Took the 152 out to our club star party tonight, and wanted to share
a few things with the group.

We were fortunate enough tonight to enjoy some of the best seeing
we've had in the Tulsa area for some time - though it sure didn't
look as though it was going to be that good starting out.  I arrived
at our club's observatory site about 30 minutes before sunset, but
the entire western sky was obscured by clouds that were being blown
to the north.  We didn't hold out a lot of hope, but we set up
anyway and waited.  The southern sky wasn't too bad, so I went ahead
and pointed the scope at M42 with my Nikon binoviewer and 19
Panoptics for the visitors and kids who would leave early.  I also
wanted to see if the Feathertouch retrofit to the 152 was as
successful as I'd hoped it would be (more on that later).  It turned
out that the view was enjoyed more by the club members than the
visitors - and every one of them said that it was the best view of
M42 they'd ever had out of any telescope.  Using both eyes with the
binoviewer and allowing the image to develop while observing let
everyone see more detail in the nebula and the dust lanes.  I
thought I caught a glimpse of the E component in the Trapezium with
averted vision, but maybe not.

Of course, the kids wanted to see planets, so I obliged them.
Saturn was spectacular.  With the 5mm Pentax Ortho at 240x, we were
easily able to discern both Cassini's and Encke's divisions as well
as several planetary bands.  The kids (and their parents) oohed and
aahed over that for quite a while.  Later Jupiter came up enough to
get out of the turbulence (though the skies actually got more steady
as the night wore on) and we observed that as well.  Both Io and
Europa transited the planetary disk, and it was well observed with
my 5.2mm Pentax XL (which actually provided more contrast and
surface detail than the 5mm Ortho).  The point at which Io was
ending its transit and Europa was entering it was quite spectacular -
  both moons were discernible against the disk of Jupiter, and one
could still see shadows projected on the disk.  It was quite
stunning, and enjoyed by everyone who was still there.

Another club member who was working on his Double Stars asked if we
could find a couple of doubles for him to log that he wasn't able to
split in his scope.  One was 38 Lyncis, a pair with only 2.7" of
separation with components of 3.8 and 6.5 (iirc).  Easy split with
the 7mm Pentax XL.  I've never observed that one before, so it was
gratifying to observe.

All of this was, to me, enhanced by the Feathertouch focuser that I
fitted with the adapter Detlef made for the TMB.  The amount of fine
control it added to focusing made both binoviewing and cyclops-
viewing a *joy*.  I had *no* problems whatsoever focusing the
binoviewer - even with the OTA pointed near the zenith while
initially observing Saturn.  The brake held the focuser in place
with the load of the bino and the 19 Pans easily.  Of course,
cyclops mode was simply stunning.  There were several folks who were
at the star party last month when I gave the 152 first "public"
light and had seen the image of M42 in the bino, but they all said
that having the Feathertouch made a real difference in achieving
critical focus (seeing was better tonight, but not so much so that
it was a major factor).  Even the seasoned observers in the club
were stunned - there were several "oh wows" and other stronger
exclamations from those more experienced viewers.  :)  Several of
the kids (ages were probably 6-10) were fascinated with it and
observed for several minutes (most gratifying to me - it makes it
all worthwhile to have the kids look for more than 10-15 seconds).
Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB consider
adding a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to
snap to focus on planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at
240x tonight than I've ever seen - even with better seeing
conditions - and I attribute that to being able to achieve better
focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch) and there is
no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and more
satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.

The wind picked up about 11PM and made it a bit unpleasant, so we
had to pack up earlier than we would have liked.  Hopefully tomorrow
night will be as good as tonight (but warmer, as forecasted) and
we'll go back out for another evening.

regards,

twhite

Mr. White,

Can you please provide a URL of a source that illustrates (and prices?) the
Feathertouch? I've seen it noted here and there on this board but otherwise
am unfamiliar with it. I use the JMI 2" Crayford focuser on my 10"f4
NewtFork. Is the Feathertouch comparable? Better?

Thanks,
Donald Rosenfield


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi All.

I finally got the 180mm F9 TMB APO mounted with a guide scope.
Thursday night was clear in NE Ohio but extensive snow cover in the
midwest amplified light pollution. The skies were mag ~4.5.

The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but not
cropped.

http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html

The above image is pretty much a test run image. No dark frame or
other noise reduction was performed other than averaging the 12
aligned images. The image was stretched using DDP then the luminance
layer was increased using the Color | Luminance & Gamma command in IP
1.69. Color was not G2V calibrated.

Increasing from 12 to 36-48 300 second exposures at ISO 650 and
reducing the focal length to F7 would bring out the outer loop and
most of the remain nebulosity.

Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????

Mike

In a message dated 2/1/03 3:08:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
twhite@... writes:

<< Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB consider adding
a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to snap to focus on
planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at 240x tonight than I've ever
seen - even with better seeing conditions - and I attribute that to being
able to achieve better focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch)
and there is no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and
more satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.

        I can second everything Tony said.  The combination of Thomas's superb
optics with a Feather Touch focuser places my TMB 100/800 LW far above any 4"
aperture telescope I've ever used (and that includes three A-P 4" f/8
StarFires).  IMHO the Feather Touch is simply the best focuser you can buy,
period.

PaulB




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Can you please provide a URL of a source that illustrates (and
prices?) the
> Feathertouch? I've seen it noted here and there on this board but
otherwise
> am unfamiliar with it. I use the JMI 2" Crayford focuser on my
10"f4
> NewtFork. Is the Feathertouch comparable? Better?

Donald,

See: http://www.astrofieds.com/docs/feathertouch.htm

The Feathertouch is IMO the best focuser available anywhere.  It is
patented as well (a message from Paul Bock from a few days ago
refers to the USPO database for it).  I had a JMI Crayford some time
ago which was a horrible disappointment to me - mechanical fit was
terrible, and JMI wouldn't fix it.  The Feathertouch is a work of
mechanical art, as well as being a joy to use - the motion is
incredibly smooth and stable as well as accurate.  One of the major
reasons for that is the fact that the drawtube has bearings whose
races are actually cut into the drawtube for superior stability -
that focuser can hold the weight of my 2" diagonal, binoviewer and
eyepieces or my 2" diagonal and 31T5 Nagler with absolutely NO shift
of any kind whatsoever.

Also, there is a picture in the files section of this board which
shows a picture of Tim Povlick's 152 with the Feathertouch
retrofit.  Looks just like mine.  I would also refer you to several
reviews on CloudyNights - specifically Motti Pikelny's review of his
Vixen-tubed TMB that he had Detlef Schmidt (owner of Starlight
Instruments and the designer/manufacturer of the Feathertouch)
retrofit to his tube.  I think you'll find his comments compelling.

regards,

twhite

I enjoyed your post.  I also have the 152 and am considering changing
the focuser.  What cost was involved in changing out to a feathertouch
focuser?  What is needed?  Can a real amateur make the change or is
professional help needed?

I regularly see both E and F components through my 152 when I haul it to
my friends house in Boulder City, Nevada.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony White <twhite@...> [mailto:twhite@...]
Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 12:08 AM
To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [tmboptical] Quasi-observing report

Took the 152 out to our club star party tonight, and wanted to share
a few things with the group.

We were fortunate enough tonight to enjoy some of the best seeing
we've had in the Tulsa area for some time - though it sure didn't
look as though it was going to be that good starting out.  I arrived
at our club's observatory site about 30 minutes before sunset, but
the entire western sky was obscured by clouds that were being blown
to the north.  We didn't hold out a lot of hope, but we set up
anyway and waited.  The southern sky wasn't too bad, so I went ahead
and pointed the scope at M42 with my Nikon binoviewer and 19
Panoptics for the visitors and kids who would leave early.  I also
wanted to see if the Feathertouch retrofit to the 152 was as
successful as I'd hoped it would be (more on that later).  It turned
out that the view was enjoyed more by the club members than the
visitors - and every one of them said that it was the best view of
M42 they'd ever had out of any telescope.  Using both eyes with the
binoviewer and allowing the image to develop while observing let
everyone see more detail in the nebula and the dust lanes.  I
thought I caught a glimpse of the E component in the Trapezium with
averted vision, but maybe not.

Of course, the kids wanted to see planets, so I obliged them.
Saturn was spectacular.  With the 5mm Pentax Ortho at 240x, we were
easily able to discern both Cassini's and Encke's divisions as well
as several planetary bands.  The kids (and their parents) oohed and
aahed over that for quite a while.  Later Jupiter came up enough to
get out of the turbulence (though the skies actually got more steady
as the night wore on) and we observed that as well.  Both Io and
Europa transited the planetary disk, and it was well observed with
my 5.2mm Pentax XL (which actually provided more contrast and
surface detail than the 5mm Ortho).  The point at which Io was
ending its transit and Europa was entering it was quite spectacular -
  both moons were discernible against the disk of Jupiter, and one
could still see shadows projected on the disk.  It was quite
stunning, and enjoyed by everyone who was still there.

Another club member who was working on his Double Stars asked if we
could find a couple of doubles for him to log that he wasn't able to
split in his scope.  One was 38 Lyncis, a pair with only 2.7" of
separation with components of 3.8 and 6.5 (iirc).  Easy split with
the 7mm Pentax XL.  I've never observed that one before, so it was
gratifying to observe.

All of this was, to me, enhanced by the Feathertouch focuser that I
fitted with the adapter Detlef made for the TMB.  The amount of fine
control it added to focusing made both binoviewing and cyclops-
viewing a *joy*.  I had *no* problems whatsoever focusing the
binoviewer - even with the OTA pointed near the zenith while
initially observing Saturn.  The brake held the focuser in place
with the load of the bino and the 19 Pans easily.  Of course,
cyclops mode was simply stunning.  There were several folks who were
at the star party last month when I gave the 152 first "public"
light and had seen the image of M42 in the bino, but they all said
that having the Feathertouch made a real difference in achieving
critical focus (seeing was better tonight, but not so much so that
it was a major factor).  Even the seasoned observers in the club
were stunned - there were several "oh wows" and other stronger
exclamations from those more experienced viewers.  :)  Several of
the kids (ages were probably 6-10) were fascinated with it and
observed for several minutes (most gratifying to me - it makes it
all worthwhile to have the kids look for more than 10-15 seconds).
Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB consider
adding a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to
snap to focus on planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at
240x tonight than I've ever seen - even with better seeing
conditions - and I attribute that to being able to achieve better
focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch) and there is
no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and more
satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.

The wind picked up about 11PM and made it a bit unpleasant, so we
had to pack up earlier than we would have liked.  Hopefully tomorrow
night will be as good as tonight (but warmer, as forecasted) and
we'll go back out for another evening.

regards,

twhite




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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Well Tim you have more questions than answers.
Someone posted that these eyepieces will have Zeiss coatings.
Thats why I asked.

SL
>
> Why do you think they let others use their technology?  More
> specifically why do you think they have let others use the process?

> Tim

John,

Thanks for your comments.

Nothing needs to be "changed" to adapt the Feathertouch to the TMB
focuser.  Starlight Instruments makes an adapter plate that threads
into the end of the 4" focuser.  All you need to do is thread that
adapter into the end of your focuser tube and then attach the
Feathertouch (it slots into a machined hole in the adapter and is
secured with three set screws).  A real amateur can make the change
in a matter of minutes.

Having both is nice simply because one can achieve rough focus with
the TMB focuser and fine focus with the Feathertouch - which is
really nice when you have a number of people who want to view
through the same scope and all need slightly different focus.  The
TMB focuser just doesn't have the range of tension it needs to make
this easy - especially with a binoviewer load and pointed near
zenith.  I had problems with mine wanting to rack out immediately
upon loosening of the focuser tension screw.  The Feathertouch has a
shaft brake which, instead of locking against the focuser drawtube
itself, pushes a flat piece of metal against the shaft tensioned
with a screw - which gives a lot of control over the amount of
tension on the focuser shaft while not allowing the focuser to rack
back out.

If there is enough interest, I can take and post photos of the
focuser and adapter plate seperately and together and the end result
on my tube.

regards,

twhite

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "John Erickson" <jerickson@w...>
wrote:
> I enjoyed your post.  I also have the 152 and am considering
changing
> the focuser.  What cost was involved in changing out to a
feathertouch
> focuser?  What is needed?  Can a real amateur make the change or is
> professional help needed?
>
> I regularly see both E and F components through my 152 when I haul
it to
> my friends house in Boulder City, Nevada.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony White <twhite@d...> [mailto:twhite@d...]
> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 12:08 AM
> To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [tmboptical] Quasi-observing report
>
> Took the 152 out to our club star party tonight, and wanted to
share
> a few things with the group.
>
> We were fortunate enough tonight to enjoy some of the best seeing
> we've had in the Tulsa area for some time - though it sure didn't
> look as though it was going to be that good starting out.  I
arrived
> at our club's observatory site about 30 minutes before sunset, but
> the entire western sky was obscured by clouds that were being
blown
> to the north.  We didn't hold out a lot of hope, but we set up
> anyway and waited.  The southern sky wasn't too bad, so I went
ahead
> and pointed the scope at M42 with my Nikon binoviewer and 19
> Panoptics for the visitors and kids who would leave early.  I also
> wanted to see if the Feathertouch retrofit to the 152 was as
> successful as I'd hoped it would be (more on that later).  It
turned
> out that the view was enjoyed more by the club members than the
> visitors - and every one of them said that it was the best view of
> M42 they'd ever had out of any telescope.  Using both eyes with
the
> binoviewer and allowing the image to develop while observing let
> everyone see more detail in the nebula and the dust lanes.  I
> thought I caught a glimpse of the E component in the Trapezium
with
> averted vision, but maybe not.
>
> Of course, the kids wanted to see planets, so I obliged them.
> Saturn was spectacular.  With the 5mm Pentax Ortho at 240x, we
were
> easily able to discern both Cassini's and Encke's divisions as
well
> as several planetary bands.  The kids (and their parents) oohed
and
> aahed over that for quite a while.  Later Jupiter came up enough
to
> get out of the turbulence (though the skies actually got more
steady
> as the night wore on) and we observed that as well.  Both Io and
> Europa transited the planetary disk, and it was well observed with
> my 5.2mm Pentax XL (which actually provided more contrast and
> surface detail than the 5mm Ortho).  The point at which Io was
> ending its transit and Europa was entering it was quite
spectacular -
>  both moons were discernible against the disk of Jupiter, and one
> could still see shadows projected on the disk.  It was quite
> stunning, and enjoyed by everyone who was still there.
>
> Another club member who was working on his Double Stars asked if
we
> could find a couple of doubles for him to log that he wasn't able
to
> split in his scope.  One was 38 Lyncis, a pair with only 2.7" of
> separation with components of 3.8 and 6.5 (iirc).  Easy split with
> the 7mm Pentax XL.  I've never observed that one before, so it was
> gratifying to observe.
>
> All of this was, to me, enhanced by the Feathertouch focuser that
I
> fitted with the adapter Detlef made for the TMB.  The amount of
fine
> control it added to focusing made both binoviewing and cyclops-
> viewing a *joy*.  I had *no* problems whatsoever focusing the
> binoviewer - even with the OTA pointed near the zenith while
> initially observing Saturn.  The brake held the focuser in place
> with the load of the bino and the 19 Pans easily.  Of course,
> cyclops mode was simply stunning.  There were several folks who
were
> at the star party last month when I gave the 152 first "public"
> light and had seen the image of M42 in the bino, but they all said
> that having the Feathertouch made a real difference in achieving
> critical focus (seeing was better tonight, but not so much so that
> it was a major factor).  Even the seasoned observers in the club
> were stunned - there were several "oh wows" and other stronger
> exclamations from those more experienced viewers.  :)  Several of
> the kids (ages were probably 6-10) were fascinated with it and
> observed for several minutes (most gratifying to me - it makes it
> all worthwhile to have the kids look for more than 10-15
seconds).
> Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB
consider
> adding a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to
> snap to focus on planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at
> 240x tonight than I've ever seen - even with better seeing
> conditions - and I attribute that to being able to achieve better
> focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch) and there is
> no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and
more
> satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.
>
> The wind picked up about 11PM and made it a bit unpleasant, so we
> had to pack up earlier than we would have liked.  Hopefully
tomorrow
> night will be as good as tonight (but warmer, as forecasted) and
> we'll go back out for another evening.
>
> regards,
>
> twhite
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tmboptical-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi Clevis:

Enjoyed reading your observation. Your doing quite well with your fine TMB
115mm. I was out recently and noted some shading along the inner portion of
the B-Ring also, which on one side appeared to show a small white area
between two areas of shading. The sketch I made that night is at:

http://home.fiam.net/ericj/saturn011903.html


Sad day for Nasa, the country, and the world today...

Eric

>> - Saturn's rings are bright and clear.  We see the B ring as more than
>> flat gray - almost a texture - almost multiple lines of slightly
>> different grays - I call it corduroy.  On the inner edge of the B
>> ring, next to the Crepe ring, there is a definite darkening of the
>> white color to a light gray.  It changes.  Sometimes this area takes
>> on a very pronounced saw tooth look with points toward the Cassini
>> Division.  The Cassini Division is sharp and distinct - sometimes
>> seeming to be less black than outside the rings.  We see the Crepe
>> ring semi transparent and wispy - not a solid evenness.  It becomes a
>> dark line as it crosses the globe.  The globe seems a cream color with
>> a very light tanish pole, a slightly darker thick belt, and sometimes
>> a second thinner belt.



---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses at mail.fiam.net]

Hi Clevis, Eric.

Eric, your sketch shows exactly the B ring shading I have seen on best nights of
Alaskan seeing with my TMB100, binoviewer, Baader FFC and a pair of 18 U.O.
orthos.

best regards
Mike C



> Hi Clevis:
>
> Enjoyed reading your observation. Your doing quite well with your fine TMB
> 115mm. I was out recently and noted some shading along the inner portion of
> the B-Ring also, which on one side appeared to show a small white area
> between two areas of shading. The sketch I made that night is at:
>
> http://home.fiam.net/ericj/saturn011903.html
>
>

Curiosity has me, was this problem(?) taken to Thomas and Markus in
private before being splattered on the web?????

Thomas has had to defend himself on the web before with issues (not
his problem!) that should have been handled in a more polite way.

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "jamesw767 <jamesw767@y...>"
<jamesw767@y...> wrote:
> I have noticed that some of my coating on my TMB has come off.  A
> vary small amount. Does this make any effect on the lens? Can this
> lens be recoated if more comes off?   What does the Coating do?

For those who own 4" TMB with retractable dewcap 6" in diameter.
What cap from household materials did you use to cover it (since no
cap is supplied with the original scope)? And if in case Markus
sells one (do you Markus?), what kind of cap is it in terms of
build, colors, etc. (Is it a Vixen cap Markus?)? I found out Vixen 4"
apos have dew shield with diameter of 5.5" so it can't fit in the 4"
TMB which has 6" diameter, so if Markus cap is vixen made, pls share
what model is it. Thanks.

Paul

Paul,

I'm a bit behind on my mail, so I apologize if this is redundant, but you should
seek out
a TMB cap as replacement.  Not only will the TMB cap fit and work properly, it
is also
functional.  While most dew caps are by name only, the TMB cap actually does a
superb job
at preventing dew.  I have yet to ever dew up.

WG


----- Original Message -----
From: <paulhathaway@...>
To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 6:43 PM
Subject: [tmboptical] 4" TMB Missing Dew Cap


>
> I have a 4" TMB 100/800 F8 and it comes without any dew cap.
> I plan to order one at Vixen America and it asks what model my
> scope is. So what vixen refractor model has the same diameter
> as the 4" TMB dewshield which is 6 inches?? For those who have
> the Vixen FL102S or Vixen VX102ED. Can you please measure
> what is the size of it's dew cap or dew shield in diameter?? It will
> fit the 4" TMB if it's 6 inches. I'm sure other 4" TMB owners would
> be interested to know too. I use a plastic cap from jar as dew cap
> and it always fall down and putting it back will introduce quite a
> dust to the inside of the shield.so I want the metallic one that fits
> it exactly.
>
> Paul

I am sorry I realize you are talking about a different scope model altogether.
:)

Good luck on your quest!

Mike


----- Original Message -----
From: <paulhathaway@...>
To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 4:42 PM
Subject: [tmboptical] 4" TMB dew cap? (attn: Markus)


>
> For those who own 4" TMB with retractable dewcap 6" in diameter.
> What cap from household materials did you use to cover it (since no
> cap is supplied with the original scope)? And if in case Markus
> sells one (do you Markus?), what kind of cap is it in terms of
> build, colors, etc. (Is it a Vixen cap Markus?)? I found out Vixen 4"
> apos have dew shield with diameter of 5.5" so it can't fit in the 4"
> TMB which has 6" diameter, so if Markus cap is vixen made, pls share
> what model is it. Thanks.
>
> Paul
>

Hi, Mike:

A marvelous image! Congratulations, and thank you for sharing it. What mount did
you use for tracking?

Eric Baumgartner

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Mike Unsold <mike@...>
   To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 8:50 AM
   Subject: [tmboptical] M42 - First image with 180mm TMB and Canon 1Ds


   Hi All.

   I finally got the 180mm F9 TMB APO mounted with a guide scope.
   Thursday night was clear in NE Ohio but extensive snow cover in the
   midwest amplified light pollution. The skies were mag ~4.5.

   The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
   exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
   of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but not
   cropped.

   http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html

   The above image is pretty much a test run image. No dark frame or
   other noise reduction was performed other than averaging the 12
   aligned images. The image was stretched using DDP then the luminance
   layer was increased using the Color | Luminance & Gamma command in IP
   1.69. Color was not G2V calibrated.

   Increasing from 12 to 36-48 300 second exposures at ISO 650 and
   reducing the focal length to F7 would bring out the outer loop and
   most of the remain nebulosity.

   Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????

   Mike




   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.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tony:

I'm about to order a Feathertouch focuser and adapter for the 3 in. focuser of
my TMB 130. I spoke at length with Detlef Schmidt yesterday, and he was very
helpful and patient in answering my questions. Still, it would be a tremendous
help to see photos of your focuser and adapter plate in pieces and assembled.

Thanks in advance,

Eric Baumgartner


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Tony White <twhite@...>
   To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 4:59 PM
   Subject: [tmboptical] Re: Quasi-observing report


   John,

   Thanks for your comments.

   Nothing needs to be "changed" to adapt the Feathertouch to the TMB
   focuser.  Starlight Instruments makes an adapter plate that threads
   into the end of the 4" focuser.  All you need to do is thread that
   adapter into the end of your focuser tube and then attach the
   Feathertouch (it slots into a machined hole in the adapter and is
   secured with three set screws).  A real amateur can make the change
   in a matter of minutes.

   Having both is nice simply because one can achieve rough focus with
   the TMB focuser and fine focus with the Feathertouch - which is
   really nice when you have a number of people who want to view
   through the same scope and all need slightly different focus.  The
   TMB focuser just doesn't have the range of tension it needs to make
   this easy - especially with a binoviewer load and pointed near
   zenith.  I had problems with mine wanting to rack out immediately
   upon loosening of the focuser tension screw.  The Feathertouch has a
   shaft brake which, instead of locking against the focuser drawtube
   itself, pushes a flat piece of metal against the shaft tensioned
   with a screw - which gives a lot of control over the amount of
   tension on the focuser shaft while not allowing the focuser to rack
   back out.

   If there is enough interest, I can take and post photos of the
   focuser and adapter plate seperately and together and the end result
   on my tube.

   regards,

   twhite

   --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "John Erickson" <jerickson@w...>
   wrote:
   > I enjoyed your post.  I also have the 152 and am considering
   changing
   > the focuser.  What cost was involved in changing out to a
   feathertouch
   > focuser?  What is needed?  Can a real amateur make the change or is
   > professional help needed?
   >
   > I regularly see both E and F components through my 152 when I haul
   it to
   > my friends house in Boulder City, Nevada.
   >
   > -----Original Message-----
   > From: Tony White <twhite@d...> [mailto:twhite@d...]
   > Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 12:08 AM
   > To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
   > Subject: [tmboptical] Quasi-observing report
   >
   > Took the 152 out to our club star party tonight, and wanted to
   share
   > a few things with the group.
   >
   > We were fortunate enough tonight to enjoy some of the best seeing
   > we've had in the Tulsa area for some time - though it sure didn't
   > look as though it was going to be that good starting out.  I
   arrived
   > at our club's observatory site about 30 minutes before sunset, but
   > the entire western sky was obscured by clouds that were being
   blown
   > to the north.  We didn't hold out a lot of hope, but we set up
   > anyway and waited.  The southern sky wasn't too bad, so I went
   ahead
   > and pointed the scope at M42 with my Nikon binoviewer and 19
   > Panoptics for the visitors and kids who would leave early.  I also
   > wanted to see if the Feathertouch retrofit to the 152 was as
   > successful as I'd hoped it would be (more on that later).  It
   turned
   > out that the view was enjoyed more by the club members than the
   > visitors - and every one of them said that it was the best view of
   > M42 they'd ever had out of any telescope.  Using both eyes with
   the
   > binoviewer and allowing the image to develop while observing let
   > everyone see more detail in the nebula and the dust lanes.  I
   > thought I caught a glimpse of the E component in the Trapezium
   with
   > averted vision, but maybe not.
   >
   > Of course, the kids wanted to see planets, so I obliged them.
   > Saturn was spectacular.  With the 5mm Pentax Ortho at 240x, we
   were
   > easily able to discern both Cassini's and Encke's divisions as
   well
   > as several planetary bands.  The kids (and their parents) oohed
   and
   > aahed over that for quite a while.  Later Jupiter came up enough
   to
   > get out of the turbulence (though the skies actually got more
   steady
   > as the night wore on) and we observed that as well.  Both Io and
   > Europa transited the planetary disk, and it was well observed with
   > my 5.2mm Pentax XL (which actually provided more contrast and
   > surface detail than the 5mm Ortho).  The point at which Io was
   > ending its transit and Europa was entering it was quite
   spectacular -
   >  both moons were discernible against the disk of Jupiter, and one
   > could still see shadows projected on the disk.  It was quite
   > stunning, and enjoyed by everyone who was still there.
   >
   > Another club member who was working on his Double Stars asked if
   we
   > could find a couple of doubles for him to log that he wasn't able
   to
   > split in his scope.  One was 38 Lyncis, a pair with only 2.7" of
   > separation with components of 3.8 and 6.5 (iirc).  Easy split with
   > the 7mm Pentax XL.  I've never observed that one before, so it was
   > gratifying to observe.
   >
   > All of this was, to me, enhanced by the Feathertouch focuser that
   I
   > fitted with the adapter Detlef made for the TMB.  The amount of
   fine
   > control it added to focusing made both binoviewing and cyclops-
   > viewing a *joy*.  I had *no* problems whatsoever focusing the
   > binoviewer - even with the OTA pointed near the zenith while
   > initially observing Saturn.  The brake held the focuser in place
   > with the load of the bino and the 19 Pans easily.  Of course,
   > cyclops mode was simply stunning.  There were several folks who
   were
   > at the star party last month when I gave the 152 first "public"
   > light and had seen the image of M42 in the bino, but they all said
   > that having the Feathertouch made a real difference in achieving
   > critical focus (seeing was better tonight, but not so much so that
   > it was a major factor).  Even the seasoned observers in the club
   > were stunned - there were several "oh wows" and other stronger
   > exclamations from those more experienced viewers.  :)  Several of
   > the kids (ages were probably 6-10) were fascinated with it and
   > observed for several minutes (most gratifying to me - it makes it
   > all worthwhile to have the kids look for more than 10-15
   seconds).
   > Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB
   consider
   > adding a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to
   > snap to focus on planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at
   > 240x tonight than I've ever seen - even with better seeing
   > conditions - and I attribute that to being able to achieve better
   > focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch) and there is
   > no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and
   more
   > satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.
   >
   > The wind picked up about 11PM and made it a bit unpleasant, so we
   > had to pack up earlier than we would have liked.  Hopefully
   tomorrow
   > night will be as good as tonight (but warmer, as forecasted) and
   > we'll go back out for another evening.
   >
   > regards,
   >
   > twhite
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   > tmboptical-unsubscribe@egroups.com
   >
   >
   >
   > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
   > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


   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.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Eric.

The 180mm F9 is mounted on an Astro-Physics 1200 GTO. Autoguiding is
necessary and is provided by a 76mm Televue APO with SBIG STV. The AP
1200 handles the load effortlessly and would easily guide an 8" F9.

The views of the planets have been just excellent.

Mike

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hi, Mike:

A marvelous image! Congratulations, and thank you for sharing it.
What mount
did you use for tracking?

Eric Baumgartner

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Unsold <mike@m...>
To: tmboptical@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 8:50 AM
Subject: [tmboptical] M42 - First image with 180mm TMB and Canon 1Ds


Hi All.

I finally got the 180mm F9 TMB APO mounted with a guide scope.
Thursday night was clear in NE Ohio but extensive snow cover in the
midwest amplified light pollution. The skies were mag ~4.5.

The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but not
cropped.

http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html

The above image is pretty much a test run image. No dark frame or
other noise reduction was performed other than averaging the 12
aligned images. The image was stretched using DDP then the luminance
layer was increased using the Color | Luminance & Gamma command in IP
1.69. Color was not G2V calibrated.

Increasing from 12 to 36-48 300 second exposures at ISO 650 and
reducing the focal length to F7 would bring out the outer loop and
most of the remain nebulosity.

Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????

Mike

Exactly what is your problem? This is a TMB group; I was not accusing
anybody of anything. I wanted some advise on a SMALL thing on my lens. I
will thing twice before I post because some in this group choose to not be
supportive.

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "wjburg <wjburg@y...>" <wjburg@y...>
wrote:
> Curiosity has me, was this problem(?) taken to Thomas and Markus in
> private before being splattered on the web?????
>
> Thomas has had to defend himself on the web before with issues (not
> his problem!) that should have been handled in a more polite way.
>
> --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "jamesw767 <jamesw767@y...>"
> <jamesw767@y...> wrote:
> > I have noticed that some of my coating on my TMB has come off.  A
> > vary small amount. Does this make any effect on the lens? Can this
> > lens be recoated if more comes off?   What does the Coating do?

James and all,

I do not think there is any problem here, only a simple misunderstanding.  The
coating
technology used by TMB is of the highest quality, like all other aspects of the
construction.  In my experience, the coating is both very durable (hard) and
also
extremely uniform.  But that is not to say that there cannot be flaws as no one
is
perfect.  I have seen many small "spots" appear on I-M correctors (M-Newts), and
I have
long suspected that a possibility of the cause may be improperly cleaned
surfaces prior to
coating.

Whether your spot is actual or just a surface contaminant, may I suggest the
following:

Your lens is an extremely precision, polished surface.  Do not attempt to remove
it by
cleaning.  If it is a contaminant, it may clean off nicely with acetone, etc.,
but each
time you clean, you risk far more damage than any spot can do to your image, via
the
chance of scratches, etc.   Such spots, real or superficial, pose no measurable
effect on
performance or image quality.  The lens should only be cleaned when absolutely
necessary.
Whether a smudge or a real "spot" in the coating, the effect is totally
inconsequential to
the telescope performance, believe me.  It causes only a few % difference in
light
throughput on an extremely small area of the lens.  Normal dust accumulation
will do as
much or more.  Cleaning, you may end up with both still a spot, plus further
damage.  The
biggest effect such a spot may have is only on the cosmetics (and the value you
place on
them).

Have someone look at it who can determine conclusively which it is, if you are
that
bothered by it.  I am in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is close to you, and could make
that
determination.  I might also suggest an e-mail to Tom, etc., whereas he may be
able to
determine by your descriptions what the nature of the spot is.  If a smudge, he
has very
explicit recommendations on how to proceed with cleaning.  I advise following
his
recommendations to the letter, and not using "generic" cleaning methods.

Do remember that all coatings are extremely thin and "fragile" no matter what
their
nature.  They play no role in the image forming process, but only act as a
slight
impedence matching layer, to make a phase adjustment to the photons so that a
few more
pass through the surface rather than be reflected off, as would be normal.  As
such, most
coatings are by nature a more or less "temporary" enhancement, depending on
their exposure
to the elements.

In general, I think it is reasonable to say that such coating "issues" have had
an
extremely low incidence of occuring with TMB instruments, and should not be
given any more
significance than they deserve.  If you have one or a few pinholes, accept them
for what
they are:  just a few inconsequential and superficial birthmarks in what is
indeed a very,
very fine, handcrafted telescope!

WayneG


----- Original Message -----
From: <jamesw767@...>
To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 11:07 AM
Subject: [tmboptical] Re: Coating


>
> Exactly what is your problem? This is a TMB group; I was not accusing
> anybody of anything. I wanted some advise on a SMALL thing on my lens. I
> will thing twice before I post because some in this group choose to not be
> supportive.
>
> --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "wjburg <wjburg@y...>" <wjburg@y...>
> wrote:
> > Curiosity has me, was this problem(?) taken to Thomas and Markus in
> > private before being splattered on the web?????
> >
> > Thomas has had to defend himself on the web before with issues (not
> > his problem!) that should have been handled in a more polite way.
> >
> > --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "jamesw767 <jamesw767@y...>"
> > <jamesw767@y...> wrote:
> > > I have noticed that some of my coating on my TMB has come off.  A
> > > vary small amount. Does this make any effect on the lens? Can this
> > > lens be recoated if more comes off?   What does the Coating do?

For what it's worth, I have a pair of WWII vintage 7x50
binoculars that say "U.S. Navy - Bureau of Aeronautics" on them.  The
coatings are absolutely trashy looking. Blotches all over the place.
When I compare them to my Nikon Prostar 7x50's with perfect looking
coating I can't see a nickle's worth of difference in the performance.
      Maybe the Nikons are just really bad, but I don't think so.

Harvey

Hi Tony,
   What a great evening observing. Congratulations! I drove up to my
farm yesterday to observe. I learned of the Columbia disaster on the
way and thought twice about obsaerving last night. I went ahead,
thinking about the seven astronauts as I observed. The TMB 8" F/9 is
a superb telescope as is your 152. My eyes are not as keene as yours,
Cleve's and Erics but the views were Very nice. Saturn was
magnificent and Jupiter later in the evening as well. The GRS
transited about 10:50 and I enjoyed watching it and the knotted ropes
of white cloud (ala Clevis) following behind. The color of the GRS is
a Salmon-orange, and fairly prominent to me. Sad evening but good to
be out, under the stars.

Jim


  <twhite@d...> wrote:
> Took the 152 out to our club star party tonight, and wanted to
share
> a few things with the group.
>
> We were fortunate enough tonight to enjoy some of the best seeing
> we've had in the Tulsa area for some time - though it sure didn't
> look as though it was going to be that good starting out.  I
arrived
> at our club's observatory site about 30 minutes before sunset, but
> the entire western sky was obscured by clouds that were being blown
> to the north.  We didn't hold out a lot of hope, but we set up
> anyway and waited.  The southern sky wasn't too bad, so I went
ahead
> and pointed the scope at M42 with my Nikon binoviewer and 19
> Panoptics for the visitors and kids who would leave early.  I also
> wanted to see if the Feathertouch retrofit to the 152 was as
> successful as I'd hoped it would be (more on that later).  It
turned
> out that the view was enjoyed more by the club members than the
> visitors - and every one of them said that it was the best view of
> M42 they'd ever had out of any telescope.  Using both eyes with the
> binoviewer and allowing the image to develop while observing let
> everyone see more detail in the nebula and the dust lanes.  I
> thought I caught a glimpse of the E component in the Trapezium with
> averted vision, but maybe not.
>
> Of course, the kids wanted to see planets, so I obliged them.
> Saturn was spectacular.  With the 5mm Pentax Ortho at 240x, we were
> easily able to discern both Cassini's and Encke's divisions as well
> as several planetary bands.  The kids (and their parents) oohed and
> aahed over that for quite a while.  Later Jupiter came up enough to
> get out of the turbulence (though the skies actually got more
steady
> as the night wore on) and we observed that as well.  Both Io and
> Europa transited the planetary disk, and it was well observed with
> my 5.2mm Pentax XL (which actually provided more contrast and
> surface detail than the 5mm Ortho).  The point at which Io was
> ending its transit and Europa was entering it was quite
spectacular -
>  both moons were discernible against the disk of Jupiter, and one
> could still see shadows projected on the disk.  It was quite
> stunning, and enjoyed by everyone who was still there.
>
> Another club member who was working on his Double Stars asked if we
> could find a couple of doubles for him to log that he wasn't able
to
> split in his scope.  One was 38 Lyncis, a pair with only 2.7" of
> separation with components of 3.8 and 6.5 (iirc).  Easy split with
> the 7mm Pentax XL.  I've never observed that one before, so it was
> gratifying to observe.
>
> All of this was, to me, enhanced by the Feathertouch focuser that I
> fitted with the adapter Detlef made for the TMB.  The amount of
fine
> control it added to focusing made both binoviewing and cyclops-
> viewing a *joy*.  I had *no* problems whatsoever focusing the
> binoviewer - even with the OTA pointed near the zenith while
> initially observing Saturn.  The brake held the focuser in place
> with the load of the bino and the 19 Pans easily.  Of course,
> cyclops mode was simply stunning.  There were several folks who
were
> at the star party last month when I gave the 152 first "public"
> light and had seen the image of M42 in the bino, but they all said
> that having the Feathertouch made a real difference in achieving
> critical focus (seeing was better tonight, but not so much so that
> it was a major factor).  Even the seasoned observers in the club
> were stunned - there were several "oh wows" and other stronger
> exclamations from those more experienced viewers.  :)  Several of
> the kids (ages were probably 6-10) were fascinated with it and
> observed for several minutes (most gratifying to me - it makes it
> all worthwhile to have the kids look for more than 10-15 seconds).
> Bottom line - I would *highly* recommend anyone with a TMB consider
> adding a Feathertouch to their scope.  It really made it easy to
> snap to focus on planets.  I saw more detail viewable in Saturn at
> 240x tonight than I've ever seen - even with better seeing
> conditions - and I attribute that to being able to achieve better
> focus.  I tried both (stock focuser and Feathertouch) and there is
> no question in my mind that the Feathertouch is much easier and
more
> satisfying to use and worth every penny spent.
>
> The wind picked up about 11PM and made it a bit unpleasant, so we
> had to pack up earlier than we would have liked.  Hopefully
tomorrow
> night will be as good as tonight (but warmer, as forecasted) and
> we'll go back out for another evening.
>
> regards,
>
> twhite

Wow  Mike. That's a superb image! Just beautiful.

Jim

<mike@m...> wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I finally got the 180mm F9 TMB APO mounted with a guide scope.
> Thursday night was clear in NE Ohio but extensive snow cover in the
> midwest amplified light pollution. The skies were mag ~4.5.
>
> The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
> exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
> of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but
not
> cropped.
>
> http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html
>
> The above image is pretty much a test run image. No dark frame or
> other noise reduction was performed other than averaging the 12
> aligned images. The image was stretched using DDP then the
luminance
> layer was increased using the Color | Luminance & Gamma command in
IP
> 1.69. Color was not G2V calibrated.
>
> Increasing from 12 to 36-48 300 second exposures at ISO 650 and
> reducing the focal length to F7 would bring out the outer loop and
> most of the remain nebulosity.
>
> Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????
>
> Mike

Hi Mike:

Thanks for sharing your observation with us. Sounds like your TMB100mm is
working very well for you.

Clear Skies,

Eric

>Hi Clevis, Eric.
>
>Eric, your sketch shows exactly the B ring shading I have seen on best
nights of
>Alaskan seeing with my TMB100, binoviewer, Baader FFC and a pair of 18 U.O.
>orthos.
>
>best regards
>Mike C
>
>
>
>> Hi Clevis:
>>
>> Enjoyed reading your observation. Your doing quite well with your fine
TMB
>> 115mm. I was out recently and noted some shading along the inner portion
of
>> the B-Ring also, which on one side appeared to show a small white area
>> between two areas of shading. The sketch I made that night is at:
>>
>> http://home.fiam.net/ericj/saturn011903.html
>>
>>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>tmboptical-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses at mail.fiam.net]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses at mail.fiam.net]

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, Donald Rosenfield <cardar@c...>
wrote:
> James,

Get a good sight of something in your telescope, the Moon, a
galaxy,whatever. Then put your or a friend's (don't use an enemy's
for this) thumb in front of the objective. You won't be able to tell
that the obstruction is there. Once thee hast that simple fact
ensonced in thy headbone ask thyself what difference to thy
observing that blem could be causing.

Donald
>

Donald,
I think you should examine your attitude in your response to James'
problem, in particular the last sentence / quip. It was quite simply
an unhelpful remark to a person who is quite rightly upset at a
(possible) circumstance that has not only arisen but may also become
worse as time goes on. In addition, a reply of this nature does
nothing but arouse a degree of anger in whoever asks such a question
and who should reasonably expect a sensible and helpful reply.
James' subsequent post suggests that he has been none too impressed
with certain postings on his asking for information / viewpoints.

To pay a substantial amount of money for a scope, any scope and for
something like this to happen is not what any owner would want to
see; including you. If this happened to your cherished / heirloom
TMB scope, how would you react? A shrug of the shoulders and to
gamely carry on without being mortified I very much doubt. How would
you take it if Joe Soap suggested that you hire a subordinate for
each nights observing to place their thumb in front of your TMB lens
and that you should find that an acceptable situation whilst you are
viewing a galaxy? If you pay for a 4" unobstructed premium lens you
don't want 4" less a thumbs worth so to speak.

If you find that placing a thumb in front of the lens (if its good
enough for James)will have little or no difference as regards being
able to enjoy ultimate telescope performance which is part of the
reason for buying a premium refractor and thus turning the refractor
into an obstructed design, here's a tip to save you some money next
time you are thinking of a new (TMB?) telescope for ultimate optical
performance; try an apochromatic reflector instead, they have had a
thumb-like obstruction in the optical system for quite some time and
their image quality and contrast compared to a refractor...

As I wrote this post, Wayne Gondella's post came up. This is a reply
containing the sort of response that I'am sure James was looking for.

> The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
> exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
> of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but not
> cropped.
>
> http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html
>
> Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????
>
> Mike


Mike Unsold, that is a very nice image.  I look forward for more to come!

Your camera is truly the DREAM digital. Combining that super sexy EOS 1V
thixotropically molded magnesium body with an 11 megapixel 35mm frame
sized sensor... oh my, is it getting hot in here or is it just me?

Mike C

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "W. Gondella" <gondella@s...>
wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I'm a bit behind on my mail, so I apologize if this is redundant,
but you should seek out
> a TMB cap as replacement.  Not only will the TMB cap fit and work
properly, it is also
> functional.  While most dew caps are by name only, the TMB cap
actually does a superb job
> at preventing dew.  I have yet to ever dew up.
>
> WG

In the 4" TMB 800/100. The Tube is made by Vixen while the
retractable dewshield is made by... Markus? Whatever, what color is
your TMB cap? I want to know if it is made by vixen or Markus (?). If
it is made by vixen. i'll just order one from Vixen USA since it's
easier to order there, but I heard that the vixen 4" flourite has
5.5" dew shield while the 4" TMB has 6" dew shield. So it couldn't
be vixen. Could it be takahashi, the FS-102 has 6" dew shield too.
Anyone can help identify, thanks.

Paul


>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <paulhathaway@m...>
> To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 6:43 PM
> Subject: [tmboptical] 4" TMB Missing Dew Cap
>
>
> >
> > I have a 4" TMB 100/800 F8 and it comes without any dew cap.
> > I plan to order one at Vixen America and it asks what model my
> > scope is. So what vixen refractor model has the same diameter
> > as the 4" TMB dewshield which is 6 inches?? For those who have
> > the Vixen FL102S or Vixen VX102ED. Can you please measure
> > what is the size of it's dew cap or dew shield in diameter?? It
will
> > fit the 4" TMB if it's 6 inches. I'm sure other 4" TMB owners
would
> > be interested to know too. I use a plastic cap from jar as dew cap
> > and it always fall down and putting it back will introduce quite a
> > dust to the inside of the shield.so I want the metallic one that
fits
> > it exactly.
> >
> > Paul

Methinks there is something squirrely about your
message, Sir. :-)

    Would you have liked my message better had I
placed a " :)  " after the sentence with his headbone
in it? All I was saying was my standard response to
those who think it okay to obsessively clean their
objectives. Stick your thumb in front of the telescope;
that thumb takes up far more light than the dust
strewn across your lens or a blem in the coating
thereupon. When you do so you can't tell that the
thumb is there; it takes up too small a percentage
of the incoming light.

    Nowhere did I imply as did you that he should
keep his or a friend's (never use an enemy for
that service) thumb there after that first glimpse.
As to what the blem is, like others responding to
his post, I assume it is something on top of the
coating and that the cleaning process would be more
damaging to his telescope than leaving it there as it
can't possibly affect his viewing.

Donald



> James,

Get a good sight of something in your telescope, the Moon, a
galaxy,whatever. Then put your or a friend's (don't use an enemy's
for this) thumb in front of the objective. You won't be able to tell
that the obstruction is there. Once thee hast that simple fact
ensonced in thy headbone ask thyself what difference to thy
observing that blem could be causing.

Donald
>

Donald,
I think you should examine your attitude in your response to James'
problem, in particular the last sentence / quip. It was quite simply
an unhelpful remark to a person who is quite rightly upset at a
(possible) circumstance that has not only arisen but may also become
worse as time goes on. In addition, a reply of this nature does
nothing but arouse a degree of anger in whoever asks such a question
and who should reasonably expect a sensible and helpful reply.
James' subsequent post suggests that he has been none too impressed
with certain postings on his asking for information / viewpoints.

To pay a substantial amount of money for a scope, any scope and for
something like this to happen is not what any owner would want to
see; including you. If this happened to your cherished / heirloom
TMB scope, how would you react? A shrug of the shoulders and to
gamely carry on without being mortified I very much doubt. How would
you take it if Joe Soap suggested that you hire a subordinate for
each nights observing to place their thumb in front of your TMB lens
and that you should find that an acceptable situation whilst you are
viewing a galaxy? If you pay for a 4" unobstructed premium lens you
don't want 4" less a thumbs worth so to speak.

If you find that placing a thumb in front of the lens (if its good
enough for James)will have little or no difference as regards being
able to enjoy ultimate telescope performance which is part of the
reason for buying a premium refractor and thus turning the refractor
into an obstructed design, here's a tip to save you some money next
time you are thinking of a new (TMB?) telescope for ultimate optical
performance; try an apochromatic reflector instead, they have had a
thumb-like obstruction in the optical system for quite some time and
their image quality and contrast compared to a refractor...

As I wrote this post, Wayne Gondella's post came up. This is a reply
containing the sort of response that I'am sure James was looking for.


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.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sorry I ruffled your feathers.  If a potential warranty issue has
gone unanswered in private then going public is at times necessary.

--- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, "jamesw767 <jamesw767@y...>"
<jamesw767@y...> wrote:
>
> Exactly what is your problem? This is a TMB group; I was not
accusing anybody of anything. I wanted some advise on a SMALL thing
on my lens. I will thing twice before I post because some in this
group choose to not be supportive.

In all fairness to Donald, I took his post in the spirit of which I think it was
intended:
as a light-hearted, very friendly, and well-intended commentary that made clear
such blems
are far less important in their impact than their appearance might otherwise
seem to
indicate---- a commentary from a man who speaks humbly from experience and
authority
greater than almost anyone else I know.  A lifetime of distinguished
professional and
personal experience in the fields of astronomy, science, and education, to but
name a very
few.

That said, everyone here can sympathize with someone who, buying a premium
instrument, has
initial concerns at least that the instrument delivered is everything that
he/she had
hoped for.  And I think we have said all that we can offer to that end.   It
goes without
saying that no telescope leaves Thomas' hands without his unequivocable approval
and
assurance of quality.

WayneG


----- Original Message -----
From: <sirsquirrelnutkin@...>
To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 4:24 PM
Subject: [tmboptical] Re: Coating


> --- In tmboptical@yahoogroups.com, Donald Rosenfield <cardar@c...>
> wrote:
> > James,
>
> Get a good sight of something in your telescope, the Moon, a
> galaxy,whatever. Then put your or a friend's (don't use an enemy's
> for this) thumb in front of the objective. You won't be able to tell
> that the obstruction is there. Once thee hast that simple fact
> ensonced in thy headbone ask thyself what difference to thy
> observing that blem could be causing.
>
> Donald
> >
>
> Donald,
> I think you should examine your attitude in your response to James'
> problem, in particular the last sentence / quip. It was quite simply
> an unhelpful remark to a person who is quite rightly upset at a
> (possible) circumstance that has not only arisen but may also become
> worse as time goes on. In addition, a reply of this nature does
> nothing but arouse a degree of anger in whoever asks such a question
> and who should reasonably expect a sensible and helpful reply.
> James' subsequent post suggests that he has been none too impressed
> with certain postings on his asking for information / viewpoints.
>
> To pay a substantial amount of money for a scope, any scope and for
> something like this to happen is not what any owner would want to
> see; including you. If this happened to your cherished / heirloom
> TMB scope, how would you react? A shrug of the shoulders and to
> gamely carry on without being mortified I very much doubt. How would
> you take it if Joe Soap suggested that you hire a subordinate for
> each nights observing to place their thumb in front of your TMB lens
> and that you should find that an acceptable situation whilst you are
> viewing a galaxy? If you pay for a 4" unobstructed premium lens you
> don't want 4" less a thumbs worth so to speak.
>
> If you find that placing a thumb in front of the lens (if its good
> enough for James)will have little or no difference as regards being
> able to enjoy ultimate telescope performance which is part of the
> reason for buying a premium refractor and thus turning the refractor
> into an obstructed design, here's a tip to save you some money next
> time you are thinking of a new (TMB?) telescope for ultimate optical
> performance; try an apochromatic reflector instead, they have had a
> thumb-like obstruction in the optical system for quite some time and
> their image quality and contrast compared to a refractor...
>
> As I wrote this post, Wayne Gondella's post came up. This is a reply
> containing the sort of response that I'am sure James was looking for.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> tmboptical-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Mike and all,

Please do not read if you are offended easily.

Mike, minor glitches aside, my reactions to your picture were threefold:

1).  Holy Sh__!
2).  Jesus F_____ C_____!
3).  G__ Damn!  What lovely subtle shadings of contrast, sharpness and hue!

What more can I say?

WG


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike C" <mike@...>
To: <tmboptical@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [tmboptical] M42 - First image with 180mm TMB and Canon 1Ds


>
> > The following image is an average combination of 12 300 second
> > exposures with the 180mm at F9 and Canon 1Ds using ISO 400. The size
> > of the original 4064x2704 16-bit TIFF was reduced to 1016x676 but not
> > cropped.
> >
> > http://www.mlunsold.com/examples/1DS/1Ds-M42.html
> >
> > Hmmm.... this makes me wonder what an 8" F9 would do????
> >
> > Mike