Quote:
Originally Posted by Satchmo
There is a fair amount of thickness and mass in the centre. Renowed planetary photographer Anthony Wesley found them not ideal for imaging in Canberra where the mirror has to track some large temperature shifts. I am a fan of them but they are definitely more fiddly on the production side.
|
That is true, however I thought the centre thickness was no thicker than a full thickness mirror(6:1) So overall it has reduced mass?
I think for my use, the 80-100mm secondary obstruction should pretty much cover the majority of the centre anyway?
For me, dealing with a flotation cell and supporting a thin-mirror with edge support in an imaging scope really doesn't appeal.
The ease of mounting and the supposed benefits with conicals holding their collimation had me sold.
If it takes a little longer to reach thermal equilibrium than a thin mirror, so be it.