|
Dave, Dave, Dave
Calm down. There has been no bloodshed, we haven't even resorted to name calling. This thread has generated less heat than some 'Nagler vs Pentax' or 'Meade vs Celestron' debates, and certainly less than the 'Laser Ban' threads. There has been some valid points made in support of both preferences, that's all.
The only camps we need to divide into is on the observing field where imagers, necessarily, have illuminated screens and visual observers rightfully want to preserve their dark adaption. This is what has been happening at Bargo recently. Last Saturday one of the imagers (sorry I've forgotten your name) visited us several times while his camera and autoguider were doing there stuff and had a look through my scope. In hindsight, since he had experienced my 'live' photons I should have hit him for a copy of his images to look at on cloudy nights.
Sorry, but I think your comparison regarding the best method to observe grazes or occultations is flawed. Visual observing is about fun not science, and I believe the same is true of most (all?) amateur imaging. On the other hand asteroid occultations, lunar occultations, variable star observing, asteroid photometry, etc, are all forays into science and so one should aspire to the best possible equipment and technique. For that reason I would like to emulate your set up (but give me a year or two at least).
I'm glad you still accept the value of us imprecise visual observers and I hope to meet you on some dark, lonely country road somewhere between Goulburn and Collector on 12 June.
cheers, clear skies and clean, sharp light curves.
Dave
|