Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.M
I think all of us in here have put to much effort into what an expert would see through the scope. The bottom line is, the people looking through the thing wont know the difference. It may as well be a giant kaleidoscope to them. I suggest that what needs to be taken into consideration is not optical quality or design, but what the scope looks like.
|
I think Peter has hit the nail on the head with this response. If I was to go to the Sydney Observatory as a total novice I would rather look through something that looks the part. I expect that most of the guests are there for the enjoyment of the history of the building and its contents and would rather look through a 9 or 10 inch refractor that looks like it came from the 1800s than the latest gizmos that are coma or chroma free. Most would probably find a bit of colour-fringing a desirable view, rather than perfect pinpoints of light.
Whilst The Great Wetherell Refractor does sport a TEC200 objective made from Unobtanium, to most Sydney Obs. tour guests, it could just as well be a 10" achro doublet, then at least the guest would see things like astronomers of old.
I would love to see this in Sydney Observatory: