Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

jetstream

Members
  • Posts

    7,388
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

jetstream last won the day on April 9 2023

jetstream had the most liked content!

Reputation

9,702 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

42,828 profile views
  1. Lol! Right now my St Croix fishing rod has taken priority to the dismay of the local walleye population 😈 The sky is filled with forest fire smoke again, pretty bad actually and just started today. Big fire about 130 miles north of here rumour has it. And so my scopes sit idle...
  2. Not sure but my neighbour has a National Geographic branded "reflector" from years ago and he thinks its a nice scope.... asked me to set it up- but thankfully he lives 900 miles away and only visits in the summer- and forgot about it - it is a complete piece of junk. This in contrast to the H130, that is a very good scope and nicely affordable.
  3. Sometimes I start a thread and am not really sure where to put it lol the mods do a great job shuffling things into the right spot. I dont find an image posted in the obs section offensive personally. I hear you, some visual observations can raise eyebrows including some of mine. Honesty is key IMHO. And this- I challenge any imager to a duel- I take one 5 second look at a DSO, say Pickerings Wisp with my 24" and the imager with any scope, anywhere on earth to a single 5 exposure, zero processing and we'll compare notes...😁
  4. Well I agree with @Piero- I still do tick exercises, but eventually one starts to realize that the tick list is endless lol the bigger aperture and the darker the skies the list becomes so large .... During my 'tick" phase I did discover some objects that have become favourite go to mainstays ie the IC1318 complex, the "Little Veil" nebula complex, SH2-94, the Foetus neb and Hickson 55 plus so many more. As far as observing under LP skies and with small aperture, it really is a tick exercise IMHO.
  5. Lol!👍 A faint fuzzy is a faint fuzzy no matter the aperture. Oddly enough I really enjoy bright DSO in my 24" ie ones that are bright in my 10" - the difference is staggering.
  6. "Bright DSO" is only relative to the skies you observe from and the aperture you use IMHO. No matter how well my TSA120 does under very dark skies it cannot touch my 10" dob for DSO. Regardless of some opinions, a 10" dob, under LP skies will outperform a 100mm-140mm class scope every time. Take a small scope, put it under dark skies and it will amaze wih the views it gives... our H130 gives a stupidly bright view of M81/M82...and M42...and...👍
  7. My sky right now is a blurry seething mess fueled by 30c temps and the lake evaporation. This combined with massive hatches of blackflies and mosquitos... I like you am taking a lunar break lol Gerry
  8. Many kudos to you Nicos ! Calling it like it is regardless of brand, I do the same. Years ago I reported sub par performance in a SW120ED, eyebrows raised. After a long while I fixed it (with advice here) and it gives great views. It was then a side by side was done between it and the TSA120- the TSA120 showed contrast detail the 120ED did not- again eyebrows raised. IMO, the only way to sort things out is from testing and real world reviews... honest, non biased reviews.I brought the TEC160 up in this thread for two reasons- to illustrate a recently made scope from a top maker that could be said to be sub par in blue and also to illustrate the hesitation for criticism of certain brands...which by default illustrates the willingness to criticize a particular one. If SV puts out a bunch of sub par scopes or bs's their numbers I'll be in line to first report it should I have experience with it believe me. We are all winners here IMHO, all the makers will ensure better consistency now that scopes can easily be called out through DPAC which is hard to argue with when done properly and with reasonable equipment. My next high end refractor will be DPAC'd no question. Gerry
  9. @Jim L I read a lot of those reports a good while back and others and yeah its an eye opener... IMHO.
  10. For sure and at some point fast and larger aperture triplet figuring gets much harder I think which of course makes the lenses deadly expensive. I'm still considering a TEC 160, but like you, my exchange rate is not that great. With regards to f ratio, my own preference is around f7.5-f8 for a frac, triplet or otherwise. My new DM6 is fantastic, very easy to carry, great in use and can handle a largish frac, plus Tom Peters is great to deal with. Who knows what other frac I'll end up with on it, but I know this- if I drop a wad of cash I want the scope to be right up there optically. There should be zero question about optical quality at these high prices from any maker.
  11. @Jim L Having owned many dobs- my preferred telescope type- I would seriously look at this scope https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-10-dobsonian-telescope.html I think they are available in the USA from Explore Scientific. They have excellent bearings and carry very easy. A vg focuser too and the optics are up there from what Ive heard. Had these been available years ago I would not have purchased my OOUK VX10. Gerry
  12. Definitely and rightly so- that scope should have never left SV - multiple levels of QC should have caught this and prevented shipment. I think but dont know that certain lenses might not be able to be figured for the very high level of quality that we are talking about, and so would have to be rejected, a very costly proposition. The fast f ratios that the market demands is a huge challenge for the makers IMHO, ie LZOS 130 f 6 vs the 130 f9.2 - Id take the slower scope any day for my visual planetary/lunar observing, the latter a very well known top performer. The TSA120 was chosen by me for the apparently consistent optics they have, eventhough most samples Ive seen test in the mid 90's Strehl wise, but with balanced colour correction and faster cooldown than the superb TOA130. All in all I think we are in the glory days with regards to telescope choices- a lot of the makers are getting long in the tooth however and who knows how long some of them will be around, this in reference to dobs as well. I'm really glad all those guys are doing DPAC tests, I like looking at the results- the very long banter not so much, but it is my choice to read or not lol Gerry
  13. I 100% agree. I wonder if the other top makers have offered a very high level of consistency or is it taken for granted that they do? Is the TEC160 mentioned in this thread is an example of their consistency? These DPAC tests are very revealing thats for sure and personally I love them. The tests will have all the makers on their toes IMHO. I'm pleasantly surprised at how well some SkyWatcher fracs tests actually. In their case the weak point might be the assembly of the scopes and the errors this can introduce like the example I have (120ED, gross focuser misalignment, fixed with a Moonlight). Gerry
  14. Dobs are great- I have 4 of them lol My favourite though is the 15" f4.8 truss dob from Astrosystems. This scope just glides through the sky effortlessly. I hope you guys get great views through yours coming up.
  15. They dont... vertical interferometry is preferred I believe. Getting different interferometers to agree totally is near impossible and even individual fringe pictures dont 100% agree with each other from the same interferometer- hence the need for many averaged pictures to get a complete "final picture" of the optic. I believe you are right in the sense that properly set up interferometers will give close numbers so the relative differences show the direction the optic is going for the optician. With regards to SV having random SA correction in the other colours- could it not be said of other brands too? Or is the mentioned TEC160 an anomaly? Or other brands including A-P or Skywatcher? and LZOS?? Is this an indication of a lack of control like SV is being accused of? Ive looked at many test reports over many years and if any of these test reports are to be believed most if not all brands show sample to sample variation. IMO this variation is normal, but should be constrained within certain bounds or the optic rejected. I'm thinking after all the scrutiny that SV is receiving they will, in the end, put out some of the best, most consistent optics around, if they are not already doing so. I sure wish someone would tell me if the camera taking DPAC pictures can influence the look of the bands lol Gerry
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.