Jump to content

Narrowband

who has what REFRACTOR, REFLECTOR OR BOTH


spaceboy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

OK you asked for it, the current stable consists of:

102ED F7 Refractor, for semi wide field imaging and general portable visual use, my imaging workshorse.

127ED Triplet F7.5 refractor, for higer mag imaging and cracking for visual use

4" F15 Achromat refractor, fantastic lunar, planetary and double star visual scope.

80mm F15 1970s Towa opticed achro refractor, fantastic lunar, planetary and double star scope thats alot more portable than the 4" F15. Also a bosting lunar imager

3" F15 Antique Refractor, I just love this scope full stop

60mm F15 1964 Tak opticed Swift, need I say more)

127 Mak, used only as a guide when doing high mag imaging

Had a C11 SCT for 5 years but sold it and got the nice well behaved ed triplet refractor (a few others I know on here have done similar), and not regreted the choice once

As you can see I am slightly biased towards refractors:D

Philj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally dont think there is a clear "winner" between both. They both have their pros and cons in equal measure.

I personally think the BIGGEST factor and deciding factor is value for money. Reflectors are cheap(er) and offer more aperture for your money.

I often choose wrong words and don't always convey what I am thinking in to text as well as I maybe should. I'm a beginner to forums and I'm forever being pulled up on sloppy posts so please forgive me for my errors :)

I will say A clear favorite over a clear winner. I understand that winner may be perceived as better.

EDIT Thanks PhilJ

REFRACTOR...................58

SCT.............................22

MAK.............................8

REFLECTOR....................28

MAK-NEWT....................3

RC................................1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often choose wrong words and don't always convey what I am thinking in to text as well as I maybe should. I'm a beginner to forums and I'm forever being pulled up on sloppy posts so please forgive me for my errors :)

I will say A clear favorite over a clear winner. I understand that winner may be perceived as better.

EDIT Thanks PhilJ

REFRACTOR...................58

SCT.............................22

MAK.............................8

REFLECTOR....................28

MAK-NEWT....................3

RC................................1

No need to say sorry. I understood the question. I am also amazed really to see that more people own a refractor then those who own reflectors.

I wonder though of all the people who own a refrac.....how many own a reflector.

The question would have been better posed as a poll that shows clearer results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question would have been better posed as a poll that shows clearer results.

I agree it would be nice to know out right which is the overall favorit if owning either one or the other through a more accurate poll but my intension in this case was just to try and help make up my mind once and for all about adding a refractor to my collection. Previous attempts failed to show a clear favorite. I alway knew there were going to be a few members with both but my main aim was to see if anyone design (frak/flek) would stand out from the crowd. The fact so many have refractors would suggest they are a useful addition to the kit.

Just realised I've done it again. Sorry John you are right I should have said refractor vs newtonian (design) Doh.... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....Just realised I've done it again. Sorry John you are right I should have said refractor vs newtonian (design) Doh.... :)

No probs - I was being a pedant anyway :)

I'm surprised how many folks have refractors as well actually. For me the appeal has always been quick cool down, stable collimation plus I like the views ;)

While moderate CA does not bother me much, I've found the difference when it's removed quite significant - pity it's an expensive thing to achieve with larger apertures ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 150mm Newtonian for DSO's and a 127mm Mak for Lunar / Planetary. I also look after a 127mm achro refractor for Cotswold AS.

The Newt gets the most use because I prefer the view through this scope on the biggest range of objects. I bought the Mak specifically with web-cam imaging in mind but what tends to happen is that I set up the Newtonian up for imaging with a DSLR and then look at stuff with the Mak while the other scope is clicking away in the background.

The refractor doesn't get used very much mainly because the r&p focuser is a bit wobbly and the Mak gives a sharper view. We tend to take it to CAS meetings and public events though because it 'looks like a telescope'.

post-18573-133877531937_thumb.jpg

post-18573-133877531945_thumb.jpg

post-18573-133877531955_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As can be seen in my signature, I have one SCT (8") and and 80mm triplet APO. The latter is my travel scope (even though I have also traveled with my C8), and wide field (5.6 deg:D) scope. The C8 is used for smaller and fainter deep sky, lunar and planetary. I have two sets of bins for quick viewing, or generally finding my bearings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:DGreat Thread, Spaceboy:)..and I live about 30miles from Brum, in West Leicestershire, 6m from M42..you are welcome to look through my fracs anytime I'm around and the sky is clear (could be a long wait:p).

Anyone who knows me knows I am a refractor man. Why?

Well, because (and I stress these are MY opinions only, others will feel completely the opposite, and that's fine:p)..

-The original scope was a refractor, and I like the historical "link" to the past

-I just find refractors more aesthetically pleasing - to me they look like "proper" telescopes

-Having said that, the very short stubby breed of apos do nothing for me to look at, and I much prefer a nice Newt or Mak to those

-Like Jahmanson (John) I agree that it's unlikely most of us would settle for one scope. However, we might be missing a trick here..the old "greats", eg Galileo likely only had one scope at a time, so became expert in using and "seeing" all that scope had to offer..how often do we with several um and ah about which scope to use, only to at the end of a session wish we had just got one of the others out "due to the conditions"?;)

I have 6 scopes, one Maksutov, a 6" LOMO Astele, which I love (it has astro sital glass which cools down very quickly) and 5 refractors. The LOMO is F14.4 so quite specialised and not a widefield scope. The minimum magnification I can get is around x50. But on Luna, Planets, doubles, it is almost refractor sharp, and fully apochromatic. It's also short in length and easy to manouevre.

Refractor-wise, I have

-A Tal 100RS (new crayford focuser version). Totally bombproof, optically excellent, but NOT an apo. if the slight violet (on bright objects only) bothers you, get a Baader Fringe killer for around £50.

-A Celestron ED100R. A poor man's apo, and for visually use effectively colour free. Rather indifferent build quality (focuser is cheap n cheerful) but the lens is superb. The Tal shows all that the ED100 does, but with a violet or yellow tinge on the brightest objects..below mag 2 it's CA irrelevant.

Both the above are medium focal length and not ideal for imaging. But that doesn't interest me, I like to look through my scopes;)

I also have 3 vintage scopes:

Pentax J80 F12 80mm

Prinz 660 77mm F16.5

Greenkat 77m F12 (very similar to Swift 831)

These are all classic, long focus achromats finished either in white with black trimmings or white with Grey trimmings (the Greenkat).

These excel (and I mean EXCEL) on double stars, and the Moon and Planets. The Pentax in particular is as near apochromatic as makes no difference for visual use, and gives the lovliest star images I have ever seen.

These scopes are so good at what they do because of their long focal length. You get a great depth of focus (see elsewhere on SGL Neil English' piece on long focus refractors) which makes it easy to get a really sharp focus. The image is steadier and needs less adjustment (no crayfords with 1:2500 ratios here LOL:p).

And they are just beautiful to look at. As a boy in the 70s I just lusted after scopes like these and swore that one day I would buy one like that. And now I have 3!:)

I have used a Reflector (F5 Newtonian 8"). It was optically very good, and surprised me. But (to me), it was ugly, tinny, a pain in the **** to sight along with finder, and I had to stand up all the time whilst using it. It is each to their own of course, but for me the convenience, beauty and sharp views of the frac make it a foregone conclusion. But Maks are a good frac substitute!:):p

Attached are pics of the LOMO Maksutov, the Prinz 660 77mm frac (the loooong one!) and my new Tal 100RS Achromat 4".

cheers

Dave

post-16698-133877532478_thumb.jpg

post-16698-133877532486_thumb.jpg

post-16698-133877532493_thumb.jpg

post-16698-1338775325_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Celestron C8-N Reflector and have been thinking that I should have bought a refractor for some time now. This thread is really interesting to me.

As far as I can see it:

Reflector ------

Requires collimation regularly

Bigger

Heavier?

Field of view edges are affected with blurry stars more?

Faster focal ratio harder get rid of different errors

Refractor --------

Less maintenance

More likely to due up

Smaller

Lighter?

More prone to chromatic aberration

Better for lunar and planetary viewing

Better for DSO imaging?

I greatly welcome any input anyone has on the information I have been trying to compare. :)

my scope:DSCN2821.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My refractors have not shown any tendency to dew up - at least the design comes with an integral dew shield - it's an add-on for other scope designs (and an essential one).

As the aperture increases, the weight and size increase dramatically. My 6" F/8 Meade AR6 is a beast of a scope - heavier and more unwieldy than a 6" F/8 newtonian. I had a close look an a 7" Meade ED refractor a few years ago - that looked like a 2-person lifting job !.

The pics at the top of this thread illustrate just how crazy things can get:

http://stargazerslounge.com/astro-lounge/90691-d-g-refractor.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK you asked for it, the current stable consists of:

102ED F7 Refractor, for semi wide field imaging and general portable visual use, my imaging workshorse.

127ED Triplet F7.5 refractor, for higer mag imaging and cracking for visual use

4" F15 Achromat refractor, fantastic lunar, planetary and double star visual scope.

80mm F15 1970s Towa opticed achro refractor, fantastic lunar, planetary and double star scope thats alot more portable than the 4" F15. Also a bosting lunar imager

3" F15 Antique Refractor, I just love this scope full stop

60mm F15 1964 Tak opticed Swift, need I say more)

127 Mak, used only as a guide when doing high mag imaging

Had a C11 SCT for 5 years but sold it and got the nice well behaved ed triplet refractor (a few others I know on here have done similar), and not regreted the choice once

As you can see I am slightly biased towards refractors:D

Philj

Heres the 127EDT and 102ED, an early shot of the obs

Philj

post-14930-133877532531_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • 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.