Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: WO Diag

Expand Messages
  • aaa11194118
    Dpo you have any idea what the practical visual difference is between the 97% 2 WO diagonal and the new 2 99% diagonol in actual seeing objects differences? I
    Message 1 of 14 , Jun 20, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Dpo you have any idea what the practical visual difference is
      between the 97% 2" WO diagonal and the new 2'99% diagonol
      in actual seeing objects differences?

      I am trying to decide if the new one is worth the extra $100 for my
      6" Intes MK66 which focuses poorely with the Intes 1.25
      diagonol.


      --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson"
      <jim.a@r...> wrote:
      > Mickey,
      >
      > Sorry to hear about the looseness. I have two of the WO diag's
      and haven't
      > experienced your problem as mine is the snuggness
      (tightness) when inserting
      > my eye pieces. I sometimes have to really struggle to get them
      in.
      >
      > Jim
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Mickey Smith [mailto:mickeysmith@a...]
      > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 1:05 PM
      > To: William-Optics@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: WO Diag
      >
      >
      > William, please respond to this question. I tried to email it to
      you
      > off list but it bounced back.
      >
      > Thanks
      > Mickey Smith
      >
      > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
      > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
      >
      > > Now that I've used my WO diagonal for a couple months I've
      found a
      > > problem with it that needs attention.
      > >
      > > My eyepieces fit so loose that they visibly tilt toward the far
      > side
      > > when I tighten the setscrew. It doesn't matter if the EP has a
      > > safety groove or is smooth barreled. All my 2" EPs are
      affected;
      > > 40mm UO MK70, 20 Nagler Type2, 17mm Type 4, 14mm
      Meade UWA E? even
      > > the WO 1.25 adapter is a loose fit and rocks side to side in
      the
      > > diagonal.
      > >
      > > However, the 2" barrel that fits into the focuser is the best fit
      > > I've ever seen. The tolerance is so close that the setscrew
      merely
      > > secures it; no apparent movement whatsoever.
      > >
      > > Has anyone else experienced this? Is there something that
      can be
      > > done to correct this flaw in an otherwise exceptional product?
      > >
      > > Thanks
      > > Mickey Smith
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
      > > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
      > > > I just got on the wait list for the new refractor style diaganol
      > > at
      > > > Anacortes. I know the quality is going to be TOP KNOTCH
      from
      > > having
      > > > the WO crayford focuser on my C9.25 SCT.
      > > >
      > > > Mickey Smith
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • rbyscaia
      Hi, I think you should read the comparison between TV standard and Everbrite diagonals (96% vs a 99%): http://www.cloudynights.com/accessories/telediag.htm
      Message 2 of 14 , Jun 21, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi,

        I think you should read the comparison between TV standard and
        Everbrite diagonals (96% vs a 99%):

        http://www.cloudynights.com/accessories/telediag.htm

        Resuming:

        "Now, as you might have gathered, a 2-4% increase in reflectivity
        does not translate into dramatic differences in the objects under
        scruitiny. In fact, in looking at deepsky objects, there is very
        little difference visible."

        "(...)it's hard to justify spending another $140 or so just to get
        the Everbright. That money could be put into any number of other
        telescope enhancements."

        For my I-M 603, I am going to buy the standard WO version (97%). If
        I had a 8" or 10" TEC, maybe I would go for he 99% version.

        IMO, for normal scopes, like ours, the price difference between the
        diagonals is too big to be justified for the performance
        difference... In my country the 99% costs 2x the 97% version...

        In other group, a user stated that he compared the WO 97% and the TV
        everbrite (99%) and also reached this conclusion...

        Best Regards.

        --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "aaa11194118" <knightF6@e...>
        wrote:
        > Dpo you have any idea what the practical visual difference is
        > between the 97% 2" WO diagonal and the new 2'99% diagonol
        > in actual seeing objects differences?
        >
        > I am trying to decide if the new one is worth the extra $100 for
        my
        > 6" Intes MK66 which focuses poorely with the Intes 1.25
        > diagonol.
        >
        >
        > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson"
        > <jim.a@r...> wrote:
        > > Mickey,
        > >
        > > Sorry to hear about the looseness. I have two of the WO diag's
        > and haven't
        > > experienced your problem as mine is the snuggness
        > (tightness) when inserting
        > > my eye pieces. I sometimes have to really struggle to get them
        > in.
        > >
        > > Jim
        > >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: Mickey Smith [mailto:mickeysmith@a...]
        > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 1:05 PM
        > > To: William-Optics@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: WO Diag
        > >
        > >
        > > William, please respond to this question. I tried to email it to
        > you
        > > off list but it bounced back.
        > >
        > > Thanks
        > > Mickey Smith
        > >
        > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
        > > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
        > >
        > > > Now that I've used my WO diagonal for a couple months I've
        > found a
        > > > problem with it that needs attention.
        > > >
        > > > My eyepieces fit so loose that they visibly tilt toward the far
        > > side
        > > > when I tighten the setscrew. It doesn't matter if the EP has a
        > > > safety groove or is smooth barreled. All my 2" EPs are
        > affected;
        > > > 40mm UO MK70, 20 Nagler Type2, 17mm Type 4, 14mm
        > Meade UWA E? even
        > > > the WO 1.25 adapter is a loose fit and rocks side to side in
        > the
        > > > diagonal.
        > > >
        > > > However, the 2" barrel that fits into the focuser is the best
        fit
        > > > I've ever seen. The tolerance is so close that the setscrew
        > merely
        > > > secures it; no apparent movement whatsoever.
        > > >
        > > > Has anyone else experienced this? Is there something that
        > can be
        > > > done to correct this flaw in an otherwise exceptional product?
        > > >
        > > > Thanks
        > > > Mickey Smith
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
        > > > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
        > > > > I just got on the wait list for the new refractor style
        diaganol
        > > > at
        > > > > Anacortes. I know the quality is going to be TOP KNOTCH
        > from
        > > > having
        > > > > the WO crayford focuser on my C9.25 SCT.
        > > > >
        > > > > Mickey Smith
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • aaa11194118
        Thank you for your reply and Link about my questions ! This was very helpful and right to the point even though it didn t review the WO diagonols. I assume the
        Message 3 of 14 , Jun 21, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Thank you for your reply and Link about my questions ! This was
          very helpful and right to the point even though it didn't review the
          WO diagonols. I assume the performance differences between
          the 2 firms products is very small, but the price difference is
          worth noting-even though I haven't checked prices yet for
          Televue.

          I am hoping that a new WO diagonol combined with collimation
          of my brand new Intes MK66-certified to have been collimated
          byn the dealer- will correct the blurry images of everything I now
          see. If it does improve my focus issues, then, I'll save up for
          some best eyepieces which might further improve the image
          sharpness while making seeing through them enjoyable and
          easy as opposed to the Celestron Ultimas which are difficult and
          annoying to look through for more than 10 seconds.





          --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "rbyscaia"
          <rbyscaia@y...> wrote:
          > Hi,
          >
          > I think you should read the comparison between TV standard
          and
          > Everbrite diagonals (96% vs a 99%):
          >
          > http://www.cloudynights.com/accessories/telediag.htm
          >
          > Resuming:
          >
          > "Now, as you might have gathered, a 2-4% increase in
          reflectivity
          > does not translate into dramatic differences in the objects
          under
          > scruitiny. In fact, in looking at deepsky objects, there is very
          > little difference visible."
          >
          > "(...)it's hard to justify spending another $140 or so just to get
          > the Everbright. That money could be put into any number of
          other
          > telescope enhancements."
          >
          > For my I-M 603, I am going to buy the standard WO version
          (97%). If
          > I had a 8" or 10" TEC, maybe I would go for he 99% version.
          >
          > IMO, for normal scopes, like ours, the price difference between
          the
          > diagonals is too big to be justified for the performance
          > difference... In my country the 99% costs 2x the 97% version...
          >
          > In other group, a user stated that he compared the WO 97%
          and the TV
          > everbrite (99%) and also reached this conclusion...
          >
          > Best Regards.
          >
          > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "aaa11194118"
          <knightF6@e...>
          > wrote:
          > > Dpo you have any idea what the practical visual difference is
          > > between the 97% 2" WO diagonal and the new 2'99%
          diagonol
          > > in actual seeing objects differences?
          > >
          > > I am trying to decide if the new one is worth the extra $100
          for
          > my
          > > 6" Intes MK66 which focuses poorely with the Intes 1.25
          > > diagonol.
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson"
          > > <jim.a@r...> wrote:
          > > > Mickey,
          > > >
          > > > Sorry to hear about the looseness. I have two of the WO
          diag's
          > > and haven't
          > > > experienced your problem as mine is the snuggness
          > > (tightness) when inserting
          > > > my eye pieces. I sometimes have to really struggle to get
          them
          > > in.
          > > >
          > > > Jim
          > > >
          > > > -----Original Message-----
          > > > From: Mickey Smith [mailto:mickeysmith@a...]
          > > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 1:05 PM
          > > > To: William-Optics@yahoogroups.com
          > > > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: WO Diag
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > William, please respond to this question. I tried to email it
          to
          > > you
          > > > off list but it bounced back.
          > > >
          > > > Thanks
          > > > Mickey Smith
          > > >
          > > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
          > > > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > > Now that I've used my WO diagonal for a couple months
          I've
          > > found a
          > > > > problem with it that needs attention.
          > > > >
          > > > > My eyepieces fit so loose that they visibly tilt toward the far
          > > > side
          > > > > when I tighten the setscrew. It doesn't matter if the EP
          has a
          > > > > safety groove or is smooth barreled. All my 2" EPs are
          > > affected;
          > > > > 40mm UO MK70, 20 Nagler Type2, 17mm Type 4, 14mm
          > > Meade UWA E? even
          > > > > the WO 1.25 adapter is a loose fit and rocks side to side
          in
          > > the
          > > > > diagonal.
          > > > >
          > > > > However, the 2" barrel that fits into the focuser is the best
          > fit
          > > > > I've ever seen. The tolerance is so close that the
          setscrew
          > > merely
          > > > > secures it; no apparent movement whatsoever.
          > > > >
          > > > > Has anyone else experienced this? Is there something
          that
          > > can be
          > > > > done to correct this flaw in an otherwise exceptional
          product?
          > > > >
          > > > > Thanks
          > > > > Mickey Smith
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Mickey Smith"
          > > > > <mickeysmith@a...> wrote:
          > > > > > I just got on the wait list for the new refractor style
          > diaganol
          > > > > at
          > > > > > Anacortes. I know the quality is going to be TOP
          KNOTCH
          > > from
          > > > > having
          > > > > > the WO crayford focuser on my C9.25 SCT.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Mickey Smith
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.