You wrote: but I was not aware of anyone being harassed.
David Bennett was teasing Brent because Brent had the good since to favor longer focal lengths. It wasn't enough to send Brent off in a huff.
Jim.
(& Chuck & Jim & Dave & Dave)
But I am grateful that it 'went public'
This has been every educational for me.
For reasons I don't know and I have no idea where I got them,
I have been under the apparent misunderstanding that a lower f number
brought in more light. I know nothing of astronomy (which is why I joined)
and am certainly no photographer.
So I am grateful to have seen the exchanges. Maybe if I get to see enough of them I might learn enough to figure out even what kind of equipment would be best for my goals and abilities.
And it may be due to the same ignorance but I was not aware of anyone being harassed.
You all sound very experienced and significantly intelligent to me.
Thank you,
Rog
Jim Gibson wrote:
Brent
I apologies for my post going public and subjecting you to praise and harassment. I thought I grabbed your personal email address. I also apologize to everyone for cluttering the list with my personal request for tutorage from Brent; I will have to be more careful.
Chuck
Yes, I have been very influence by Brent and I would say that it has all been good. I really enjoy the Thursday night class
Dave and Dave
Thanks for watching out for me. This list is cool. We can all learn neat stuff together.
Jim
Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
50 inches and 40 mm gives 32X. With a wide field,
that is a bit over two degrees. With 87.5 inches and
a 40 mm, you have 55X and about 1.5 degrees. Still
great Milky Way views. With the f7, you can also get
stunning, high power planetary views with longer focal
length eyepieces (more eye relief) and easier viewing.
You don't have to try and look through as small a
hole.
I still would take the f7 over the f5, although f5 is
beter than f4.5.
Brent
--- David L Bennett wrote:
> Don't forget considerations of field of view! My
> 10" f/5 Cave with a
> 40mm Tele Vue Wide Field gives some very impressive
> Milky Way shots ;)
>
> On Friday, February 21, 2003, at 09:58 AM, Chuck
> Hards wrote:
>
> > Everyone should, unless there is a specific reason
> for
> > going "short". Of course, legitimate reasons
> include
> > transportation and ergonomics.
> >
> > Brent's always been right-on in that department!
> :)
> >
> > C.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Utah-Astronomy mailing list
> Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
>
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Utah-Astronomy mailing list
Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more