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)
JJK
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 04/28/08

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: moynihan]
      #5667255 - 02/07/13 03:03 PM

Quote:

Quote:

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


Like Alex




Alex had an exceptional (and trained) way to communicate. I don't have the time to train my parrots that way, but it's clear a lot of processing is going on in their heads.


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: spencerj]
      #5667266 - 02/07/13 03:07 PM

Quote:

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




Actually, make that thick-soled shoes or boots, several layers of socks, long underwear, normal clothes, Carhartt one-piece coverall, balaclava, and gloves!


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: Jon Isaacs]
      #5667690 - 02/07/13 07:14 PM

Quote:



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.


Jon Isaacs




Yep - just hang out in the refractor forum a bit and you will see the "CA is horrible - only apos are worth owning" vs. "Who would spend that kind of money when an achromat is just as good" battle surface on a repeated basis.

EVERY scope is a compromise. Just the way it is...


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: Scott Beith]
      #5667831 - 02/07/13 08:44 PM

Quote:



EVERY scope is a compromise. Just the way it is...




No, No, No....

Your scopes are compromises, my scopes are perfect...

Now if I can just find an eyepiece that is free from astigmatism at F/1.4...



Jon


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]
      #5667889 - 02/07/13 09:24 PM

Quote:

Quote:



EVERY scope is a compromise. Just the way it is...




No, No, No....

Your scopes are compromises, my scopes are perfect...

Now if I can just find an eyepiece that is free from astigmatism at F/1.4...



Jon




Seriously Jon, men who stand on ladders in their bare feet don't exactly have a whole lot of credibility


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
aa6ww
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 10/23/11

Loc: Sacramento, Calif.
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Robo-bob]
      #5667989 - 02/07/13 10:32 PM

Quote:

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  
BPO
sage


Reged: 02/23/10

Loc: South Island, NZ
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: hottr6]
      #5668000 - 02/07/13 10:37 PM

Like a lot of people, as a kid I started out on small refractors. After that I moved up to increasingly larger aperture SCTs. Eventually I graduated to big reflectors, and learned that anything less, especially small refractors - any refractors, in fact - were only for amateurs. Then a few years later I rediscovered the joys of small refractors. Finally, I tried and loved every one of the Maks made by Synta, including the wonderful 190mm Mak-Newt.

Any telescope is better than no telescope.


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: Jon Isaacs]
      #5668136 - 02/07/13 11:48 PM

Quote:

Quote:



EVERY scope is a compromise. Just the way it is...




No, No, No....

Your scopes are compromises, my scopes are perfect...

Now if I can just find an eyepiece that is free from astigmatism at F/1.4...



Jon






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: BPO]
      #5668421 - 02/08/13 07:42 AM

Quote:

Eventually I graduated to big reflectors, and learned that anything less, especially small refractors - any refractors, in fact - were only for amateurs.




This is a hobby, we are amateur astronomers...

Jon


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: Jon Isaacs]
      #5668439 - 02/08/13 08:05 AM

Sadly, the wages some of the pros make at observatories might seem like an extension of that term. Ill never forget the poor guy who had to ride his bike to work (and a junky one one) to Keck.

Pete


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: azure1961p]
      #5668830 - 02/08/13 11:52 AM

Quote:

Sadly, the wages some of the pros make at observatories might seem like an extension of that term. Ill never forget the poor guy who had to ride his bike to work (and a junky one one) to Keck.

Pete



There are very few jobs in the world that have a better commute to work than Keck. Besides, the guy on a bike was prolly a tri-athlete in training. I'll bet he could afford shoes, too.

Shane in grey-zone New Mexico


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]
      #5668874 - 02/08/13 12:14 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Sadly, the wages some of the pros make at observatories might seem like an extension of that term. Ill never forget the poor guy who had to ride his bike to work (and a junky one one) to Keck.

Pete



There are very few jobs in the world that have a better commute to work than Keck. Besides, the guy on a bike was prolly a tri-athlete in training. I'll bet he could afford shoes, too.

Shane in grey-zone New Mexico




I am guy that commuted to work via bicycle for more than 20 years. I consider it a luxury. Unfortunately age has caught up with me and those 125 mile/weeks are not possible any more.

But the Kecks, I believe the observatory is at about 14,000 feet. An ex-coworker is a operator and he says just being there are 14,000 feet is no fun.

Jon


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

Reged: 03/08/05

Loc: Matthews, NC, USA
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5669096 - 02/08/13 01:45 PM

Back on subject, MCTs have characteristics that at least to me present bigger challenges than the field of view. If I had a 7" F15 MCT, I can work around that by putting it on a goto mount or putting it on a dual saddle mount and have my 5" achro ride shotgun. Other challenges associated with MCTS from my perspective include:

1) Availability of MCTs: It appears that Orion 7" MCTs are quite available, and so are Questars (if you can afford them). Those appear to be the only choice for 7" MCTs. There are offerings from Meade, Celestron, and Ioptron, but only for smaller apertures. There used to be MCTs available from Intes-Micro and Santel, but the dealers offering them either have stopped or closed their doors. My workaround is to buy what's available and not worry about what's not available. Factoring in cost, if I were to get a MCT, it'd be the Orion 180mmF15 MCT.

2) Weight: As MCTs get larger, their weight goes up notably and with it, the difficulties in setting up the rig and putting it away. For me, that would limit me to 8" at most, based on specs for MCTs that once were offered here in the US. At 16 lbm, the Orion 7"F15 would not pose a problem here.

3) Heat transfer lag or cooldown. From here in North Carolina, this could be a problem. Picking on the Orion, I just don't see aby provisions for active or passive speedup of cooling. My workaround would either to set up very early or to store the optical tube assembly in un-airconditioned storage room (in a case or bag, of course).


None of this means that I've ruled out a MCT as a companion scope for my refractor. It only means that there may be problems with MCTs other than field of view of which I should be aware and ready to resolve.

Best,


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

Reged: 08/27/04

Loc: New Hampshire
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Mark Costello]
      #5669214 - 02/08/13 02:49 PM

You can still order Intes-Micro maks through APM. There may be others but, I'm not sure.

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: Mark Costello]
      #5669275 - 02/08/13 03:26 PM

Stellar Optical?

Intes Micro among others....


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: moynihan]
      #5670029 - 02/09/13 01:04 AM

Quote:

Stellar Optical?

Intes Micro among others....




I've tried to contact Stellar numerous times with no response. Odd as they advertise on the side liner here on CN.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Asbytec
Guy in a furry hat
*****

Reged: 08/08/07

Loc: La Union, PI
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Robo-bob]
      #5670182 - 02/09/13 05:55 AM

Unless you want wide field vistas, I am not sure what the narrow field hoopla is all about. The MCT FOV is actually perfect for lunar, planetary, double stars, and even most deep sky.

The MCT also seems plagued with the cool down myth. Its really not a myth, but its overblown. Their reputation may have stemmed from the earlier, heavy models. No doubt the Meade took a while with its massive internal weight. Other than that, their cool down appears to be similar to the similarly designed SCT.

I find neither to be a problem at all, and I star hop to every target including 10th mag doubles. Properly executed, the MCT is an impressive design. My Orion is simply jaw dropping. So much so, the FOV just is not a concern with the high power work I enjoy.


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: Asbytec]
      #5670195 - 02/09/13 06:36 AM

Quote:

Unless you want wide field vistas, I am not sure what the narrow field hoopla is all about. The MCT FOV is actually perfect for lunar, planetary, double stars, and even most deep sky.

The MCT also seems plagued with the cool down myth. Its really not a myth, but its overblown. Their reputation may have stemmed from the earlier, heavy models. No doubt the Meade took a while with its massive internal weight. Other than that, their cool down appears to be similar to the similarly designed SCT.

I find neither to be a problem at all, and I star hop to every target including 10th mag doubles. Properly executed, the MCT is an impressive design. My Orion is simply jaw dropping. So much so, the FOV just is not a concern with the high power work I enjoy.




I am not sure what all the hoopla is about either. One needs to merely accept that in comparison other designs, Maksutov-Cassegrains have a narrow maximum possible true field of view, have difficulty achieving large exit pupils and low magnifications and move on.

If any of those things are important to you as an observer, if you do want a scope that is capable of "widefield vistas" and is "perfect for lunar, planetary, double stars, and deep sky", such telescopes exist, they just have their own sets of disadvantages and issues.

Jon


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5670475 - 02/09/13 10:39 AM

Quote:

Maksutov-Cassegrains have a narrow maximum possible true field of view, have difficulty achieving large exit pupils and low magnifications and move on.




Ah, but it is all relative, isn't it? And that is what telescope design is about.

The origins of the Mak position it as an "Alternative" to its contemporary designs.

And what where the contemporary designs for amateurs? When it was introduced, what was the MCT competing with?

Well, it was competing with another scope that had narrow fields of view, that also had trouble with generating wider exit pupils, and that was very expensive to make in 5" to 8" apertures.

What was that other scope? It was the large observatory achromat.

And for this competitor, the MCT was in fact a superior design in just about every way.

It offered the same contrast and a long focus achromat of the same aperture, it offerd in some cases a wider true field of view and potentially a bigger exit pupil, it was far easier to mount, and it costs less to make.

In every way, it was simply a better telecope than a large long focus achromat.

And that remains the case today. I don't know why anyone in their right mind would buy a 7" f/18 achromat when they could buy a 180mm MCT and get esentially the same performance for a fraction of the price.

So, it is all realtive, and relative to the 6" and 7" long focus achromat, the 180mm MCT is a total winner.

But I would rather have a C11. You get a bigger true field with a bigger exit pupil, coupled to a much bigger aperture with better resolution and contrast.

And this answers why there are so few larger MCTs on the market. The market has spoken, and said that it prefers other options, and that other option is almost always these days, a larger, less expensive, SCT.

It is always about the market and what people are buying, and they buy SCTs because the packaging is better, and the price is cheaper.

I would rather have a 5" SCT than a 4" MCT.

I would rather have a 6" SCT than a 5" MCT.

I would rather have an 8" SCT than a 7" MCT.

I would rahter have an 11" SCT than an 8" MCT.

And so it would seem, would a lot of other people.

Aperture is aperture, and the advanteages of more aperture for the same money in a package that is essentially about the same size and weight is what the MCT competes with today.

When it was long focus acrhomats, it was oh, so easy. The MCT was a better scope in just about every way.

It's a jungle out there.. LOL>


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

Reged: 06/07/07

Loc: western Colorado
Re: "But Maks have a narrow FOV" - WTH??? new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5670517 - 02/09/13 11:09 AM

Which explains why there are more Chevrolets than Rolls Royces, but we all know which is the better automobile.

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


Extra information
33 registered and 20 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Cotts, Starman27, kkokkolis 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 5612

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics