Posts Made By: William Paolini

Rod Mollise said:

...DID NOT BELIEVE IN A PERSONAL GOD that will answer one's prayers. Nor did he believe in anything like an afterlife. Once when asked whether he believed in an afterlife, Einstein replied, "No, and one life is quite enough for me."

Perhaps that is really what he said. However, I have found that more often then not, what people "say" in public on such personal issues if often not the entire truth. I'd say only one or two people could really answer with authority what he really felt...he himself, perhaps his wife. Just a thought.

Siebert Optics. 2.5x barlow=$79. 2.5x amplifier (i.e. Powermate)=$119. I have not tried his barlows, but his telecentric amplifiers are increadibly transparent. Even my 24 Pan works fabulous on it with no vignetting of the FOV.

I think there is definitely something to them As a community we see DSO purists gravitate to particular wide fields, and planetary purists gravitate to particular simpler designs. So people are seeing differences.

I think you have to ask yourself how much of this type of observing you do and if it is the kind of observing that gives you the most enjoyment. If it is, then definitely worth experimenting and training your eye to see the differences these specialized EPs can readily deliver. But be warned, they are not as comfortable as what you might be used to from the T6 line. I myself like comfort as much as the next person, but I also like optimum performance as well. I solved the problem by having both, comfortable things like Radians, then the specialized planetaries for when all that matters is maximum detail.

I'd say go inexpensive and get some UO HDs or BGOs, then experiment and compare for several months and train yourself by observing the differences. Once you know what they are, they stick out obviously when observing, especially when using larger aperture scopes. After that if you like what you see, you can then go to the more expensive varieties that you mentioned and IME these do even better.

Anyway, good luck which ever way you go. In no case does any quality eyepiece give less then excellent results on planets. So they all cross the finish line screaming and doing a great job...just depends if you want to cross the line first or not

Scott,

Hello. That storm complex only being visible in some EPs was IMO not due to seeing. I went back and forth many times between the EPs and at every switch to the ZAOs and the Supermonos it would be visible, and all other EPs not (as well as more extensive banding). I spent a lot of time on that particular observation...actually the entire evening/morning was devoted to it and I would observe for long periods, as well as do rapid changes with the EP in the slot for no more than 30 seconds to further confirm it was the EP. And for periods would just pick two EPs and do rapid back and forths for 10 minutes also to confirm. So this was really the EP showing these differences for this observation.

What Jon says is also quite true and perhaps I did not make it clear enough although I thought I did state it in the comparison, in the 4" scope there was little difference between any of the EPs on Saturn, in the 10" that was not the case. So aperture matters. The ZAO-II in the 4" could not outperform any of the EPs in the 10".

As far as how much observing...several months solid taking the scope out as soon as I got home from work and observing til about 11pm or so, then waking back up at 3am and observing til 6am , and weekends basically just staying out straight til about 4am. While there were many EPs to compare, I kept it simple each evening and usually devoted them all to one object and usually evaluating no more than 2 or 3 attributes relative to that object. This approach made it easy to handle the large number of EPs. Otherwise it would have been much too difficult and confusing IMO.

If you are a planetary purist and you have a larger than 4" scope, then IMO the ZAOs and Supermonos and Pentax SMCs are well worth their cost as on evenings of good seeing, there are nice additional details to be seen and a good bit more dimensionality to the object as well. On average seeing nights, pretty much the same excepting for the extra dimensionailty which was always there thru the best in class EPs. I now added some of these EPs to my inventory...well worth it for me after seeing for myself.

-Bill

Great Ocular Slumming report!! Zeiss really out did themselves with the II. Interesting to hear the XW comparison also...one eyepiece I never viewed thru unfortunately.

To answer the specific question posed, for me lives are not coins. So one can not equate things like money, so 1 life does not equal another life, 2 lives are not more important than 1, etc. So killing one to bring back another does not make sense.

On some of the other talk, I don;t think the legal system in the US, or perhaps anywhere, treats the issue fully. So in the end people are often still left wanting. For me, when a wrong is committed by one person against another, five things should happen:
1 - The Education (the wrong-doer must be taught the what and why of the wrong, the why of the consequences that will follow, and understand it all fully).
2 - The Apology
3 - The Restitution (i.e., undoing the wrong as much as it can and/or doing compensory acts for equivalency as much as is possible)
4 - The Punishment
5 - The Request for Forgiveness

The criminal system IMO for the most part only addresses #4. The civil system can be used to address #3. Noting to my knowledge in the system addresses it all for any single act. So given this, people will never feel satisfied. Many times, IMO from what I have read from others who had it happen to them, those who have been wronged and seek the death penalty, come away wanting after the deed is done because what they really wanted and needed was the peace of the restitution.

Congrats!!! Simply outstanding top tier scope. You will love it btw, while many feel a single speed focuser is old school, being a single-speed hater myself I have found this focuser simply wonderful -- even for high power planetary. The "trick" is to get it to the desired feel via the adjustment screw under the knobs. If you look under the scope you will see a round flat silver plate with 2 holes in it. If you unscrew this plate the box shaped green housing comes off to reveal the screws which hold the rack and pinion on. You can tighten or loosen this screw to get the desired feel you want (instead of using the friction lock on top of the focuser which is a less precise method). Anyway...a grand instrument and second to none Enjoy!

Thanks for the kind words. I've had both but never at the same time so never did a side-by-side myself. All that I have read from others points to them being the same. Baader of course advertises different coatings. Many reports I have seen from others said they could tell no difference between them in the field. Of course when you look at them, visually appear to be exactly the same (i.e., made by the same OEM). I myself believe they probably perform the same. When I had the UO HDs I loved them...as I do these now. Was stunned a few days ago looking at the Moon with the 9-7-6mms thru my 4" APO. The Moon was positioned just 1/2 way into the FOV and I was actually having a hard time discerning the field stop because the background of space around the Moon was just jet black!

Sacrilege! Go to the religion forum and ask forgiveness

Mark,

Is all you have the 9mm Astrola Plossl?? If so, then definitely get some more eyepieces to take advantage of your 10" scope! But like has already been said, experiment around some to see what you like and don't. Try to hook up with a club. If you want a good wider FOV and more eye relief EP than the one you have now, for $36 get the 9mm one of these - http://www.owlastronomy.com/exwide.htm. Works quite well. 6mm not bad either although some people seem to have some light control problems with the 6. I have tw of these 6mms and both fine. Don't try the 15mm or the 20mm though in your scope...your focal ratio way too fast for the 15 and 20mm ones of these.