Quote: In years past, I've gotten into the argument of which is best. One friend suggested that the 'serious' student of the moon should only use photographic atlases. I countered with the point that 'serious' students of any subject use all the resources at their command. I don't know if I was right, but it sure shut him up!
I think that is the correct answer, Tim, no matter what field of study. Well said.
Quote: What happened in the bird watching world was that neither style of guide replaced the other. Those with stylized depictions are often used side by side with photo guides, and the combination offers a joined perspective that really helps with difficult identifications. And so it is with lunar atlases. I'm finding that I often have Rukl's and Hatfield's atlases on the observing table, open to corresponding pages, using both to figure out which obscure lunar pockmark it is that has me excited. Having gotten to this point, I doubt I would want to observe with only one or the other.
Excellent information, Tom! With that said, would the Wood's book not fill that need while viewing scope-side or planning a viewing session. I can really see utilizing all 3 (and others) and you study certain aspects for a particular session.
-------------------- Tom Tele Vue 102mm f/8.6 on an EzTouch
Vixen 80mm f/5 A80SSWT on a grab-n-go mount
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: Which Lunar Atlas Would You Choose?
Edit
Reply
Quote
