Amateur vs Pro Mmirror makers

:S
I recently came across the website for Star Instruments. I was struck by their implicit dismissal of the claims of "amateur" mirror makers. I suppose this generalization includes the likes of Carl Zambuto, Bob Royce and others. Any thoughts?
http://www.star-instruments.com/html/opticaltesting.html
Joe

Joseph,
I for one dismiss their claims that one can not make a mirror better than 1/4 wave. I think that anyone that makes claims to dismiss all other's claims must be themselves looked at with a steady eye.
If Carl says that the mirror he makes is 1/20 wave or better, I for one believe him. Carl is also not an amateur, but a professional optician.
Discovery claims to make 1/8 or better at their factory.
Too many people have had testing done by too many places that state higher than 1/4 wave for them all to be wrong.
The Palomar 200" mirror was the first to be made with Pyrex and it was ground to 2 millionths of an inch. Certainly that would be better than 1/4 wave would it not?

You may recall that the Latin root of amateur is amator,to love.I've always thought that an amateur is anybody really that loves their hobby,craft or profession.We're amateurs all aren't we?
By that definition I include Christen,Royce,Zambuto and the rest.Difficult to imagine these lads wearily rising everyday to do their allotted hours of toil.
The modern idea of the term 'amateur' as a craftless person is a wrong one.Implicit is the idea that before they became full time TM's,their endeavours as ATM's weren't up to much.I'd find that hard to believe.
Cheers,


Bruce

I dunno. I have a different take on the website. There reference to "amateur optical suppliers" appears to me to be providers of optics for amateur telescopes. They do not reference Royce, CZ and do not compete with them either. It appears more like a clumsy stab at the big guys like M and C and specifically their high end offerings. Star Instruments have some impressive clients and apparently are the source for some very excellent RC telescope optics.

Many of us have shared concerns in the past for makers of SCTs, MCTs and some lower end newtonians. Optics are generally better today, IMO, than just a few years ago, but I've seen plenty of scopes (optics) that are sub par and many others have also.

I think the website could use some rewording and perhaps a little reengineering of the marketing message (i.e., not wise to use a negative to make a positive point), but otherwise I do not equate their message as a reference to any of the premium newtonian mirror makers.

Randy

when in reality there are very few 1/4 wave 8: and larger optical systems

That claim is incorrect.

-Jason

STAR INSTRUMENTS continues to be concerned with the false advertising claims being made by amateur optical suppliers who claim 1/10 to 1/20 wave optics

joseph,

I read that as just being a poorly written sentence. I think it should have read "...made by optical suppliers who claim 1/10 to 1/20 wave optics to amateurs ..." or "...made to amateurs by optical suppliers who claim 1/10 to 1/20 wave optics." Or something like that. I don't think the concern was with 'amateur mirror makers' but with 'optical suppliers' to amateurs that make claims of '1/10 to 1/20 wave optics' (at low cost of course). When you consider the large number of consumer grade scopes out there, the number of 1/10+ wave optics is very small (and not at a low cost). Also, I think most people think of 'amateur' as someone that does it for the love of the game or activity (not paid) and 'PRO' as someone that does it for money. As anyone that has 'bought' a CZ or Royce mirror can tell you they are not in the 'amateur' ranks ($). I suppose if someone was concerned enough, they could call STAR INSTRUMENTS and ask what they meant by this, but that wouldn't be as much fun as guessing!! That's my take. But what do I know? I drive a truck for a living. Feel free to disagree.
Dark skies to all, Ralph