Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

who has what REFRACTOR, REFLECTOR OR BOTH

spaceboy

By spaceboy
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys and girls

I am having a survey to see who has what, Refractor, reflector or both. As you can see from my pics I am a reflector guy but the end result to the survey is hopefully going to help make my mind up once and for all whether I go down the road of adding a refractor to my collection. I have tried the usual refractor vs reflector debate but I can't say there was ever a clear winner. I'm not the first to ask the question so hopefully this will help others make their mind up also.

Pics are always a welcome and IMO makes for a more interesting thread.

Thanks

SPACEBOY

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't know about refractor or reflector it's looking more of a trend towards SCT's. The high price rule these out the question for me but it is interesting to see how popular SCT's are. I can understand the appeal of the smaller MAK's as I did own one but felt the long cool down took some of the grab and go out of it.

Thanks for the replies guys :) but I don't think there was enough interest to gather any real statistics on which prove the more popular out of fraks & fleks. I'm surprised the OMNI 150 SCT isn't recommended more to beginners as for overall choices the SCT looks a contender.

SPACEBOY

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brantuk

brantuk

Posted
Posted

It's a bit like comparing a familly saloon car with a rally car. Two entirely different beasts each good at it's own job. So not sure what you're trying to "win" exactly between the two.

FWIW I have a 1 small refractor and 2 reflectors (one being a Newt the other an SCT).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

I have:

3 refractors - 2.4" F/13, 4" F/6.5 and 6" F/8

1 newtonian - 10" F/4.8

1 maksutov-newtonian - 6" F/5.9

As has been said, they all have their pros and cons. Sometimes the conditions / observation targets / my mood lead towards one type, other times it goes the other way. All winners in my book :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianb

brianb

Posted
Posted
I can't say there was ever a clear winner.

There never is - horses for courses ....

At present I have 2 cats (C6 & C11) plus assorted refractors (WO FLT 110, a cheap & rather nasty 80mm f/6 achro which gets used as a rich field scope plus Lunt & Solarscope 60mm scopes which are dedicated for solar work). Thinking of dumping the C6 for a 6" Dobsonian as it never gets used except at low/medium power on an altaz mount. The C11 (CPC1100) is the largest scope I can move; I'd prefer a bigger Newtonian on an equatorial mount but that would depend on an observatory and a fixed mount.

The FLT 110 is a nice scope but has limited light grasp & resolution. It's good for solar work and great for views of the Moon though the C11 has much better resolution in good seeing. CPC1100 is convenient but has cooling issues and is a dew magnet ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It's a bit like comparing a familly saloon car with a rally car. Two entirely different beasts each good at it's own job. So not sure what you're trying to "win" exactly between the two.

FWIW I have a 1 small refractor and 2 reflectors (one being a Newt the other an SCT).

TBH I'm not sure myself Brantuk. Just trying to think outside of the box as some times the most obvious of questions don't always get the answer you are looking for. It is probably going to be considered to most as a waste of time but at the end I will post the numbers for anyone interested and it may help beginners to make the choice as this is often the first question I see asked on the net.

I must admit I think my reflector is great but I see so many signatures including both and others either having one or the other. I can't help but be curious to establish the clear winner on paper. I doubt there could be a clear winner in the sense of performance between either one or the other because as you say they are two different beasts but I was interested to see how many felt the benefits of the different designs warranted having both. Those who felt the refractor offered more and only have refractors and vise versa. There is always the debate to the pros and cons of either design but never a figure to look at to which is the more popular. When you consider the cost of owning more than one scope I felt this might give a clearer picture to which design stands out from the crowd as I doubt people needlessly spend money on scopes if they don't feel they are of benefit. If it wasn't for the fact my tent is more like a Wendy house I would be at SGL6 hopefully finding out for myself which I deemed better :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted

I have two newts and a pair of bins.

these pretty much cover all bases for me. I had a 120mm achro in the past which was V nice but never used after I got the 12" dob.

for me a newt is far more convenient to use and quick to set up cf a frac.

I use my bins either on their own or while I wait for the newts to cool but in all honesty at lower power you don't have to wait that long.

post-17776-133877531141_thumb.jpg

post-17776-133877531147_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moonshane

Moonshane

Posted
Posted
I prefer Newts for the aperture for £ but over the last year or so most of my observing has been done with a 5" refractor on an alt/az mount because its just so easy to set up, maintain and use.

it's amazing how we have totally opposite views Gaz :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

The main mirror on a SCT reflects light to the secondary which then reflects it to the diagonal/eyepiece. Strictly speaking the SCT/ Mak Cass corrector plate refracts light but I don't think you could argue that that makes it a refractor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted
it's amazing how we have totally opposite views Gaz :)

My Newt is a 14", so it only gets brought out when I have the time for a decent session. The refractor stays on the mount by the back door and I can carry the whole lot out in one go, to be fair I could probably do the same with a 8" Dob though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I prefer Newts for the aperture for £ but over the last year or so most of my observing has been done with a 5" refractor on an alt/az mount because its just so easy to set up, maintain and use.

This is what always get me itching for a refractor. I agree with Moonshane that even larger reflectors can be used at low powers while cooling down. But due to an obstructed objective it is often suggested needing more aperture to compete with a "smaller" more manageable refractor. Also I read fraks require less maintenance regards collimation and suffer less with thermals in the OTA so speeding up observing times.

A frak vs flek review in sky at night magazine said that a 6" flek out performed a 4" frak but due to seeing conditions the frac got more observation time. With how poor the skies are most of the time this sounds one in favor of the refractor.

EDIT: Love the monopod tripod thingy for the bins Shane :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.