Info | Votes | Messages | More Stats | Up One Level |
Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.16.218 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.115.3) Date: 06/05/2003 07:42:30 am PST >Star test is excellent, 1/8+ p.t.v. >Confirmed by several double stars in the 0.4"-0.6" range. Clean split, with >almost textbook diffraction pattern. With superb seeing, it can go over 600x >in planetary obs. with no image breakdown. Very impressive. >Image brightness is also excellent. Under rare nights of 7 visual magnitude >limit, can see galaxies at 16.2-16.5 range, and stars just over 17. >Tracking is good, but with some tweaks can go to excellent also. With PEC, >just about 4" of periodic error. >Stability is superb in alt-az, good to fair in equatorial. But with some >SuperWedge mods., can be very good. A ten inch telescope cannot see stars of magnitude 17. Period. This simple fact, should, for reasonable people, invalidate your claims. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.16.218 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.208.172) In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.115.3) (Original Message) Date: 07/01/2003 08:36:24 am PST >A ten inch telescope cannot see stars of magnitude 17. Period. > >This simple fact, should, for reasonable people, invalidate your claims. I own this scope and love it.. however I have to agree.. you can't see (visually) Mag 17 stars with a 10" scope. I believe I may have reached down to mag 14 or 14.5 visually, however I haven't been lucky enough to get to a 'truly' dark sky site to verify my maximum limit. With my CCD camera on the other hand, Mag 17 can be achieved without much fuss. Page 1 of 1 |
|
©2023 by Excelsis Consulting. All Rights Reserved. E-mail webmaster to report abuse, problems, or comments.