pogobbler]
      #5666606 - 02/07/13 08:09 AM

Quote:

scopes or binoculars that give fields of view measured in degrees rather than arc-minutes.




A blanket or lawn chair
Summer night
Nikon 12x50 SE
5 degrees of sharp and flat field
Sigh, It is February


Edited by moynihan (02/07/13 08:11 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: *skyguy*]
      #5666693 - 02/07/13 09:26 AM

Quote:

No one telescope will provide the perfect view for all types of observing ... from low power wide field to high power planetary viewing.




Some scopes are better than others at providing the best possible views over a wide range of magnifications.

A Mak-Cassegrain with a 30% central obstruction is not an apo refractor of equal aperture... In the smaller sizes, 3, 4, 5 inch, there are apo refractors that provide essentially perfect widefield views and high power planetary views. A Newtonian with premium quality mirrors, a reasonably small secondary and a coma corrector (if needed) can provide excellent views over a wide range of magnifications. Similarly, a Mak-Newt can provide both high quality, low power views and excellent views of the planets and double stars, typically Mak-Newts have small central obstructions, below 20%.

Some observers such as myself, believe there is more to viewing the night sky than zooming in on particular objects, that of importance are the relationships between objects, large scale features as well as objects that are just big. Most of these are best seen with relative fast telescopes of both large and small apertures that can provide big, bright fields of view. The views of the Cygnus with a 6mm exit pupil at 17x and 4 degree Field of view as are not hype, they are real, it's a different way to experience the night sky...

One should not deny the differences between the various scope designs nor should one dismiss the importance of the capabilities of one design over another. A fast telescope with high quality optics can provide both high quality low power views and high quality high power views. A slow telescope has a more limited range.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
maknewtnut
Member
*****

Reged: 10/08/06

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666697 - 02/07/13 09:27 AM

Quote:

I am always reading the most abused and over-used byline in astronomy.... Maks have a narrow FOV. I'll suggest that such statements are made be people who came down in the last rainstorm.

Anyone ever heard slow 'fracs have a narrow field of view repeated multiple times in the same thread? No? Try saying that in the Refractor forum and be prepared to be stoned with chipped flint glass.

Anyone whoever grew up with 'scopes before the optics revolution in the late 80s grew up with long 'fracs and Kellners (if they were lucky). Magnifications greater than 70x would clip the Moon.

Today, any noob can plop a 70 degree AFOV eyepiece in their long-focus 'scope and enjoy WIIIIDE views.

I'm plenty happy with today's WIIIIDE views offered by long-focus Maks and 'fracs.





Shane, you're absolutely right.

The reality is that when it comes to design types, the SCT and MCT are closely related. Both can be produced at identical focal ratios. If both also utilize an identical primary focal ratio (which they often do), the same parameters for secondary size and baffle diameter apply to both.

Those who continually refer to FOV limitations for the Mak only might be more accurate if they followed such comments with something like, "Or at least that's what I believe after reading this month's catalog from Orion".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
*skyguy*
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 12/31/08

Loc: Western New York
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5666800 - 02/07/13 10:31 AM

Quote:

Quote:

No one telescope will provide the perfect view for all types of observing ... from low power wide field to high power planetary viewing.




Some scopes are better than others at providing the best possible views over a wide range of magnifications.

In the smaller sizes, 3, 4, 5 inch, there are apo refractors that provide essentially perfect widefield views and high power planetary views.





Yes, they can provide high power planetary views ... however you have failed to consider the compromise that a fast APO refractor has to deal with to achieve high power. Mainly, you have to use extremely short focal length eyepieces ... which are literally a pain in the neck to use ... or using a longer FL eyepiece with a barlow ... which will always "muck-up" the view.

The Mak is a specialized instrument for high power observing that has its own advantages and disadvantages over other types of scopes ... and that includes APO and Achromatic refractors.

So, who cares if the Mak has a narrow FOV ... it doesn't need or was designed to have it!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: *skyguy*]
      #5666823 - 02/07/13 10:48 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

No one telescope will provide the perfect view for all types of observing ... from low power wide field to high power planetary viewing.




Some scopes are better than others at providing the best possible views over a wide range of magnifications.

In the smaller sizes, 3, 4, 5 inch, there are apo refractors that provide essentially perfect widefield views and high power planetary views.





Yes, they can provide high power planetary views ... however you have failed to consider the compromise that a fast APO refractor has to deal with to achieve high power. Mainly, you have to use extremely short focal length eyepieces ... which are literally a pain in the neck to use ... or using a longer FL eyepiece with a barlow ... which will always "muck-up" the view.

The Mak is a specialized instrument for high power observing that has its own advantages and disadvantages over other types of scopes ... and that includes APO and Achromatic refractors.

So, who cares if the Mak has a narrow FOV ... it doesn't need or was designed to have it!




Well...

Simply put: Barlows do not "always muck up the view." Barlows are simple and a decent Barlow has negligible effect on the quality of the image, certainly far less than hanging a 30% or larger obstruction in the middle of the optical path.

It is worth keeping in mind that a 6 inch F/15 Mak is actually a 6 inch F/3 telescope with full aperture corrector and a magnifying secondary mirror that performs the same task as a Barlow.

As far as who cares? Folks who choose other designs. So... yeah, a Mak-cassegrain has advantages and disadvantages, one of disadvantage is that the maximum possible true field of view is smaller than most other popular designs of similar aperture.

That's just how it is. It's worth noting when choosing a scope.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
hottr6
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 06/28/09

Loc: 7,500', Magdalena Mtns, NM
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5666875 - 02/07/13 11:08 AM

Quote:

All telescopes have some kind of compromise.

Why can't people just accept that and move on?



Eddgie,

You are of course 110% correct. Why cannot people accept this and move on?

The reason for my rant is that many folk qualify statements about Maks with "Maks and their narrow FOV". Other 'scope designs never seem to receive as many qualifying statements, otherwise we would be forever reading statements such as:

"Extremely expensive APOs....."
"Neck-breaking Newts...."
"Violet-colored achros......"
"Mirror-shifting SCTs....."

We do see these and similar comments being made infrequently, but my beef is that we don't see them multiple times in every single thread about those designs.

I'd like to suggest that Maks are the Rodney Dangerfield of 'scopes, but they are way too pretty.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JJK
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 04/28/08

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666889 - 02/07/13 11:17 AM

Quote:


I keep coming back to slow refractors. No one has ever accused a Unitron or Zeiss Telementor of having a narrow field of view, even though it is more true than almost all MCTs of similar aperture.

Yeah, I'm grousing, but it is because maybe well-meaning people who parrot misleading or incomplete statements.




I can fit in virtually all of the M42 complex in my AP 10" f/14.6 Mak-Cass using a Leitz 30 mm 88* AFOV eyepiece. The view is absolutely stunning. I don't care that I can't completely visualize the relatively rare number of very wide DSOs (e.g. M31) in the FOV of this OTA, as I have other instruments to do that.

BTW, parrots aren't just mimics. They are actually intelligent creatures with personalities of their own.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: JJK]
      #5666908 - 02/07/13 11:31 AM

Quote:

BTW, parrots aren't just mimics. They are actually intelligent creatures with personalities of their own.


Like Alex

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5666929 - 02/07/13 11:42 AM Attachment (33 downloads)

Quote:

The reason for my rant is that many folk qualify statements about Maks with "Maks and their narrow FOV". Other 'scope designs never seem to receive as many qualifying statements, otherwise we would be forever reading statements such as:

"Extremely expensive APOs....."
"Neck-breaking Newts...."
"Violet-colored achros......"
"Mirror-shifting SCTs....."

We do see these and similar comments being made infrequently, but my beef is that we don't see them multiple times in every single thread about those designs.




You must be reading different forums that I do.

To my eye, coma, chromatic aberration, awkward viewing positions, off-axis eyepiece astigmatism in fast scopes, cost, mounting requirements, difficulties in transport, thermal equilibrium, dewing, collimation, field curvature, are among the many issues that are discussed with similar frequency as the field of view of a Mak.

I can tell you that anytime someone brings up the topic of mounting a Newtonian on a GEM, I will be right there pointing out all the fun and games that entails and just why it was that the Dobsonian became so popular. And I will include a photo just to emphasize the point.

Jon Isaacs

Edited by Jon Isaacs (02/07/13 01:48 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spencerj
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 11/17/04

Loc: Londonderry, NH
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5667042 - 02/07/13 12:53 PM

What is the difference between an observer from the Northeast and an observer from California? We wear shoes in the winter

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
George Methvin
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 01/30/06

Loc: Central Texas
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: spencerj]
      #5667161 - 02/07/13 02:06 PM

But Sct don't give refractor like views and have narrow FOV..hear that way to much. Why because SCT or not refractor..LOl and Maks are not F/5 to F/7 refractors. Apple and oranges. Its not really that big of a deal. Buy one of each type of telescope and try to be happy. I have two scope one 10 SCT I use for those really close up views and one 120mm ed refractor for those wide field views..there you go the best of both worlds...Iam happy.. .

Edited by George Methvin (02/07/13 02:07 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Robo-bob
sage


Reged: 05/02/05

Loc: Central Alberta
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5667218 - 02/07/13 02:42 PM

Quote:

Quote:

The reason for my rant is that many folk qualify statements about Maks with "Maks and their narrow FOV". Other 'scope designs never seem to receive as many qualifying statements, otherwise we would be forever reading statements such as:

"Extremely expensive APOs....."
"Neck-breaking Newts...."
"Violet-colored achros......"
"Mirror-shifting SCTs....."

We do see these and similar comments being made infrequently, but my beef is that we don't see them multiple times in every single thread about those designs.




You must be reading different forums that I do.

To my eye, coma, chromatic aberration, awkward viewing positions, off-axis eyepiece astigmatism in fast scopes, cost, mounting requirements, difficulties in transport, thermal equilibrium, dewing, collimation, field curvature, are among the many issues that are discussed with similar frequency as the field of view of a Mak.

I can tell you that anytime someone brings up the topic of mounting a Newtonian on a GEM, I will be right there pointing out all the fun and games that entails and just why it was that the Dobsonian became so popular. And I will include a photo just to emphasize the point.

Jon Isaacs




Man Jon, every time I see that pic of you standing on that ladder in bare feet, my feet go into spasms. Kind of like watching another guy get kicked in the....well, you know.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Robo-bob]
      #5667236 - 02/07/13 02:53 PM

Quote:


Man Jon, every time I see that pic of you standing on that ladder in bare feet, my feet go into spasms. Kind of like watching another guy get kicked in the....well, you know.




I keep that photo just to post in the winter. When I first posted it, I did not know that I was barefoot, someone had to point it out to me.

It does get cold up in the mountains east of San Diego... thermal socks and thick soled boots are definitely on the menu.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)


Extra information
7 registered and 17 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  cbwerner, Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 5711

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics