Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_2.thumb.jpg.72789c04780d7659f5b63ea05534a956.jpg

Louis D

Members
  • Content Count

    5,539
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,753 Excellent

4 Followers

About Louis D

  • Rank
    Main Sequence

Profile Information

  • Location
    Texas, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Since the OP didn't really specify cost, I took the topic's debate to be between wide field and narrow field eyepieces in general. At the high end, narrow field eyepieces like the ZAOs, TMB monos, TAK TOEs, and Vixen HRs still outperform their similarly or lower priced wide field competitors.
  2. OMG! 32mm of in-focus will be required??? I've only got about 15mm of in-focus left on my Dob with a CC in place. It would be fine in my fracs and Maks, though.
  3. I can't think of any recent US leaders who might fit that definition.
  4. Hot cuppa tea, coffee, hot cocoa, mixed drink???
  5. Svbony is having a 32% off sale on ebay US right now on them.
  6. Quintessential British stiff upper lip, I presume.
  7. For me, it's the super short eye relief of orthoscopics at short focal lengths that really bugs me. I have enough astigmatism that taking my eyeglasses off even at a 1mm exit pupil causes a noticeable drop in resolution for me. As such, I stick with my Pentax XLs, XWs, and Delos. I know I'm giving up a bit relative to TMB monocentrics, ZAOs, TAK TOEs and Vixen HRs, but I'm willing to live with it for comfort sake. During the latest Mars opposition, I found much better resolution to be had with my entry level Arcturus binoviewers and 50 year old B&L microscope wide field eyepieces than
  8. All the same issues being regurgitated over and over again on page after page of this CN thread. Apparently, us Americans are in a much bigger froth over it than folks on the other side of the pond.
  9. Having all but the 3.2mm in the set, I would suggest 25mm, 12mm, 8mm, and 5mm making for powers of 48x, 100x, 150x, and 240x. I tend to skip straight from widest field to mid-high power in a Dob of that focal length. As such, the 18mm and 15mm get skipped and are too closely spaced in power at 67x and 80x, respectively, to either the 25mm or 12mm to make sense to buy them as well. That, and they're both fairly weak performers compared to the 12mm and below. I would pool the money saved on the 15mm and 18mm toward getting a 30mm APM UFF or equivalent (Altair/Meade/Celestron) in the futu
  10. By keeping prices low for two decades, they've managed to push out almost all non-Chinese competition. Now they can raise their prices to a sustainable level for themselves. This is also happening in solar cells and rare earth metals production.
  11. That might work for short term outages, but not for days long outages. Our gas stations were running out of fuel due to lack of tanker truck deliveries because of the icy roads. Modern generators automatically start and run diagnostics weekly, alerting you via wireless connection if there's an issue. The biggest issues I've read about are when the starter battery dies and this check can't happen and making sure to have the engine oil changed/maintained. I'm not concerned about natural gas not making it to our house because we had a continuous supply despite it not making it to all the
  12. I just had an epiphany. At 15.5mm and 75 degrees, it will most likely have a wider true field of view than the typical 8-24mm zoom at 24mm and 44 degrees. It will also be wider at the short end as well. It should yield a very useful range of magnifications and TFOVs.
  13. Adding a focal reducer to a Newtonian will probably just exacerbate the inherent coma of the desig, add field curvature, add other edge aberrations, and reduce back focus to such a point it may not be possible to bring most eyepieces to focus. If you really want a fast Newt for wide field views, go with an f/3.9 astrograph with a TV Paracorr T2 instead. The large central obstruction will limit its contrast for planets, though.
  14. If the dewpoint is quite low outside compared to inside my house (often the case during winter here), I'll cap my eyepieces and close my airtight cases before bringing them in to prevent them from instantly dewing over. If it's damp outside, I'll bring them in uncapped and open cased to let them dry out before storage. The scope(s) are brought in uncapped in either case because they're not airtight. I don't want moisture inside the house accumulating on them while capped and not temperature equalized. Finders come off before bringing in the scope(s) to avoid catching them on the do
  15. I'm thinking of getting a standby generator for the house instead of more astro gear since we lost power for days during the winter storm two weeks ago.
×
×
  • 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.