View Single Post
Old 22-11-2013, 10:58 AM
Satchmo's Avatar
Satchmo (Mark)
Registered User

Satchmo is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted by alpal View Post

To me spot size does matter -
pics done with high end RC telescopes & the Hypergraph etc
mentioned at the star of this thread do look a lot better than
ones taken with SCTs & Newts.
Corrected Newts are capable of just as small spot sizes as any other design - the only reason high end RC look so good is that the owners usually have the money to buy an approprate size mount - and not be putting a 10" or 12" Newt on an HEQ6 mount for example.

If you look at the work of David fitz-Henry and Mike Sidoneo on this forum - both using well mounted tubes I would challenge you to find any RC shots showing better resolution .RC's tend to work at F9 or F8 which will exploit the best seeing if matched to the right sized pixels , but the spot size due to diffraction is actually larger than a typical Newt. There is always a trade off Newts will take in fields that an RC simply cannot , but to say that RC's are `sharper ' I'm afraid is nonsense.
Reply With Quote