Image of the day

Captured by
Herb Bubert

Saturn 2004-2022

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: Paul Atkinson

July 10, 2003 11:42 AM Forum: Binoviewers

AP/Baader Bino's

Posted By Paul Atkinson

Does anyone know if you can use these without the prism diagonal it comes with on a SCT? I.E., can you use it straight through by changing the configuration around? I am having my prism serviced and was wondering if there was a way to still be able to view while it is gone?

Paul

July 15, 2003 07:54 AM Forum: Equipment Talk

Televue 41 Pan vs. Pentax 40 XW

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I am curious about both of these EP's. The new Pentax 40 XW offers a 70 degree field while the Pan 41 offers a 68 degree. This calculates out to just a smidge wider FOV for the Pentax. The Pentax is going to run around $529 vs. $495 for the Pan. I am wondering which will be better in the end. In my opinion the cost of both of these EP's is extreme. Does anyone have any experience with both of them? I know that APM is already selling the Pentax.

Paul Atkinson

July 15, 2003 06:23 PM Forum: Deep Sky Observing

Galaxy Light Transmission

Posted By Paul Atkinson

Can someone tell me where (approximately) the light transmission (nm) of most observable galaxies in small scopes falls?

Thanks,

Paul Atkinson
AstroProProducts.com

July 16, 2003 07:28 AM Forum: Binoviewers

Which 1.25" EP gives the widest FOV possible?

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I am curious what 1.25" EP will give the widest "usable" FOV in a pair of bino's? Imgage quality must be considered. It doesn't do any good to mathmatically say an EP has a wide FOV if it's hard to view or the image is poor.

Paul Atkinson

July 16, 2003 01:32 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

2 Liter Coke vs. 20 oz. Pepsi....

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I was just wonder what everyone thought about these two soft drinks in their various sizes... what the... ooops, sorry... must be in the wrong forum. Got to quit staying up late.

Paul

July 18, 2003 05:32 AM Forum: Equipment Talk

Re: LensPen trashed?

Posted By Paul Atkinson

Tony,

I have been VERY happy with my Lens pens and have cleaned some pretty dirty EP's with them. I think if you follow the directions you should be fine. The only time I would truly worry is if it got grit or sand on it somehow. Then you might want to replace. What people don't realize is that the coatings today are MUCH more durable than in the past. I talked to Al Nagler at length on the subject and he said the same thing. In fact, when asked he told me to clean his EP's with Windex and a paper towel. Most of us wouldn't do that, but it is a good indication that the coatings are a little more durable then we give them credit for being.

July 18, 2003 04:56 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

A little Friday Humor...You poor 4" APO guys...

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I have been curious why there aren't more good looking women in Astronomy? I have found that girls are always impressed when I tell them I have a 14"! Must be the 4" APO guys scaring them off.

Paul Atkinson

July 19, 2003 06:07 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

Coronado Binomites... pretty cool!

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I bought a pair of these through Anacortes, my favorite Astronomy Store. (Nice plug, eh Herb?) Anyway, I was very surprised at how well they work. It took a little fidgeting to get them adjusted to my eyes but once dialed in they provided a very good view. Unlike the article in Sky & Tel where the author said he had trouble pointing them, I found it very easy to locate the Sun. I have used them every day since I bought them. In fact, I have used these more the last two weeks then I did my Pronto/Solarmax setup for a whole year.

The sun, albeit small, clearly showed a plethora of detail. I saw two large solar spot groupings and several smaller ones today. Hey, for $99, these are about as easy as it gets and well worth the money. Heck, that is cheaper then most solar filters are, and you don't have drag a scope out just to see the Sun.

Paul Atkinson
AstroProProducts.com

July 19, 2003 06:09 PM Forum: Solar System Observing

Coronado Binomites... pretty cool!

Posted By Paul Atkinson

I bought a pair of these through Anacortes, my favorite Astronomy Store. (Nice plug, eh Herb?) Anyway, I was very surprised at how well they work. It took a little fidgeting to get them adjusted to my eyes but once dialed in they provided a very good view. Unlike the article in Sky & Tel where the author said he had trouble pointing them, I found it very easy to locate the Sun. I have used them every day since I bought them. In fact, I have used these more the last two weeks then I did my Pronto/Solarmax setup for a whole year.
The sun, albeit small, clearly showed a plethora of detail. I saw two large solar spot groupings and several smaller ones today. Hey, for $99, these are about as easy as it gets and well worth the money. Heck, that is cheaper then most solar filters are, and you don't have drag a scope out just to see the Sun.

Paul Atkinson
AstroProProducts.com

July 21, 2003 06:14 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

Re: Aperture vs. Seeing - Another Round

Posted By Paul Atkinson

Ed,

I would beg to differ. This comes up all the time and I can't help be think how crazy it is. Here is an excerpt from a Sky and Telescope magazine article regarding 4 Common Telescope Myths. I'd say the author of this is more of expert on seeing than most of us. This is verbatum from the S&T website written by:

Gary Seronik is an associate editor of Sky & Telescope magazine and an accomplished telescope builder.

MYTH:

"Large scopes are more adversely affected by seeing than small ones."

The idea behind this myth is that when it comes to planetary observing, there is little point in getting a large telescope unless the seeing conditions at your observing site are unusually good. Some actually claim that a small scope can outperform a large one on nights of mediocre seeing.

I call this assertion a myth for two reasons. First, my own observations do not bear it out. Second, no one has proposed a plausible mechanism for it. Telescopic resolution is limited by the weakest link in a chain made up of optical quality, atmospheric steadiness, telescope design, and the observer. No doubt, some small scopes give better views than some large ones, but this can easily be ascribed to factors having nothing to do with the atmosphere. In particular, poor collimation and poor thermal characteristics often plague large reflectors.

When I first heard that small scopes could beat out big ones, I checked it out for myself. At the time my principal telescope was an optically good 12½-inch f/5 reflector. I built a 5-inch-diameter off-axis mask that could quickly be placed at the front of its tube, making it into an unobstructed 5-inch reflector. Over the course of several years I took this mask with me to every observing session and compared full-aperture planetary views with those seen with the mask in place. I did this on nights of good seeing, okay seeing, and poor seeing. Not once did the reduced-aperture view show greater detail than the full-aperture view.

Admittedly, when the seeing (or atmospheric steadiness) was below average the off-axis mask produced an aesthetically pleasing view. But this did not translate into greater detail — though it's easy to understand how a casual glance would give this impression. Most often I would wind up using my telescope's full aperture because even on nights of substandard seeing, occasional brief moments of stillness would allow me to see details that simply could not be seen with the aperture mask in place.

If you'd like the whole article here is the link:

http://www.astromart.com/messages.asp?message_id=94184&page=

Paul Atkinson
AstroProProducts.com