-----------------------------------

HoO_Germany

02 Oct 2006 11:54



-----------------------------------

OK . M-am uitat dupa preturi si ce mi-ai recomandat tu e dublu ... nu prea pot ..

Ar mai fi acel 80/600 de la celestron, care are review-uri foarte bune pentru banii aia .. si e doar 400$..cu micile lui neajusri (nu are focuser crayford)

si din ce vad .. o mica eroare de colimare ..

"Ok, now, finally, I will tell if it is any good, to which the simple answer is “Yes.” In fact optically it is without doubt the best small telescope (100mm and smaller) that I have ever used. The correction is almost perfect, and the lenses show a pretty smooth surface finish when star testing. Mine has a TINY bit of mis-collimation, but most people would never see it. It shows in a Cheshire in an academic way, but in real life, it is only visible on very bright stars when seeing causes the diffraction rings to flare a bit more brightly on one side than on the other. Like I said, I KNOW it is there, but in practice, the collimation error is WELL within the 3 arc-minute limit required for high-contrast viewing."

Voi ce intelegeti ?

Mai caut niste ED 100 acceptabile.. sa vedem ce gasesc

Multam de ajutor !  :)

Da, un Pentax 75 costa dublu, dar ESTE un Apo  :wink: . 
Si daca zici ca ti-ar place un Celestron ED, de ce nu ti-ar place un Skywatcher ED? Amandouo optice sant facute de acelas fabricant, de Skywatcher  :) . Si la Skywatcher ED ai si un Crayford-focusser, si costa mai putin ca Celestron. 
Un ED 100/900 exista de la Skywatcher, care este calitativ bun, si ieftin.

Despre testul de sus inteleg, ca el zice, comparand airy disc in intrafocal si extrafocal, se vad diferentii mici si din care se vede ca optica nu este justata pe axa optica bine.