13 replies to this topic

[desertstars]

https://shopatsky.co...m_campaign=rukl

 

[Pjmjrastro]

I would love to have it, but that’s a little pricey.

[kimcheese]

Copy finally arrived at the local public library (inter-library loan).  Haven't made time to head into town to pick it up. On the wish list at a number or online used book sources.  Prices have been as low as $28 to +$150USD.  Did purchase a copy of Wood & Collins, "21st Century Atlas of the Moon".  I think all the mapping images were taken by the LRO.  Purchased from a used bookstore, but new for a significant discount.  Store purchased a bit too much inventory of this slow seller. 

 

The spiral bound design and format makes for a functional Moon Atlas. Rukl's book seems to be a "classic".  Outside of that.  Any reason to choose it over the Wood & Collins?

[Dave Mitsky]

https://shopatsky.co...m_campaign=rukl

 

Limit 2 per customer.

 

Is this perhaps a limited edition?  

[desertstars]

Limit 2 per customer.

 

Is this perhaps a limited edition?  

I hope not. 

[desertstars]

The spiral bound design and format makes for a functional Moon Atlas. Rukl's book seems to be a "classic".  Outside of that.  Any reason to choose it over the Wood & Collins?

Not a question I can answer. I'm in the habit of acquiring (and using) multiple references for a given astronomical subject. So I have the previous Sky Publishing edition of Rukl's atlas, the recently released Duplex Moon Atlas by Stoyan, The Cambridge Photographic Moon Atlas by Chu et.al., and both versions of S&T's Field Map Of The Moon. I use all of them to one degree or another, but the Rukl's atlas has been my go-to atlas since it was published.

[Dale Smith]

I received the email from Sky & Telescope earlier today and it looks like a must-buy. I missed the earlier edition when it was available.

[RMay]

I own Wood & Collins, my go-to reference guide, plus Luna Incognita for the rare research effort. Don’t own Rukl and it seems like overkill at this time to add it to my library.

Ron

[Josephus Miller]

I would love to have it, but that’s a little pricey.

Agreed. I picked up my used copy of the Kalmbach edition for around $20 online. It's quite serviceable. Any idea what makes this edition worth $100?

[mich_al]

Copy finally arrived at the local public library (inter-library loan).  Haven't made time to head into town to pick it up. On the wish list at a number or online used book sources.  Prices have been as low as $28 to +$150USD.  Did purchase a copy of Wood & Collins, "21st Century Atlas of the Moon".  I think all the mapping images were taken by the LRO.  Purchased from a used bookstore, but new for a significant discount.  Store purchased a bit too much inventory of this slow seller. 

 

The spiral bound design and format makes for a functional Moon Atlas. Rukl's book seems to be a "classic".  Outside of that.  Any reason to choose it over the Wood & Collins?

I have both and many other Moon books. "21st Century Atlas of the Moon" is near or at the top of my list.  I lusted after Ruki for some time and when one came up for sale I snapped it up.  It's OK to have, I suppose, for completeness if one desires a rounded collection of Moon books but I very seldom even open it.

[maroubra_boy]

Sorry, but I don't see what all the lust over the Ruki atlas is all about. At one time it may have been top dog, but it hasn't been for a long time now. It has no info on domes & it is lacking on info that it does show. It really isn't a patch on VMA & falls short on the Lunar Map HD app. And both are free downloads. This paper atlas is a step backwards if you really are into the Moon.

Edited by maroubra_boy, 26 May 2023 - 12:15 PM.

[alder1]

Just my opinion, for what it’s worth: I have a number of lunar atlases and all have their points. But my Rukl, now much annotated, is the one I use every session at the telescope. I find it invaluable. The information that it’s lacking is easily available elsewhere. For a comprehensive overview of the lunar surface it can’t be beat. 

[desertstars]

Just my opinion, for what it’s worth: I have a number of lunar atlases and all have their points. But my Rukl, now much annotated, is the one I use every session at the telescope. I find it invaluable. The information that it’s lacking is easily available elsewhere. For a comprehensive overview of the lunar surface it can’t be beat. 

I'm in agreement with your opinion. Of the multiple resources I have for lunar studies, Rukl's atlas is the one I use most during an observing session. I find it works very well along side the pdf edition of Garfinkle's Luna Cognita I have on my laptop. 

[maroubra_boy]

See, I use Lunar Map HD in the field on my phone. No paper to be comprised by dew either.

The photographic resolution this app alone offers is greater than what this atlas can provide.

For that matter, I stopped using a paper celestial atlas long ago too since I started using Sky Safari, and I star hop. I never thought I would relinquish my paper atlas, but looking back it has been years since I packed it & I have to admit I am grateful I don't need to pack it & not have to do running repairs to it when dew mushes it up.

I understand people have their own preferences, but I still don't get the wide appeal of this atlas when there are other resources that are more detailed & offer more information. Worse still if this is the person's only source of lunar info, they are missing out on so much about the Moon. Seriously missing out on deeper understanding on the lunar geology & geography to best understand what they are actually looking at. Miss out on features that are quite extraordinary entirely because the resource they are using totally skips over them.

I also have not come across a review of Luna Cognita that has made it a compelling resource. Sorry, but the reviews of it are only using rose coloured glasses, not a nuts & bolts analysis of the work. I also don't see people referencing this work in their own descriptions of their work with the Moon. I am often referring the two resources I use by far with the Moon.

Yes, I am being critical, but I am deliberately putting up this point of view as I don't see the appeal of what is now an out of date reference. The Rukl atlas was great in its time, but lacking today.