Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryp
I think magazine reviews are often slanted in favour of the article being reviewed, simply because the publisher does not wish to upset the advertisers who make some of this stuff-its better to look for independent reviews, although they are often difficult to find!
In 30 odd years in this hobby, I have owned in excess of 20 telescopes of all different types. I can't say any of them were bad, but the most disappointing one I had was a Vixen VMC110. Optically it was fine, but the image was so dim that the only thing that looked any good at higher magnification (100x) was the moon. I think I used that scope once and immediately sold it!
|
Yes, that's the other aspect of a bad telescope, poorer performance than expected for the money. Especially if it's a lot of money.
I can understand magazine reviews being somewhat slanted, but to my mind that may involve not being critical on grey areas. I recollect Claude in the Adelaide astronomy shop pointing out to me a review in S&T which I'd also read, saying how an APO refractor was superb, and then mentioning in passing the violet twinge at high power - as Claude pointed out, that telescope plainly wasn't an APO.
To my mind, in the case of the tiny reflector First scope, the right thing for the magazine to do, would have been to tell the manufacturer that they'd review something else he put out, as they couldn't in good conscience write anything good about the First Scope.
Regards,
Renato