Probably a dumb question.....

[ScubaMike]

you guys must have seen that starting line so often...............

Can someone explain to me, preferably in lay terms that I will be able to understand, why the focal reducers for Celestron CXX tubes cost so much more than "standard" focal reducers that would be used on a Newtonian?

Is the construction different? If so, in what way?

Is it just the quality of the optics?

(I am refusing to jump in this time, I'm taking it slowly and researching and trying to understand every aspect).

[brantuk]

The purpose of a reducer is to reproduce the view through the telescope at a shorter focal length and lower f-ratio, and still bring all wavelengths of light to focus in the same focal plane.

It needs quality glass which is fully multi coated to do this whilst still maintaining the quality of view through the scope. It's a bit like a half decent refractor objective lens. Unlike you I trusted to the wind and jumped in when I got mine lol, but I hope that helps

[ScubaMike]

Thanks Brantuk.

I understand the use of focal reducers.

I just don't understand why the ones Celestron sell for their SGTs are so much more expensive than the ones I see for Newts.

Are they one and the same thing, just quality differences?

[brantuk]

I've personally never reduced a newt - but I have a .63 reducer for the CPC which works a treat (like having 2 scopes in one). So can't really comment on the difference - but I do know Celestron hike the price a bit for the name on all their products.

That said - their reducer does give a very nicely corrected flat field, with little or no noticeable coma, CA, or astigmatism. But I couldn't explain all those very simply without doing a spot of research myself lol.

Sure there are cheaper ones around but you may find they introduce some imperfections in those qualities, or don't do the job as well. The Celestron ones are made specifically for their scopes.

[Catanonia]

Quality to match the scopes optics and ensure it it matched to the scope to give good fields and flatness.

[johninderby]

Do you mean Newt Coma Correctors rather than reducers?

John