View Single Post
  #30  
Old 13-02-2013, 12:40 PM
Satchmo's Avatar
Satchmo
Registered User

Satchmo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poita View Post
I'm interested in any poor reports as a mate of mine is seriously considering the 16" model.
The whole point is that on cheaper mass produced instruments there is much greater spread of quality. You would have to be thinking wishfully to that one report ( good or bad ) had any statistical meaning. Ten might start to give you a good idea. These optical systems do not come with a any guarantee certificate nor are the optical pieces even serialised.

On the Newts GSO website states better than +/- 1/12 wave surface RMS which is about 1/3 wave wavefront if talking basic spherical correction- I have tested ones much better than this and some worse. But I can guarantee the only thing that stick in the mind of readers is the 1/12 wave bit !

If you buy a high end system like RC Optical you will get an interferogram and an optical certificate of guaranteed performance. Thats what I would call piece of mind.

If you can star test a telescope to weed out a lemon and up to making mechanical mods needed then the cheap RC's would seem worth a look.
Reply With Quote