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 >> ATM, Optics and DIY Forum

Pages: 1
roscoe
curmudgeon
*****

Reged: 02/04/09

Loc: NW Mass, inches from VT
coated/uncoated objective?
      #6290700 - 01/03/14 10:54 PM

This morning, I took advantage of the Surplus Shed sale, and for $185, am/will be the proud (I hope...) owner of a Jaegers 6" f/10 uncoated second-grade objective. I'd always wanted a D&G f/12 someday, missed out on the Jaegers f/12's at SS, and recently decided that, for my old-guy vision, a chipped, uncoated f/10 was good enough, considering the price.

So my questions: what is the light transmission/ghosting difference between coated and uncoated? Is it cost-effective/intelligent to get it coated? If so, who would I send it to??
Thanks,
Russ


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


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Perth, West Australia
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: roscoe]
      #6290738 - 01/03/14 11:16 PM

Russ you could send it to Majestic Coatings. I think that is where D & G lenses are coated. However I don't think it is worth the cost and the risk. Lenses can be destroyed in the coating process so there is some risk involved.

I think you can make a fine telescope without having to get the lens coated.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mikey cee
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/18/07

Loc: bellevue ne.
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: plyscope]
      #6290765 - 01/03/14 11:33 PM

Russ coatings are more in the "ego of the beholder" rather than the "eye of the beholder". I used an uncoated R.E. Brandt 8" F/13.3 lens for over 30 years and was pleased. Now I upgraded to an Istar 10" F/11 R35. True this lens is coated but I had no choice....that's what I was having to pay for anyways so might as well accept it. In a blind test study more than likely most all would fail to tell the difference and of those who could were probably just lucky. It really is just that difficult. Most would be amazed at how much of an objective lens would be covered by a cardboard mask before they could say "stop" I see a difference. Our club used to do that routinely in demonstrations amongst themselves years ago. Some so called experts say the diminishment must approach somewhere in the vicinity of 11%-15% gain before the human eye becomes sensitive to a change. I would absolutely agree with that and then some. Mike

Edited by mikey cee (01/03/14 11:35 PM)


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

Reged: 08/31/12

Loc: SC
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: roscoe]
      #6290841 - 01/04/14 12:04 AM

They are very good. My 6" F10 is my most used scope. Super sharp diffraction rings. E And F stars were easy tonight in the Trapezium and the seeing wasn't great. I'm so happy with mine I bought a 6" F8 with the code and a credit plus a little money.
The 6" F10 is a great all around scope. A D&G F12 may be a little better. N


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
PhilHerring
super member


Reged: 12/06/09

Loc: -33.87800,151.19630
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: bremms]
      #6291031 - 01/04/14 02:43 AM

I believe that an uncoated surface transmits around 96% of the light passing through it, whereas a basic, MgF2 coated surface transmits more like 99%. With 4 surfaces, this means a total of about 85% uncoated versus about 96% coated.

(BTW, my 6" f/5 was listed as "uncoated", but the flint is definitely AR coated, so you might get lucky...)


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

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: PhilHerring]
      #6291263 - 01/04/14 08:31 AM

The transmission difference is practically of no import. The eye is principally a contrast detector; a 10-15% lower transmission is essentially nothing compared to the eye's huge dynamic range.

What *might* matter is the veiling glare which could result if the curves on one or more surfaces happens to be just right for causing an aperture-filling (or near-filling) ghost reflection as seen from the focus.

One way to initially test for this is to shine a penlight up the focuser, with eye and light beside one another at about the position of focus. You could ease things by using a piece of glass from a small picture frame as a beam splitter. Place the glass ahead of the light, tilted about 45 degrees. You observe the reflection off the glass, as though it were a diagonal. You're looking to see if any reflection fills a considerable portion of the objective. If the spots are small, you *should* have little to fear from veiling glare from this source.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
roscoe
curmudgeon
*****

Reged: 02/04/09

Loc: NW Mass, inches from VT
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6291298 - 01/04/14 09:01 AM

Thanks, folks!

I'll wait and see if any surfaces are indeed coated, and try Glen's test....ghosting is something I am a bit concerned about....but hopefully the folks at Jaegers took this into account during their design phase....
R


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mikey cee
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/18/07

Loc: bellevue ne.
Re: coated/uncoated objective? new [Re: roscoe]
      #6291517 - 01/04/14 10:52 AM

Like I said I never had any issues nary a bit of ghosting was ever seen. Mike

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


Extra information
13 registered and 26 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, richard7, Starman81 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 265

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics