March 2003 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Go-to scopes
by Dale Hooper 02 Mar '03

02 Mar '03

I don't find a goto scope at all gimmicky. As you say - it may prevent some beginners from truly learning the night sky - but if it gets them out using their telescope - I say, go for it. It also depends partly on what your emphasis is. If your greatest joy is finding a particular object - then certainly don't use a goto scope. But, if your greatest joy is looking at more objects in an evening or observing some of the real elusive stuff like dark nebulae - then a goto scope is going to be perfect. I personally don't think an amateur should feel ashamed or feel like they have to defend whatever type of scope they get (except to their spouse <g>). Goto scopes are just another arrow in the astronomer's quiver. I find the whole goto/star-hop issue a bit like GUI vs command line for computers from a few years back. When mice first became available for computers many people (including myself) thought they were a gimmick. Nowadays, do I use/create GUI's? Certainly. Do I use/create command line interfaces? Sometimes. It just depends on what works best for the application. I also find it a bit amusing that this kind of thing always seems to go one way. I hear purists decry use of goto scopes, but I never seem to hear people with goto scopes complain about purists that spend an hour or two to find one object - or that complain when a purist comes over to look through the finder of a goto scope to get some ideas about where to look for something. As I said before - whatever gets you outside (or into your observatory) is what you should use. -----Original Message----- I agree entirely with Brent (almost). There's no way one will learn the night sky without spending time star-hopping - with planisphere and unaided eye, binoculars, or a telescope. An added benefit is the myriad treasures one happens upon quite by chance while one is hunting a specific target. A couple years ago I came upon, quite by chance, a fabulous deal on a Celestron Ultima 2000, a "go-to" model capable of both alt-az and equatorial operation. I bought the scope mainly for it's optical quality but also for use at public star parties. There are two advantages for me: the scope is lighter and more compact than either of my Newtonians and I can more quickly find objects so that people waiting don't get bored and go away. "Oh, you've never seen a quadruple star? Well give me 30 seconds and I can show you one." I still use my Newtonians or my refractor for serious personal observing. Except for these and maybe other marginal advantages, I find that the go-to phenomenon is gimmicky and discourages beginners, especially, from simply scanning the sky to see what one may find. I am especially puzzled why the manufacturers promote their GPS models over all others. After all, how much trouble is it to align a scope on a couple of stars? Kim A. Hyatt, AIA SL&A Architects 331 South Rio Grande, Suite 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 801.322.5550 x122

3 2

Apogee Inc. 25X100mm Binoculars - Review - by Gary Honis
by karen vanderhule 28 Feb '03

28 Feb '03

Chuck, I get a web site when I go there, maybe you are looking at the back of your moniter.....anyway,try this Ron Vanderhule http://www.hostultra.com/~ghonis/apogee25x100.html

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Auto Find Feature that could still allow for equator...
by RStmarie＠aol.com 28 Feb '03

28 Feb '03

Brent, Whats your estimate on cost to put together your own 10" dob? Bob

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Auto Find Feature that could still allow for equator...
by RStmarie＠aol.com 28 Feb '03

28 Feb '03

I have really enjoyed this thread on go-to scopes. Lots of good commentary from people who really know and care about the hobby (and none of the punches have been below the belt). Right up front let me say, I feel just the way John does about buying a good all around scope; a go-to "piece of schmidt" is exactly the all around compromise I'd make, I even prefer the Meade. That said, I have not bought the scope yet, for some good reasons, even though, as Brent and Rich both have said, the best telescope is THE ONE YOU ACTUALLY USE. It sure is nice to have one (or several) to use and I intend to have one soon. But, Like a friend said, "The best boat in the world ... is the one your fishing buddy just paid for." It sure is nice to have the clubs own the scopes they do. The best astronomy money I ever spend is to join a club and meet the people who have 8" Clark's or 36" Dobs on trailers! The best astro time I spend, next to observing, is learning from these guys and gals. I find it funny that people have anywhere at home to put a scope the length of a pick-up truck bed, or as big around as a trash can. It amazes me people have one scope for planets and another for deep sky, and maybe one for the kids, and several pair of binos. I can't imagine having two or three regular nights off a week to grind a mirror. I barely have time to run out into my backyard with my 15x80 binos and look up for a half hour every other week. I can't imagine tapping the side of a dobsonian for 10 minutes to find a fuzz ball the size of a pin prick just to prove I can do it. But I have friends who do all of this, and I think they're great because they can and do. I'd still like to have that Meade LX200gps in the backyard all to my self.

2 1