Posts Made By: Tom Hole

I re-evaluate my ep collection and buy more.

Or I build stuff like an observing chair or eq platform.

Clear skies,

Tom

James,

Since you have more than one, you can hold them up to your eyes and see if they work. If you hold them up and they touch before matching up with your eyes, your interpupillary distance (IPD) is too narrow. I can't use the XL's because my IPD is 58mm and the XL's centers are 60mm's apart at their closest.

Another issue to consider is nose relief. If your IPD is compatible, hold the XL's up to your eyes and look through them. See if there is enough room to fit your nose in between the ep's. Hold the ep's straight out from your eyes and then tilt them up just slightly as if you were looking up just a tad into the ep's.

Let us know what you find.

Clear skies,

Tom

Mark,

I can understand the 102 confusion. I can't keep up with the options, but that's ok, I don't have to. I could even understand the misplaced baffles and such on the 1026. It is a non-production representative scope.

But my hair really stood up when I read in that Yahoo thread that one of the production 1278's had a misplaced baffle that effectively made it a 4 inch scope. Now, I never measured my 1278, but I hope it was 5" of clear aperture. Even if it were 4", it sounds like an easy matter to move a baffle. But I didn't buy into the Burgess saga so I would have to move baffles. I was hoping all that would be taken care of by Bill. He had those 1278's long enough to figure it out before he shipped them. Maybe it was a one time, one scope issue.

I'll reserve judgment about further purchases from Bill until this whole baffle issue gets hashed out. Right now I don't feel good about sending Bill more money for binoviewers or binoculars that need a bit of baffle re-positioning. Sure it's inexpensive stuff, but that doesn't mean it has to be poorly made. Doesn't match up with Bill's assurances.

Clear skies,

Tom

Ed,

Great value. I used a pair of 32mm GTO plossls and 25mm Sirius plossls and they were very good. The 32mm's will give you your widest TFOV. At that price, you will have no problem recouping most of your money if you upgrade later on.

Clear skies,

Tom

Greg,

I cannot answer your question, but I'd sure like to be a part of the testing. Let me know when and where

Just looking at the square inch issues:

5" x 2 = 38 sq inches (19 sq in / eye)
6" = 28 sq inches (14 sq in / eye without loss)

I think the 5" would be better. A better comparison might be a dual 4" to a binoviewer 6":

4" x 2 = 25 sq in (12.5 / eye)

So in that case, the 6" would be brighter and have more resolution. I'm thinking you can get two 4 inch APOs for less than one 6" APO, but I'm not certain.

Clear skies,

Tom

Chris,

How about an adjustable height observing chair? I made one for my 10" f/4.7 dob and it worked just great. Had to build a taller one for my 11" f/5.4 Starmaster, but no comfort issues. Sitting, tracking, binoviewing at 545x, now that's clean livin'.

Clear skies,

Tom

Chas,

That's the same scope I bought last Dec and it is fantastic. The EL part is very convenient. I didn't know if I would like having the trusses and secondary cage stay together, but it has proven quite convenient. That part fits in my trunk and I just put the rocker box with the mirror box on the back seat (Nissan Altima). This setup has proven as portable as my old 10" f/4.7 XT10. The views are a lot nicer. I really like the focal length. Add binoviewers, a comfy chair and an eq platform and life is indeed very good.

The only thing I have added to it are fans inside the mirror box blowing across the primary and some baffling/flocking across from the focuser. Motion is perfect. You already know all this as a veteran Starmaster, but I felt like typing.

Let us know how it looks. I'm sure it will be fantastic.

Clear skies,

Tom

"but with the new future semi-apo or even apo the 1026 should also be a great performer"

Bill cannot get the Chinese to make a simple doublette achro objective in a 102mm f/6 format, I'm not betting he will have any better luck getting them to make him a semi-apo or apo objective.

That said, I also won't bet against him. I'll watch patiently from the sidelines and if he does it, he can have my business back. I'm much more comfortable not having a stake in this wild ride for now. I held out for the 1278, as I said I would, but that's it for now. I do wish him all the luck, but my gut tells me this ride is far from over.

Clear skies,

Tom

I guess we have to keep the off topic discussion going on the binoviewer forum.

Tom

It's not an SCT, but it's a CAT:

http://www.astro-physics.com/products/telescopes/10mak/10f146mak.htm

Looks expensive

Tom