Re: (IAAC) FWD: What should I buy? (rich field scopes)
Sue and Alan French wrote:
> I completely agree that long focus instruments can give wonderful deep
> sky views as well. Our 10" f/9.5 Newt and 8" f/11.5 Apo are both wonderful
> deep sky scopes - but not for wide-field objects.
> Clear skies, Sue
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >What I was trying to do was to make the point that as much deep-sky
> observing can be done with large aperture,long focus instruments (at higher
> magnifications) as with fast telescopes, or rich-field scopes for that
> matter. Most of my observing is done with a 17" f/15 classical Cassegrain
> with a focal length of 6477mm! And I sometimes use a friend's superb 20"
> f/10 classical Cassegrain with a mere 5080mm focal length.:-) Working with
> a rather limited field of view (even with a 55mm Ploessl) and having to deal
> with the difficulties of observing from a dome make locating DSO's somewhat
> challenging, but certainly far from impossible. And in many cases the views
> of these objects, at least to me and other club members, are far superior at
> higher magnifications.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did I ever say or imply that a large aperture, long
focus instrument was appropriate for large extended objects? No, what I said
was they are perhaps more useful for observing *small* DSO's than rich-field or
small telescopes are. Can we just let it go at that or must you have the last
word? :-) Remember this all started in response to Penny's assertion that one
should not use high magnifications on deep-sky objects. You most certainly can
with the right telescope and appropriately selected objects.