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 >> Refractors

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Pinbout]
      #5507692 - 11/06/12 11:10 PM

Yeah, well, that's just it. Doing a search on the US patent office website yields zero patents in the name of Stellarvue or Victor Maris.

Pretty weak.

-Rich


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

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Pinbout]
      #5507706 - 11/06/12 11:25 PM

Quote:

Quote:


Read it from the original source:

www.stellarvue.com/about.html






when I read it in the last paragraph from the link, I see they are speaking about dealers, not individuals, who will resell their knocked off designs.

so they won't persue "anyone" only u.s. dealers who, without knowledge, are purchasing with the intent to resell patent pending designs that are not licensed.




Smoke and mirrors, the optics in these scope are not proprietary designs, the mechanicals in these scopes are basic standard stuff. Long Perng and Kunming United Optics sell versions of their scopes to vendors around the world including SV. The Astro-Tech version might be spec'd a little differently but they are the same basic scopes from the same manufacturers.

The AT-102 ED and the SV-102ED.. it was kind of funny. The SV-102ED had a particular issue with the collimation screws being too tight. It was no surprise that AT-102ED had exactly the same problem.

What I found distasteful was the implication that other similar scopes sold be other vendors were inferior versions of the SV scopes. Back in the days when SV was selling the AT-1010 NightHawk, their website featured disparaging remarks about "colorful Chinese glass". It was only later that it became clear the AT-1010 was coming from Taiwan...

Jon


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

Reged: 02/22/10

Loc: nj
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5507714 - 11/06/12 11:34 PM

Quote:

Smoke and mirrors




totally agreed.


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

Reged: 02/22/10

Loc: nj
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5507730 - 11/06/12 11:46 PM

Quote:

Doing a search on the US patent office website yields zero patents in the name of Stellarvue or Victor Maris.






patent pending. they wouldn't have any info if it's not issued yet.

but as jon says, "smoke and mirrors".

from wikipedia

"Fraudulent use of the patent pending warning is prohibited by the law of many countries and inventors should be cautious when marking products or methods that may arguably not be covered by any pending patent application. In some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, a warning notice should ideally mention the number of the pending application."

so you could persue a action to have them take it down if they don't provide the number of the pending application.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Pinbout]
      #5507842 - 11/07/12 01:50 AM

You know, you're absolutely right.

From the Wiki article:

In the United States, according to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the expression "Patent Pending" as such does not protect an invention until the actual patent is published and/or issued:

"A patentee who makes or sells patented articles, or a person who does so for or under the patentee is required to mark the articles with the word "Patent" and the number of the patent. The penalty for failure to mark is that the patentee may not recover damages from an infringer unless the infringer was duly notified of the infringement and continued to infringe after the notice.

The marking of an article as patented when it is not in fact patented is against the law and subjects the offender to a penalty. Some persons mark articles sold with the terms "Patent Applied For" or "Patent Pending". These phrases have no legal effect, but only give information that an application for patent has been filed in the Patent and Trademark Office. The protection afforded by a patent does not start until the actual grant of the patent. False use of these phrases or their equivalent is prohibited". [5]

The use of the term "patent pending" or "patent applied for" is permitted so long as a patent application has actually been filed. If these terms are used when no patent application has been filed it is deemed as a deceptive act and a fine of up to $500 may be imposed for every such offense.[6] Under the current interpretation of "offense", each mis-marked article constitutes an offense, which permits theoretical damages in the hundreds of millions of dollars for high-volume consumer goods.

Anyone seen a "Patent Pending" label on a SV scope?

-Rich


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


Reged: 12/03/05

Loc: Cypress, Texas
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Pinbout]
      #5507971 - 11/07/12 06:53 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Smoke and mirrors




totally agreed.




.. but then it'd be a reflector..

-Pete


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

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Burgess back?? [Re: DCS]
      #5508007 - 11/07/12 07:59 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Smoke and mirrors




totally agreed.




.. but then it'd be a reflector..

-Pete




Well, smoke and coke bottles...

Anyway it seems this thread is getting off topic. This is thread is about Bill Burgess. In my experience Bill Burgess seemed to often have unrealistic expectations about what was possible and that got him into trouble but I think his mistakes and errors were honest mistakes, he simply "bit off more than he could chew."

And he did have some notable successes, the Burgess Optical/TMB planetary eyepiece series was probably his greatest. These were the first decent short focal length, decent eye relief eyepieces on the market, at least the first I ever saw and I still use mine the majority of the nights I view from my backyard.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5508462 - 11/07/12 02:34 PM

What next, a "Do Not Remove This Tag Under Penalty of Law" tag?

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

Reged: 11/26/06

Loc: Vienna, VA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5508673 - 11/07/12 04:27 PM

Quote:

Anyway it seems this thread is getting off topic. This is thread is about Bill Burgess. In my experience Bill Burgess seemed to often have unrealistic expectations about what was possible and that got him into trouble but I think his mistakes and errors were honest mistakes, he simply "bit off more than he could chew."

And he did have some notable successes, the Burgess Optical/TMB planetary eyepiece series was probably his greatest. These were the first decent short focal length, decent eye relief eyepieces on the market, at least the first I ever saw and I still use mine the majority of the nights I view from my backyard.

Jon




I just got an email from Tammy FYI. She says that yes it is indeed an available product. Further says that It is better than 1/4 wave from 435-656nm and 3 color crossings and that images taken from this scope by T. Davis is on the Astro Images section of the website.


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

Reged: 11/26/06

Loc: Vienna, VA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Mike Clemens]
      #5508688 - 11/07/12 04:36 PM

Quote:

Is there any reality to it though? I've never heard of anyone trying to import the same stuff and getting attacked by Stellervue as a result, has it happened?




I don't believe it is feasible to even do this since the customer has no signed contract with SV. If SV has a contract with Vendor A to exclusively supply them scopes, and Vendor A decides to sell me one direct, all SV can do to my knowledge is to sue Vendor A for breach of contract. Can do nothing to me. And since these are overseas transactions...probably not much he could do to Vendor A either other than terminate the relationship. Just a lot of scare tactics IMO.


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

Reged: 09/13/03

Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5508799 - 11/07/12 06:06 PM

Quote:

In my experience Bill Burgess seemed to often have unrealistic expectations about what was possible and that got him into trouble but I think his mistakes and errors were honest mistakes, he simply "bit off more than he could chew." And he did have some notable successes...




I agree with Jon's assessment.

I've had positive purchasing experiences with Bill. I was fortunate to purchase my Burgess 1278 when they were in stock. After a phone call with Bill to learn more about the 1278, he invited me to come by and test one out in person. We auditioned three of his 1278 scopes. All three had impressive performance. Bill let me have my pick of the three and he adjusted the stock focuser to my liking. Bill followed-up with me to see how I liked the scope. It was a great purchase experience.

The 1278 is a solidly built scope and a nice performing f8 achromat. I like it so well I later added a Moonlite focuser to it.

I may be in the minority, but I wanted to add that my experiences with Bill Burgess have been positive.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Wes James
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/12/06

Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: SAL]
      #5509503 - 11/08/12 08:12 AM

I, too had some bad experiences with Bill- you'll find one of my complaints on file with the BBB there.... but it was finally resolved, took about a year to get my money back.
I did, however- have a great experience with Bill- when he was cleaning out a warehouse- he had some 1278 tubes, objectives and cells- I got essentially a whole scope- minus focuser- for $60.00 SHIPPED to me! I added a Moonlight 3 knob focuser when they were closing them out at $100 off- that's one of my better astro bargains!


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

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Wes James]
      #5509521 - 11/08/12 08:28 AM

Quote:

I, too had some bad experiences with Bill- you'll find one of my complaints on file with the BBB there.... but it was finally resolved, took about a year to get my money back.




I was one who went the ordeal of the 102F/6. The promise of a scope in month, the stories and delays, the arrival of a nice scope but with seriously flawed optics about a year later, the promise of an upgraded objective to fit flawed 102F/6, I have told this story before. I eventually replaced the objective with one from an Orion Astroview 100mm F/6 and had some fun times with the scope. I called it "the Burion."

To Bill and Tammy's credit, one day, two years after the original order, after it was quite clear that Burgess was not going to have replacement objectives , I received a credit to my account for the $200 the scope cost. I never asked for it, it just happened.

When I no longer needed the scope, I passed it on to someone to use doing outreach in the heartlands of Ugranda... I hope it is still out there doing its thing.

Jon

(Burion and an ED-80 looking at Venus in the sunrise)



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

Reged: 03/08/05

Loc: Matthews, NC, USA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5509594 - 11/08/12 09:35 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I, too had some bad experiences with Bill- you'll find one of my complaints on file with the BBB there.... but it was finally resolved, took about a year to get my money back.




I was one who went the ordeal of the 102F/6. The promise of a scope in month, the stories and delays, the arrival of a nice scope but with seriously flawed optics about a year later, the promise of an upgraded objective to fit flawed 102F/6, I have told this story before. I eventually replaced the objective with one from an Orion Astroview 100mm F/6 and had some fun times with the scope. I called it "the Burion."

To Bill and Tammy's credit, one day, two years after the original order, after it was quite clear that Burgess was not going to have replacement objectives , I received a credit to my account for the $200 the scope cost. I never asked for it, it just happened.

When I no longer needed the scope, I passed it on to someone to use doing outreach in the heartlands of Ugranda... I hope it is still out there doing its thing.

Jon

(Burion and an ED-80 looking at Venus in the sunrise)






I also had one of those 1026 (4"F6) achros. The original issue as Bill described it before he shipped out the scopes was yellow flaring around brighter objects. The apparent cause was a bad figure on the outer edge of the lens. So the scopes were sent out with an internal stop to eliminate the flaring. But unfortunately, the stop limited the aperture to about 70mm instead of 90mm as Bill had mentioned (I checked this out after the first news of the 70mm stop hit the owner's Yahoo group). So I removed the stop and used the scope for about 2 years as it was with full 102mm aperture and the flaring issue. While falling short of what a 4" achro should have been able to do, it was not too bad for powers up to 100X and was good enough to show me several dozen Messier objects like the smoky filamentation in M42, the Ring Nebula, Andromeda, Bode's Nebula and the nearby Cigar Galaxy, etc. I had some good time finding clusters and asterisms in Cygnus and making up my own names for them (Football Helmet, Coffin Cluster, M103 was the Shrimpboat Cluster and M34 the Bow & Arrow Cluster ) Later on with some help, I got it souped up, an "eye transplant" that allowed the transformed scope to deliver really sharp images all the way to 220X. Saturn's image looked as if someone cut a picture out of National Geographic and pasted it on a background of - deep purple - but the image was still extremely sharp. Under ideal conditions, it could show stars all across the disc of M13. When I upgraded to the ES AR127, I decided not to sell the souped up 1026. There were several reasons, it was a litle banged up, due to the reputation it really wasn't "sellable" IMO, a lot of people including Bill made it possible for me to get back into the hobby, I had help in getting the most out of it and so it didn't seem right to sell it, take your pick. That ol' 1026 rig hopefully is getting use at my girl's alma mater....

Unlike the 1026, the 1278 (5"F8 achro) turned out to be a real winner. There were times that I kicked myself for not plopping money down for that one. Then I take my AR127 out for a spin and forget all about that...

Cheers,


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

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Mark Costello]
      #5509603 - 11/08/12 09:44 AM

Quote:

I also had one of those 1026 (4"F6) achros. The original issue as Bill described it before he shipped out the scopes was yellow flaring around brighter objects. The apparent cause was a bad figure on the outer edge of the lens.




Mark:

Some were better than others. Mine had the yellow fringing but it also had severe astigmatism. I don't think there were any "good ones" in terms of a scope that would perform as well as a 102mm F/6 should perform.

I would not expect this sort of problem with this new scope... those were different times...

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Andy Howie
sage
*****

Reged: 09/10/05

Loc: Paisley, Scotland
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5509675 - 11/08/12 10:29 AM

Just re-found pics of the slightly later tubed versions of the Flourite Doublet. Exactly the same as the one shown on the new Burgess website. Rings are a bit different and there was never a handle option before. Don't know if these ones had the split threaded ota tube though, for binoviewer use, as mine has.
If they have the same glass as in mine, it'll be a lovely scope to view through.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
sarastro
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 08/12/04

Loc: Seattle
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: Andy Howie]
      #5509883 - 11/08/12 12:26 PM

I've had some dealings with Bill. Overall they have been good. I would still buy from him. He's had some good stuff at good prices in the past. My advice is don't buy anything unless it is in stock.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cjc
sage


Reged: 10/15/10

Loc: Derbyshire, England
Re: Burgess back?? new [Re: sarastro]
      #5510124 - 11/08/12 03:19 PM

I note that the Planetary eyepiece listed:
http://www.burgessoptical.com/planetary-eyepieces.html

is not the same as the TMB Optical® Planetary II, the only eyepieces authorized by the estate of the late Thomas M. Back.
https://www.astronomics.com/tmb-optical-planetary-ii-series-eyepieces_c93.aspx


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


Extra information
44 registered and 38 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Scott in NC, FirstSight, panhard, star drop 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 3936

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics