Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoe
Bizzarely.Most people on the cloudy night reviews say and admit their taks are beaten by 8" dobs 9 1/4 sct etc on planets when seeing permits.Its just more to do with pinpoint stars, that crisper refractor view id guess.Most nights rarely allow over 1" arc seeing anyway so the tak 128 will strut its stuff and look fabulous doing it(not a tin can).cheers
Ps:I suppose a lot also comes down to what else you do with your lifemoneywise etc.
|
Hi Joe
I know this is the age old debate of reflectors v refractors which isn't what I was actually talking about at this point but rather the differences amongst the quality of refractors - not the competing merits with reflectors. The real problem is that there are too many competing variables to make valid comparisons and hence these endless debates/discussions.
For example, I acknowledge a 12' SCT will beat a 100mm refractor on DSOs. However, from personal experience the folks with a 100mm refractor will be out under the stars 4-5 times more often (all factors taken into account) in comparison to the folks with the SCT due to the set-up/portability/cool down issues. So how do were equate these totally different merits when the old expression is the best telescope is the one you use the most.
Moreover, given that a huge part of astronomy is the idiosyncratic variable of atomsphere suggests that the person who is out the most on different occasions is going to have better opportunities for better views and in a quantitative framework will simply see more. Likewise, the person who gets out the most is also likely to get out to different locations such as dark sites. I am happy to accept any challengers who believe their dob is more portable than my TV-85 - body builders and weight lifters with dobs are excluded from this contest
