| Info | Votes | Messages | More Stats |
 Up One Level
|
 | ||||
Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.89.128 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.201.186) Date: 02/28/2002 06:32:27 pm PST >in response to the last comment, all things being equal aperture wins. but all things are rarely equal and i have yet to see a eight inch dob that gives better planetary images than this 5" AP. i am not saying that one does not exsist, they are out there, but they are rare. deep sky faint fuzzies are the targets of choice for large scopes, but for brighter targets i will take the APO. set up, cool down time, are all reasons i hate big scopes. i love the images they give but they always seem to become a reason not to go out and observe. and i hope you were not suggesting that the AP scopes are all hype. anyone who has spent time with any of the AP scopes knows that this is as good as it gets in the world of APO's, and oh how sweet it is. I've owned literally 40 plus scopes of all makes and manufacture...none of them had less than excellent optics, by star test and image quality...After owning several 4 and 5" apos including Taks and APs, I can tell you that there is not one 7" or larger reflector of any kind that did not beat out these refractors on the planets or deep sky. I had 3 seperate C8s, 2 C9.25s, a Meade 8 and 10" Scts which all beat my AP and Tak 128s is side by sides comparos on Jupiter... Images were close with the 8" scopes, but the larger ones were obviously better on image detail and contrast. The comparisions took place over at least 2 years total...with each scope taking their turn. Even my astro club buddies, 12 in all, (some owned APs and Taks), were surprised with the double blind comparos. Aperture is trully king. Now I'm not saying that refractors don't have their place, and I still own one (not an AP or Tak, but a superb Vixen that ALSO hold up at 100x per inch, BTW all 3 I owned did!) but it is unjust and actually dishonest for manufacturers and owners to make a 2 minute comparision and proclaim one is scope type is "better" than the other. Compare them for a year or more...than make the judgement. I'm amazed at how biased most AP and Tak owners are.... Believe it or not almost all 8" and over newtonians, and even most cheaper ones also out performed these refractors....side by side...as long as the same quality eyepieces were used. Subject: Moved Message By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.67.70) Date: 12/01/2002 09:32:44 am PST in response to the last statement, absolutely true. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.156.71 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.115.13) Date: 06/22/2003 07:24:52 am PST Yes, if you are a ferenghi, this scope is a 10. When you are a astronomer it's a 8 to 9.. >In my opinion, this is the finest all-around scope ever made. The optics are flawless, whether used for widefield or planetary views. The scope is small and light enough to set up easily on a GEM or LightSpeed Alt-Az. It cools quickly and is sufficiently short to handle well. You get the views of a fine 5" scope with the handling of a 4". This scope can be used with a binoviewer/diagonal - with or without 2" barlow. > >Most of the other "reviews" here have nothing to do with this scope, but deal with the economics of large reflectors vs small APOs. You can sell your AP 130 f/6 for more than you paid; how can you have higher value than that? > >There are lots of fine small refractors available to amateurs. This is the finest. Prev Page 2 of 2 | ||||||||
