Quote:
Originally Posted by rat156
I don't think imaging at longer FL is an advantage, infact it would be the biggest disadvantage of them all, everything is much easier at shorter FLs. ......
|
I disagree for various reasons....
To carry the short FL argument to its absurd conclusion you only need look here
http://www.atscope.com.au/BRO/gallery38ro.html
(a few hundred mm versus about 6 metres FL)
To get truly high resolution, you really do need focal length.
Sure to get an OK looking image, short FL's are very user friendly. Seeing. mountings, tracking errors etc. are all masked with modest conditions and equipment.
Small pixels are not without their problems...scattering and shallow well capacities don't help.
High-res deep sky however is a challenge (for me at least)...with good seeing more often than not playing a pivotal role.