Thread: Optical designs
View Single Post
  #12  
Old 05-07-2007, 12:51 AM
Gama's Avatar
Gama
Registered User

Gama is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,121
If any one is going to spend big bucks, then you would know what the specs say and do including the spot diagrams. Posting a Spot diagram from the 2 scopes will mean nothing to the normal person off the street, but to a university or professional, that is one of the main things that stick out the most.
This whole point about the RCX was not that the RCX is a better scope, just another optical system that performs well, not that its better than an RC..

It also doesnt matter were any data was obtained to descibe the pros and cons to the different optical methods, the point is its true. Which do you believe to be incorrect ?. To say that the RC's are the best optical scope is easy but i havent found any data that says its better than a CDK, if there is please let me know, as i havent been able to find much to say this..
The cheaper RC's which are being released, do not perform as good as the current RC's, and if you know RC's, then collimation will be a bigger problem with the cheaper versions.
Not much point in talking about the designs if you dont believe there is a better optical system. You didnt comment on the Quoted comment post, as that was also posted at another person who also believed that RC's were the the greates on the cloudynights forum, id like to know your views on it.
Something also you may not know, you dont need the corrector at the front of the SCT type scopes, it can actually be placed further down the optical train.
I agree with you the RC's are a magnificent scope, and it does have its pros and cons, as do all things on earth. But i looked form many months for my next scope and the RC was bumbed off by the CDK. Up until then it was on the top of my list. I am open to any data you have to show me a better optical scope, and possible save me (Or cost me) money.
One other optical system was also the Newt with a corrector, this is also high on my list of scopes.
I also gave one reason as to why there are RC's in large sizes over the CDK's, and again, the corrective len's would be too big and too lossy.
Heres some web links and quotes :

quote from http://www.riverofstars.net/JSCAS/Starscan/Feb04.pdf Quote: "
A properly designed Dall-Kirkham can deliver the finest images of any Cassegrain"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifie...kham_telescope quote "The performances are equal or better than the Ritchey-Chretien telescope"

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005SPIE.5874..165B

Last edited by Gama; 05-07-2007 at 02:41 AM.
Reply With Quote