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

Coma was Re: what a diff f/3 makes

Expand Messages
  • trulyyours05
    Dale, what eyepiece? I have an f4.83 12 1/2 inch. Of course my Plossls were fine, but I had an 84 degree 30mm Widescan that made everything in the outer 20% of
    Message 1 of 12 , Dec 1, 2009
      Dale, what eyepiece? I have an f4.83 12 1/2 inch. Of course my Plossls were fine, but I had an 84 degree 30mm Widescan that made everything in the outer 20% of the field look like a faint fuzzy. Naglers, however, are sharp to the edge. My Pentax XWs are too. I don't need a paracorr with these eyepieces.

      Al

      --- In atm_free@yahoogroups.com, "atmpob" <atmpob@...> wrote:
      >
      > I used my F5 16 inch for several years without a coma corrector and enjoyed it. But when I started using a 36mm 70 deg FOV eyepiece and got enough experience that I wanted to start looking for dim galaxies then I started finding the coma at the edge objectionable. Still usable without but a lot nicer with a coma corrector.
      >
      > Dale Eason
      >
      > --- In atm_free@yahoogroups.com, "Jan van Gastel" <jhm.vangastel@> wrote:
      > >
      > > I never felt the need using a paracorr in my f/5 and f/6 telescopes and found the coma at the edge of the f/5 acceptable. In (for me) normal use, I didn't even notice it. I do use one in my 20" f/3.6 though, because the view without one is awfull.
      > >
      > > Jan
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.