|
Steve Napier
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/10/04
Posts: 1559
|
|
In P harringtons Starware book he claims that 20x77 size binoculars are only MARGINALLY useful for Astronomy!!!
Is this man a mental patient or something?
Steve.
|
wilash
Fairy Godmother
Reged: 09/30/03
Posts: 5746
|
|
Steve, I would take any book written by amateur astronomers on equipment or technique with a grain of salt. Think of it like a Chinese EQ mount that needs improvements to make it work even though it is new. Here you get to practice your editing skills.
I was just reading Covingtons astrophotography book where he says you should not retouch dust off the image because there could be a "nova" behind it and by removing the dust, you remove the nova and then the picture is a "lie." He also suggests not completely removing dust, but rather toning it down so careful observers can see the picture has been retouched. Obviously not one of his good days when he was working on that section.
Besides, everyone knows 20x80s are much better.  
|
lighttrap
Reged: 02/06/04
Posts: 3833
Loc: cloudy, foggy, humid NC, US
|
|
I wouldn't go so far as to calling him names. But, I've picked up copies of "Starware" in the bookstores many, many times, but have never made it to the checkout with book in hand. There's parts of that book, particularly in the bino section, that I just can't justify buying. Still, for somebody just starting out, who wants a primer on astro equipment, it's probably a reasonable choice. Everybody has opinions. Harrington just got to put his in a book.
Actually, I've seen what I would consider to be pretty major red flags and even some misinformation in the equipment chapters of just about every astro book I've ever looked at. How many books out there still try to sell the public on the notion that 7x50s are best for astronomy? I used to have this notion that I would reject every single book that recommended that size. It was my litmus test. But, then reality set in, and I realized that meant rejecting a lot of otherwise fine books such as Shaffer's "Your Guide to the Sky", which is otherwise really pretty good.
Even "Nightwatch" has what I would consider to be some potentially misleading info in the binocular section. And that's in what is probably the most recommended newbie astro book currently available.
So, you have to learn to look past a few snafus, if the book otherwise does what you want it to do.
Mike Swaim
--------------------
18" Starsplitter II f/4.5
8" Hardin Dob f/6
C5 workhorse mini SCT f/10 or f/6.3
70mm TV Ranger dual purpose birding/astro
77mm Leica Televid APO
16x70 Fujinons on UA Deluxe Mt.
12x50 Nikon SE
8x30 Nikon E2s
and many others
|
Steve Napier
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/10/04
Posts: 1559
|
|
I think saying that 20x77 are MARGINALLY useful is a bit like saying that Michael Schumakers Ferrari is MARGINALLY useful for Formula 1.
Its not an opinnion its a complete untruth!
Thanks for the replies guy"s.
Steve.
|
jrcrilly
Refractor wienie again
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 22461
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Sometimes when I see PH's writings about telescopes I've owned I get the impression that he was using a completely different model with that name number - or that he wasn't paying attention when someone told him about a scope he was later going to write about as though he knew something about it.
--------------------
John C
Urban Observatory
Tele Vue Pronto
A&M/Astreya 76mm F/6 APO
TMB/LOMO 80mm F/7.5 APO
Tak FSQ-106N F/5 APO
Meade 152ED F/9 "APO"
152mm F/10 achromat
Tak CN-212 8" F/12 classical Cass/ F/4 Newt
Teeter 20" F/3.8 truss Newt w/ServoCat
LXD750, EM-200, CI-700
ST-10XME
|
Fiske
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 03/14/04
Posts: 2057
Loc: Missouri / United States
|
|
I'm afraid I'm not a big fan of Phil's, though I do own copies of StarWare and his binocular guide. One thing I've noticed is a bias toward inexpensive (cheap?) gear.
I think the point made above about not expecting perfection is a good one. For example, in the generally outstanding Backyard Astronomer's guide, the authors include right-angle, erect image finders in their list of "accessories you don't really need." From that it was immediately clear to me that neither of them has done much star-hopping with an SCT. Adding an erect-image right angle finder (to replace my standard mirror-reversed finder) was the best step I ever took to making objects easier to find. At another point in the book, they both admit to now favoring GoTo telescopes. Figures. 
--------------------
Fiske Miles
Nikon 8x42 LX / 12x50 SE Binos
Mini Borg 60ED, TV-101, AT80Ach, XT-8, C11/CI-700, 22-Inch Dob
Way too many Nagler eyepieces
http://www.fiskemiles.blogspot.com/
www.fiskemiles.com
|
|
0 registered and 1 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: desertstars, ~Steph~
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 660
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
