| Info | Votes | Messages | More Stats |
 Up One Level
|
 | ||||
Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.58.188 By: JB In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.58.188) (Original Vote) Date: 10/26/2003 06:06:09 pm PST > For example, I'm sure the 10" AP Maksutov would have no >trouble dispensing with the refractor because it's really >about the quality of the optics more than it is about the >design. The 10" AP Mak should "dispense" a 4" APO of any kind. 10" vs. 4"? What kind of contest is this? The Vixen Fluorite is not in the same league as other 4" Apo's mechanically. But, mine compares as good as every other 4" I have had a chance to compare it to optically. This includes 2 TV 102's, 1 TV 101, 1 AP traveler and a few Tak 102's. Yeah, the others have better focusers that make their use easier and more enjoyable but optically, the Vixen 102 is as good as any out there. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.58.188 By: astroramrx In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.58.188) (Original Vote) Date: 11/08/2003 06:19:08 am PST >To the above comments: > >I did a star test and it did not appear out of collimation. It just did not seem to be able to keep up with the larger aperture scopes. Maybe it had nothing to do with the lack of quality in the refractor. Perhaps it was simply a case where the other two scopes we just fine examples of their designs. This coupled with their intrinsic ability to resolve more detail, because of their larger apertures, resulted in very fine views the refractor could not duplicate. For example, I'm sure the 10" AP Maksutov would have no trouble dispensing with the refractor because it's really about the quality of the optics more than it is about the design. Whatever it was, the refractor just didn't measure up. Perhaps it would be worth having another go with it as I have access to both scopes. > >As an aside, I recently picked up an FC76 and love its performance. Very sharp and takes unbelievable amounts of magnification. Viewed Mars at 240X with little image breakdown - very nice. Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.58.188 By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.90.248) In Reply to: JB (Original Message) Date: 06/05/2004 03:00:40 pm PST Well, 1. My original post has been deleted. 2. My 10" AP Mak comment is taken out of context. 3. My original point was that the refractor performed very well but was bested by a 6" Mak Newt, and an 8" SCT indicating that there is no magic in any one design, but rather, many factors are involved, not least of which is aperture. To be sure there are others. 4. I am not knocking the Vixen instrument, just thought the comparison was useful. Take care, john >> For example, I'm sure the 10" AP Maksutov would have no >trouble dispensing with the refractor because it's really >about the quality of the optics more than it is about the >design. > >The 10" AP Mak should "dispense" a 4" APO of any kind. 10" vs. 4"? What kind of contest is this? The Vixen Fluorite is not in the same league as other 4" Apo's mechanically. But, mine compares as good as every other 4" I have had a chance to compare it to optically. This includes 2 TV 102's, 1 TV 101, 1 AP traveler and a few Tak 102's. Yeah, the others have better focusers that make their use easier and more enjoyable but optically, the Vixen 102 is as good as any out there. Page 1 of 1 | ||||||||
