Quote:

---

Nice to see a fairly simple piece of "wearable" hardware (the DarkSkies Hooded observing vest) got into the top ten.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Nice to see a fairly simple piece of "wearable" hardware (the DarkSkies Hooded observing vest) got into the top ten.

---

Thanks for calling my attention to that. I use a short tube of black material for this, but this is a better solution and has pockets, too, so I just ordered one. Of all the purchases I've made in the last few years, I think it required the least deliberation--obviously useful, obviously a good solution.

---

Yes, I use it fairly regularly at my home where local lighting is a problem. However, it has also been useful at the dark sky site of the Nebraska Star Party. Here is a shot of a bunch of us "modeling" the vest:

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Is it helpful to the hobby to compile a list that suggests one needs a credit card with a 15k limit to enjoy the hobby?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Is it helpful to the hobby to compile a list that suggests one needs a credit card with a 15k limit to enjoy the hobby?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

At least they seem to have gotten away from presenting this as if is was a real survey listing the top 10 products. Although we still get the TV at the top with the only big colored picture in the group. Quite frankly, reading the posts here, it did not seem that many people were buying the 3.7mm SX.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Is it helpful to the hobby to compile a list that suggests one needs a credit card with a 15k limit to enjoy the hobby?

---

Oh, please.

This site is sponsored by a major astronomy retailer. Would you expect them to discourage consumerism?

Actually, Astronomics keeps a reasonable balance, IMO. Certainly, there's plenty of space here for hardcore gearheads' fantasies, but also for low-key, tight budget, "roll your own" astronomers.

Becoming major gear consumer is a personal choice, not a requirement.

Jim

---

To the OP - (Not you Jim)

So next time, nominate less expensive products. Every year we get these posts where people just don't seem to realize that it's the *readers* that nominate and the *readers* that vote. Not me. Not the mods. Not Astronomics. You. Your fellow forum members. That's why it says "READERS CHOICE" on the front. If you don't like what's nominated, or voted for, change it.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

As per "real survey" - not exactly sure what you meant by that. The forum members nominated the products, and then voted on the products. It was all up to the users, and both the nominations and voting were open for months. If you have serious suggestions for improvement, I'm open to reading them...

---

Tom:

It's only a "real survey" if everyone who voted for the winning product gets one for free...

Jon

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Well, that - I don't think we can swing.

---

Maybe we should have voted in the Astronomics discount for Cloudy Nights members... you could swing that one.

Jon

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Is it helpful to the hobby to compile a list that suggests one needs a credit card with a 15k limit to enjoy the hobby?

---

Oh, please.

This site is sponsored by a major astronomy retailer. Would you expect them to discourage consumerism?

Actually, Astronomics keeps a reasonable balance, IMO. Certainly, there's plenty of space here for hardcore gearheads' fantasies, but also for low-key, tight budget, "roll your own" astronomers.

Becoming major gear consumer is a personal choice, not a requirement.

Jim

---

To the OP - (Not you Jim)

So next time, nominate less expensive products. Every year we get these posts where people just don't seem to realize that it's the *readers* that nominate and the *readers* that vote. Not me. Not the mods. Not Astronomics. You. Your fellow forum members. That's why it says "READERS CHOICE" on the front. If you don't like what's nominated, or voted for, change it.

---

OK, people, it's interesting to see how a single comment, couched in terms that make it fairly benign can cause so many people to reflexively scoff.

The demographics of the long time, contributing, frequent posters is very skewed away from the median with regard to income and/or discretionary income. I did not say that was bad but I did comment that the picture portrayed here might be off putting for some.

Instead of being defensive, why not tweak the rules? How hard would it be to include categories for "Best Product for Beginners" and "Best Value?" The specious arguments above are just that: specious. Astronomics would be just as happy to sell a large number of Astrotech dobs and Astrotech high grad Plossls as they are to sell what will always be a small number of Ethos and Taks. A look at their offerings would indicate that Astronomics is seeing a lot of possibilities in the "Value" market or they would not be selling all those reasonably priced imaging OTAs and the Astrotech eyepieces.

Post Extras: