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

Re: [tmboptical] Re: Ob Rpt Moon Last Night

Expand Messages
  • Markus Ludes
    Here specs about the new 130F/7, which is available with a few weeks delivery time only. weight is 28 pounds with rings and lenght is 40 inch, so no problem
    Message 1 of 27 , Jun 1 12:04 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Here specs about the new 130F/7, which is available with a few weeks delivery time only.
       
      weight is 28 pounds with rings and lenght is 40 inch, so no problem for AP 400 mount
       
      best wishes
       
      Markus
       
       
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:49 PM
      Subject: [tmboptical] Re: Ob Rpt Moon Last Night

         Thanks for the review Tom. As both a lunar observer and collector
      of lunar map/atlases and books you have certainly hit many of the
      high
      marks. There are other important works like Schroeter, but your list
      is the creme de la creme. I once passed up a two Vol. Kreiger for
      $700
      Many years ago!! I did have a copy on loan when Hurricane Hugo hit.
      Even though the roof came off the book remained undamaged and I was
      able to ship it back intact. I have never seen another copy for sale
      although I did find a copy of his Monde Atlas, Triest, 1898 on E-Bay!
      The 2 Vol. Kreiger and the Consolidated Atlas remain on the top of my
      want list.
         Lunar Observing is one of my very favorite things to do.
      am wrestling with the idea of a TMB apo for just that (plus planetary
      and double stars). My choices are between the 5" (130mm) and the two
      7" (175,180mm). Is an A-P 400 mount O.K. for the 130?  How about the
      A-P 600 on wooded tripod for either the 175mm or the 180mm? Visual
      only.Where can I get additional specs like weight, recommended mounts
      etc.? The Astronomics webbsite is great but doesn't have that info?
      Thanks for your time !!

      Jim Phillips
        


         Lunar observing
      > --- In tmboptical@y..., a_potentate@h... wrote:
      > >
      > > John,
      > >
      > >
      > > I'll go with the North book and check out the atlas.  Yes
      > > I can see how one would need both.
      > >
      > > Do you think this book:
      > > Atlas of the Lunar Terminator, by John E. Westfall
      > > could replace an atlas?  I like the idea of actual
      > > CCD images versus a map.  Of course I guess lighting
      > > angle might play avoc?  And yes about Cambridge Press!
      >
      > Hi Tim,
      >
      >    Some other Lunar books which I highly recommend are:
      >
      > "The Moon Observers Handbook" by Price
      > "A Portfolio of Lunar Drawings" by Hill
      > "The Moon" by Wilkins and Moore
      > "The Times Atlas of the Moon" by Lewis (if you can find
      > it, it is much superior to Rukl)
      > "Atlas-Guide Photographique de la Luna" by Viscardy
      > NASA's "Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas"
      >
      >    Here is a bit of history and some other important Lunar works.
      >
      >    This is a list of lunar atlases that might be of some interest
      to
      > observers of the Moon. Most of these are out-of-print, and are hard
      > to find on the used market, but if you can find them, they will be
      > well worth the time and effort.
      >
      >    Let's start with maps and visual lunar atlases. The first real
      > mapping of the Moon was done by Johann T. Mayer around the year
      > 1750 (some call him the father of lunar cartography). His work was
      > accurate and detailed for its time. The next real jump in lunar
      > cartography was by W.G. Lohhrmann with a 4.8" refractor. His atlas
      > was titled "Topographie der Sichtbaren Mondeoberflache" (1824).
      > It contained 25 sections of the Moon at a fair resolution.
      >
      >    The atlas/book "Der Mond," by Beer and Madler, 400 pages (1837)
      > became an instant classic and it took many decades before their
      work
      > was surpassed.
      >
      >    J.F.J. Schmidt published in 1878, "Charte der Gebirge des
      Mondes."
      > It contained 25 maps, 40cm x 40cm in size. 33000 craters were
      charted
      > and it was a 30 year lifetime work, with no less then 9 different
      > telescopes used. This man was dedicated!
      >
      >    The more modern works include the maps of Wilkins and Moore,
      > Philipp Fauth (which in all probability is the last of the great
      > individual works), The Times Atlas of the Moon, Lunar Atlas (Alter
      > - 1964), Hamlyn's Atlas of the Moon (A. Rukl - 1991), and the LAC
      > ACIC maps (the ACIC maps being the highest resolution maps of the
      > Moon ever made). But I'm saving the best for last. Without
      question,
      > the finest visual drawings of the Moon were done by Jonann Nepomuk
      > Krieger. Working with photographs (for accurate positioning) and
      > his 10.5" refractor, he made the most beautiful, realistic, high
      > resolution drawings of the Moon ever (see the book "The
      Astronomical
      > Scrapbook" by Joseph Ashbrook, page 258). I have seen this two
      volume
      > set for sale only once, for a price of $2000!
      >
      >    Now onto the Photographic Lunar Atlases. Probably the first good
      > photographs of the Moon were taken by Warren de la Rue, with a 12"
      > Newtonian (during 1852-1857). There were many, many photographic
      > atlases (too numerous to mention), but it wasn't until G.P. Kuiper
      > did his series of photo atlases that lunar photography became a
      match
      > for visual work. His "Photographic Lunar Atlas" published in 1960
      was
      > a compilation of all the best photo's from the Lick, Mount Wilson,
      > Yerkes, Pic-du-Midi and McDonald observatories. However, his last
      > installment of the four part series of lunar photo atlases was
      > the "Consolidated Lunar Atlas". This is, without question, the
      finest
      > earth based photographs of the moon ever taken (I have seen this
      > atlas -- and was offered its purchase at $2400 and had to pass!).
      > It was never in print, as it was made for lunar studies leading up
      > to the Moon missions. Maybe only 40 to 50 copies exist. It is made
      up
      > of 226 11" x 14" real glossy photographic prints, and the
      resolution
      > and contrast equal a superb 7-8" APO refractor (on the best
      photo's).
      > Some of today's best amateur CCD work matches and sometimes exceeds
      > the resolution of this atlas.
      >
      >    Other good lunar atlases are Kopal's "Photographic Atlas of the
      > Moon" (1965) and his later (and much better) "A New Photographic
      > Atlas of the Moon" (1971). Georges Viscardy, from France, with the
      > use of Kodak 2415 film and a custom 20" f/47 Cassegrain, in 1984,
      > published "Atlas-Guide Photographique de la Lune," an amazing lunar
      > photo atlas that, at times, equals the resolution of the
      Consolidated
      > Atlas, which used a 61" telescope for its photos of the Moon.
      >
      >    We are at the end of the great visual and photographic earth
      based
      > atlases. The "Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas" and its like
      > (including Clementine) all surpass the earth based works, but are
      not
      > as useful at the eyepiece, as the resolution is too great and
      > illumination angles are not what is normally seen from earth.

      > Thomas Back
      > TMB Optical



      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      tmboptical-unsubscribe@egroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • thefamily@charleston.net
      Hi Tom, Thanks for the info. I checked out the webbsite. Given your thoughts on mounts I m leaning toward the 130. Better to only have to buy the tube assembly
      Message 2 of 27 , Jun 1 5:16 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Tom,
        Thanks for the info. I checked out the webbsite. Given your
        thoughts on mounts I'm leaning toward the 130. Better to only have to
        buy the tube assembly and use a mount I already have. Can you help
        with whatever (mounting plate, etc.?) I need to mount the scope on the
        400?
        Leaving this A.M. for a Dressage show in Raleigh (my wife
        Stephanie's big hobby). Horses are definately not my thing. Also will
        visit my son for his 20th birthday. Will be back next Wed. I'll try to
        come to a decision soon.
        One final thought. Have you considered a folded tube assembly for
        larger, 8-10", scopes? That could cut down on mount cost and housing
        space. Thanks again.

        Jim


        > --- In tmboptical@y..., thefamily@c... wrote:
        > > Thanks for the review Tom. As both a lunar observer and
        > >collector of lunar map/atlases and books you have certainly hit
        > >many of the high marks. There are other important works like
        > >Schroeter, but your list is the creme de la creme. I once passed up
        > >a two Vol. Kreiger for $700 Many years ago!!
        >
        > Never look back, it only hurts. I can't tell you how many times
        > I passed up on a rare astronomy book, and now regret it.
        >
        > >I have never seen another copy for sale although I did find a copy
        > >of his Monde Atlas, Triest, 1898 on E-Bay!
        >
        > You're very luck to have that!
        >
        > >The 2 Vol. Kreiger and the Consolidated Atlas remain on the top of
        > >my want list.
        >
        > Same here.
        >
        > > Lunar Observing is one of my very favorite things to do.
        > >am wrestling with the idea of a TMB apo for just that (plus
        > >planetary and double stars). My choices are between the 5"
        > >(130mm) and the two 7" (175,180mm). Is an A-P 400 mount O.K.
        > >for the 130?
        >
        > Sure, the AP 400 would be an excellent choice for the TMB 130mm.
        >
        > >How about the A-P 600 on wooded tripod for either the 175mm or the
        > >180mm? Visual only.
        >
        > You could mount the 7" TMB's on an AP 600, but it would not be
        > a stable platform.
        >
        > >Where can I get additional specs like weight, recommended mounts
        > >etc.? The Astronomics webbsite is great but doesn't have that info?
        >
        > Check my web site:
        >
        > www.apm-telescopes.de/tmboptical/index.htm
        >
        > >Thanks for your time !!
        >
        > Thank you,
        >
        > Thomas
      • TMBoptical@aol.com
        ... Hi Doug, Yes to your first question, and to die for on your second question. Thomas
        Message 3 of 27 , Jun 1 7:55 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In tmboptical@y..., "Douglas W. Forehand" <dwf@e...> wrote:
          > By the way have you ever seen the any of the ACIC Lunar
          >Astronautical Charts (LAC) ?
          >
          > If so what were they like ?

          Hi Doug,

          Yes to your first question, and to die for on your second
          question.

          Thomas
        • jamesn20012001@yahoo.com
          Thomas, Thanks for the tutorial on Lunar atlases. Sometimes we just don t appreciate what we already have. Just before I read your note on atlases I was
          Message 4 of 27 , Jun 1 10:15 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Thomas,

            Thanks for the tutorial on Lunar atlases. Sometimes we just
            don't appreciate what we already have. Just before I read your
            note on atlases I was browsing through my copy of the Times
            Atlas of the Moon. We recently had two nights with a few hours
            of relatively clear skies here in the Twin Cities and I was outside
            with my TMB 100 f/8 and BW Optik binoviewer wondering at how
            unbelievably sharp and detailed the Moon could look with the
            right equipment and atmosphere. I have owned this book for
            over 30 years having picked it up for the grand price of $5.99 on a
            publishers overstock sale at Dayton's Dept Store in Minneapolis.
            Actually, I think I was still an employee there at the time so I got
            15% off of that. I had opened that book about 6 times in that
            period of time. I had convinced myself that what I really needed
            was the Rukl atlas, but now I am happily browsing through my
            valuable collectors edition of the Times Atlas Of The Moon. It
            looks a lot better and more useful than I ever realized.

            Jim

            --- In tmboptical@y..., TMBoptical@a... wrote:
            > --- In tmboptical@y..., a_potentate@h... wrote:
            > >
            > > John,
            > >
            > >
            > > I'll go with the North book and check out the atlas. Yes
            > > I can see how one would need both.
            > >
            > > Do you think this book:
            > > Atlas of the Lunar Terminator, by John E. Westfall
            > > could replace an atlas? I like the idea of actual
            > > CCD images versus a map. Of course I guess lighting
            > > angle might play avoc? And yes about Cambridge Press!
            >
            > Hi Tim,
            >
            > Some other Lunar books which I highly recommend are:
            >
            > "The Moon Observers Handbook" by Price
            > "A Portfolio of Lunar Drawings" by Hill
            > "The Moon" by Wilkins and Moore
            > "The Times Atlas of the Moon" by Lewis (if you can find
            > it, it is much superior to Rukl)
            > "Atlas-Guide Photographique de la Luna" by Viscardy
            > NASA's "Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas"
            >
            > Here is a bit of history and some other important Lunar
            works.
            >
            > This is a list of lunar atlases that might be of some interest to
            > observers of the Moon. Most of these are out-of-print, and are
            hard
            > to find on the used market, but if you can find them, they will be
            > well worth the time and effort.
            >
            > Let's start with maps and visual lunar atlases. The first real
            > mapping of the Moon was done by Johann T. Mayer around the
            year
            > 1750 (some call him the father of lunar cartography). His work
            was
            > accurate and detailed for its time. The next real jump in lunar
            > cartography was by W.G. Lohhrmann with a 4.8" refractor. His
            atlas
            > was titled "Topographie der Sichtbaren Mondeoberflache"
            (1824).
            > It contained 25 sections of the Moon at a fair resolution.
            >
            > The atlas/book "Der Mond," by Beer and Madler, 400 pages
            (1837)
            > became an instant classic and it took many decades before
            their work
            > was surpassed.
            >
            > J.F.J. Schmidt published in 1878, "Charte der Gebirge des
            Mondes."
            > It contained 25 maps, 40cm x 40cm in size. 33000 craters
            were charted
            > and it was a 30 year lifetime work, with no less then 9 different
            > telescopes used. This man was dedicated!
            >
            > The more modern works include the maps of Wilkins and
            Moore,
            > Philipp Fauth (which in all probability is the last of the great
            > individual works), The Times Atlas of the Moon, Lunar Atlas
            (Alter
            > - 1964), Hamlyn's Atlas of the Moon (A. Rukl - 1991), and the
            LAC
            > ACIC maps (the ACIC maps being the highest resolution
            maps of the
            > Moon ever made). But I'm saving the best for last. Without
            question,
            > the finest visual drawings of the Moon were done by Jonann
            Nepomuk
            > Krieger. Working with photographs (for accurate positioning)
            and
            > his 10.5" refractor, he made the most beautiful, realistic, high
            > resolution drawings of the Moon ever (see the book "The
            Astronomical
            > Scrapbook" by Joseph Ashbrook, page 258). I have seen this
            two volume
            > set for sale only once, for a price of $2000!
            >
            > Now onto the Photographic Lunar Atlases. Probably the first
            good
            > photographs of the Moon were taken by Warren de la Rue, with
            a 12"
            > Newtonian (during 1852-1857). There were many, many
            photographic
            > atlases (too numerous to mention), but it wasn't until G.P.
            Kuiper
            > did his series of photo atlases that lunar photography became
            a match
            > for visual work. His "Photographic Lunar Atlas" published in
            1960 was
            > a compilation of all the best photo's from the Lick, Mount
            Wilson,
            > Yerkes, Pic-du-Midi and McDonald observatories. However, his
            last
            > installment of the four part series of lunar photo atlases was
            > the "Consolidated Lunar Atlas". This is, without question, the
            finest
            > earth based photographs of the moon ever taken (I have seen
            this
            > atlas -- and was offered its purchase at $2400 and had to
            pass!).
            > It was never in print, as it was made for lunar studies leading
            up
            > to the Moon missions. Maybe only 40 to 50 copies exist. It is
            made up
            > of 226 11" x 14" real glossy photographic prints, and the
            resolution
            > and contrast equal a superb 7-8" APO refractor (on the best
            photo's).
            > Some of today's best amateur CCD work matches and
            sometimes exceeds
            > the resolution of this atlas.
            >
            > Other good lunar atlases are Kopal's "Photographic Atlas of
            the
            > Moon" (1965) and his later (and much better) "A New
            Photographic
            > Atlas of the Moon" (1971). Georges Viscardy, from France, with
            the
            > use of Kodak 2415 film and a custom 20" f/47 Cassegrain, in
            1984,
            > published "Atlas-Guide Photographique de la Lune," an
            amazing lunar
            > photo atlas that, at times, equals the resolution of the
            Consolidated
            > Atlas, which used a 61" telescope for its photos of the Moon.
            >
            > We are at the end of the great visual and photographic earth
            based
            > atlases. The "Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas" and its like
            > (including Clementine) all surpass the earth based works, but
            are not
            > as useful at the eyepiece, as the resolution is too great and
            > illumination angles are not what is normally seen from earth.
            >
            > Thomas Back
            > TMB Optical
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.