Sky at Night magazine

[Brass n glass]

I agree about the coats? What will it be next? Woolly hats? Silver flasks for drinks to keep the cold out? I haven't seen every issue by any means but the reviews seem to say that everything is wonderful but some things are more wonderful than others. This month's look at a Vixen ED refractor is typical. Surely what everyone wants to know is how does it stack up against the more expensive and the cheaper competition.

[SteelRat]

I wonder - will S@N have a 'summer collection' next year?

[Macavity]

Oh no... I started to find the REVIEW quite interesting. I guess I live in hope

my 1979(?) spiv-look "sheepskin" will come back into fashion...

Interesting question tho'. Do I want to know my stuff isn't as good as an XXX

or better than a YYY scope, eyepiece etc. OR do I favour a subjective view?

But I have no real answer...

[Albireo380]

Okay - I am not a picture of sartorial elegance when observing. But let's face it, it is pitch black. I am 40 miles from the city, 3 miles up a single track road. I am wanting seclusion - not groups of fashion hunters. My outer layers are an old pair of trousers (now too tatty even to hillwalk in), an eight year old hillwalking Berghaus (no longer keeps the rain out, but cuts the wind and is WARM) + a hand knitted (not by me, mothers in law have their uses) balaclava. The balaclava is made from Lake District herdwick wool - could stop a shotgun blast, never mind a bit of cold and wind).

S@N is okay, but too expensive for what you get - also, it gives little that AN and S&T don't also give (at half the price). You can get the old TV prog's from the Web, so why pay for a CD that gives only wee snippets extra.

I know, I am a mean Scot - careful is how I would put it. And I do buy my round in the Pub

Love the Cat - Macavity!

Tom

[GazOC]

Interesting question tho'. Do I want to know my stuff isn't as good as an XXX

or better than a YYY scope, eyepiece etc. OR do I favour a subjective view?

But I have no real answer...

Thats a bit like saying "ignorance is bliss" . The reality is that we usually have x amount of money to spend on a scope and we want to know the best way to spend it. Comparisions are the easiest way to it, the S@N scoring system always seem to give products 85% an up in most categories which doesn't help matters.

The Vixen ED this month review is a case in point, it would have been usefull to know whether this is a worthwhile upgrade (optically and mechanically) for ED100 owners or whether someone looking at a Tak who was willing to make some compromises could save money. The review did neither and awarded the scope the usual 85% to 95% scores.

A lot of the reviews seem to have a 'phoned in' feel about them IMO, I'm not sure how much time the reviewer actually spends using the scope before he had a deadline to meet and resorts to stock phrases lile "silky smooth focuser', "minimal CA on the Lunar limb". If you compare the reviews with those in Anstronomy Now and particulary Practical Astronomer they look very lightweight (and thats putting it politely).

<Gets off soapbox>

[TheMightyKong]

Hi Gaz, I agree 100% with you on the S@N reviews.

[Macavity]

Thats a bit like saying "ignorance is bliss" .

No, it's not really the idea I wanted to convey at all.

(Otherwise I might agree with you, in general terms)

[Jamie]

I had a Vixen 102EDSS and it had a "silky smooth focuser" and showed "minimal CA on the Lunar limb"

[GazOC]

I had a Vixen 102EDSS and it had a "silky smooth focuser" and showed "minimal CA on the Lunar limb" :)

Give the man the job!!