Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
SCTs though are great for visual.
Greg.
|
Hi Greg,
I can't agree with this comment at all.
There are a whole lot of reasons why someone might choose a SCT as their scope of choice for visual astronomy, including convenience, lack of storage space, or dual purpose as an imaging platform.
The quality of the views isn't a reason anyone would choose a SCT, unless they don't know what they are looking at. Look at all the specialist visual lunar/planetary observers, look at all the specialist double star observers, look at all the specialist variable star observers, look at all the specialist deep sky observers, you will be lucky if you find any of them using a SCT for visual work.
The pure physics of the design precludes them from being the optical equal of a newtonian or a refractor.
1) Large Central Obstruction
2) Closed tube design with corrector plate hinders fast cooling
3) More air to glass surfaces introduces additional aberrations and light loss.
4) The optical quality of the scopes themselves in many cases is poor. Although there are a few good ones. I just haven't seen very many.
Mark,
If you don't plan on imaging in the foreseable future I would be giving serious consideration to downsizing your current 12" newtonian to a 10" and being done with it. Sell the 12" on IIS and buy a 10". There isn't a huge difference in the views, but there is an enormous difference in portabality, particularly if you went with a collapsible tube version. A 10" newtonian is going to be a better visual scope on just about every single target as compared to a SCT or RC.
If you do plan on imaging one of the Advanced Come Free scopes would be a good choice as an "allrounder".
Cheers,
John B