Refractors

[lonebod]

I found this quiet interesting website. Just interested in what some of the more experience folk think of it's content for accuracy and guidance for modern currently available scopes?

https://www.astronomics.com/why-buy-a-refractor-telescope_t.aspx

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[sidewind]

Well, you just read what can split a forum. It is true, that the thruput of light is % wise bigger in a refractor than in other, and it also is true that there are deterioration of alumirrors at least for reflectors, but that said, reflectors are very expensive, compared to size with all other systems.

To me it looks like they only want sell refractors, even though they have other systems

[Wyvern]

Interesting reading their blurb. Like Sidewind above, I feel they are "leaning" towards refractors if that is their main sales item.  They don't seem to like a level playing field though, looking at their  text

- Under average seeing conditions, a useful rule of thumb in astronomy is that a good quality 3" to 4" refractor can often outperform an average quality 6" to 8" reflector or catadioptric telescope for seeing details on the Moon and planets, splitting binary stars, and resolving globular clusters.

They only wish to compare a "good quality" instrument to an "average" one! 

It really goes to show that with telescopes, it's horses for courses. There is no one telescope that is fantastic at everything. There will always be a trade off or compromise somewhere and this will be different for every individual who wants a scope. What is ideal for one person can be totally pointless for another and is why there is such a wide range of telescopes available to buy.

Regards

Les

[Peter Drew]

Nothing really outrageous, typical level of bias found in one direction advertising. A similar strength writeup could be generated in favour of other types of telescope. 

[dick_dangerous]

Hmmm...

I have a decent 3'' achromatic refractor and a decent 6'' Newtonian reflector and I have to say that the 6'' reflector out-performs the refractor (Although as a wide-field refractor, the ST80 has its advantages in a couple of areas). A couple of comparisons from London's light polluted skies:

Jupiter - main belts visible with 3'' 'frac; many belts, spots etc. visible with 6'' (To be fair the 6'' is capable of more magnification, but resolution is more of an issue here)

Andromeda Galaxy - central core visible with some of the disc visible with AV, no satellite galaxies (3''); core and disc clearly visible, M32 also clear (6'')

Crab Nebula - very difficult object (3''); easily visible (6'')

Castor - Just about split (3''); very easy split (6'')

I haven't had the reflector as long but it's already blown me away with the views I've had compared to the 3''.

DD

[lonebod]

Thanks guys. Kind of put me back in track from by 8" dob.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk