Posts Made By: Charles Packard

This past weekend I lost my dog Sparks after he ate several leaves from a daffodil. I wasn't aware that daffodils were toxic to dogs until it was too late. .

Please visit the link below and pass it along to anyone who has a dog.
http://www.dogpack.com/health/poisonplants.htm

Lonely now,
Charles Packard

Looks like NASA's out of the rocket business. :S
Sad, Sad times.

New York Times article 1/29/2010.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/science/space/29nasa.html

The Solar Dynamics Observatory spotted a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) on Sunday, 8/01. It will hit earth early Aug 4th. The Aurora Borealis should be quite a show for those up north.

Well, according to the insurance company, my '98 Acura is totaled. Not my fault. No injuries, thank you-know-who.
I've been looking for something to drive and I'm leaning towards a used 2008-2010 Ford Escape. I was wondering if there are any owners here on Amart who would be willing to comment on their experience with this auto.
TIA,
Charles Packard

Congratulations Michael the OM-1 is a fine camera!

The original battery is a 1.3V mecury cell. It was discontinued to comply with enviromental laws.

The main problem with the available replacement cells is voltage. Wein cells produce 1.35 volts and the silver-oxides produce 1.5 volts. Using them will throw the light meter off and the silver-oxide batteries have been known to damage the light meter circuitry.

The mecury cell in my OM-1 lasted over twenty years before dying so yours may live for awhile yet. When I sent it off for a CLA (clean, lubricate, adjustment) I had the battery comparment modified to accept silver-oxide 1.5 volt batteries and reduce the voltage to 1.3 volts. There's also a battery adapter the MR9. It drops into the OM-1s battery compartment resizing it for the smaller silver-oxide batteries and has a built in resistor to lower the voltage to 1.3. These are a bit pricey at 32.00-37.00 dollars.

Here is the url to my sad, outdated web page look under Olypmus Sales/Service. http://home.hiwaay.net/~packardc/

Decisions, decisions...I and others understand. You mentioned 'goto' electronics and 'portability' in your post. Start by making your decsion about those two topics. 'GOTO' - If your are already familar with finding objects, (i.e. star-hopping) then I would forget the 'goto' and purchase a good sky atlas and/or planisphere. 'Portability' - To me that issue involves size, weight and the number of pieces of equipment to haul around. A topic I won't go into detail about other than to say, the more you want your scope to do the work the more 'stuff' you will have to haul around.
My best advice is to look for a newtonian scope on a dobsonian mount, aka a 'Dob'. These scopes offer the most optical bang for the buck, IMO. Dobs in the 8"-10" are fairly easy to transport, tube lengths are under 5' in length and weigh around 50 lbs with the mount. The best part is the cost, well under a $1000.00 which you plenty for eyepieces and accesories!
As far as manufacturers, there are many. Orion telscopes , Discovery, Hardin Optical, Meade, Celestron all come to mind. As far as I know only Orion offers a Dob with Digital Setting Circles (DSC) installed although I belive any Dob can be retro fitted with them.
Charles

I own a Stellarvue AT1010, now named the Nighthawk, it an 80mm f/6 achro. It is very well color corrected for an achromat. I've also considered buying its longer fl brother the 80/90D. Planets show more contrast and color due to its longer focal length. And from what I read a real sleeper among achromats. I've seen both going used on AM for 300.00 US and less.
I've read good reviews on the Orion 90 EQ and the 120 EQ, but I think the 120ST would have too much color for me to enjoy.
Lastly, if you can squeeze a bit more into your budget the Orion 80ED would be a very nice choice.
Check out Cloudy Night's for reviews on all these and more.

No the lunar landers can't be viewed from earth. I'm quite certain about this.

I used to know another formula for calculating the resolving power of telescope but I can't recall it right now.

I do remember from an APOD (Astronomy Picture of the Day) regarding the Hubble telescope that its 1.2 meter(?) mirror can only resolve lunar objects down to around 80 meters. That further supports my earlier statement regarding earth based scopes.

Charles Packard

In addition to Harold's point about the sensitivity of film vs.eyeballs to the spectrum of light:
Astronomical images taken using film or CCD generally require very long exposure times. This allows photons to accumulate on the CCD chip or film emulsion, thereby recording a lot of information that is basically processed once. The end result being the vivid colors we see in the final image.
Conversely, the eyeball [retina]/ brain combination is constantly processing the images we see. In other words shorter exposures are being taken and processed. Which doesn't allow much time for the accumulation of photons, so what we see especially in low light situations lacks color and definition.


Charles Packard

Tim,
Have you tried contacting Olympus directly? Olympus does make a T-adapter for the E1.
Charles