Yes, Chuck. I even own a couple of "N's". They are good for low mag deep sky, but doubles, clusters, and planets suffer. BTW, for those who don't know, an "N" is basically an erfle with a built in barlow. That's a bunch of glass to have to look through. Brent --- Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com> wrote:
I agree with you, Brent, but every time I mention that a certain design beginnig with an "N" is soft in the center, I get a healthy ration of sh- stuff from "N" owners.
--- Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Steve,
My experience has shown that the more glass in an eyepiece, the harder it is to get a better image. Newer designs has more surfaces, and more elements, and not necessarily better images. I still think the best (sharpest) images come from a good quality orthoscopic or plossl. The newer designs have great eye relief and extremely wide field, but lack the sharpnerss. My opinion, and your mileage may vary.
--- steve.nielsen@comcast.net wrote:
I have a dilema.
____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs