Re: Image quality and magnification

From: CHASLX200 (chaslx200_at_aol.com)
Date: 11/20/04 

Date: 20 Nov 2004 15:38:19 GMT

>Subject: Re: Image quality and magnification
>From: jonisaacs@aol.com (Jon Isaacs)
>Date: 11/20/2004 9:22 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <20041120092202.23417.00000940@mb-m03.aol.com>

>
>>It is F11. And you are correct because if you do the math, even at 40X per
>>inch
>>120 X's is at the most useful end. However, it bothers me to see all the
>>confusing
>>BULL*** about aperture and magnification. Accordingly, the 30-50 X's per
>>inch "rule"
>>isn't a rule at all if you believe the stuff people write about. For
>>instance, if you have a TV 85, a person can't realistically get more than
>>150X's good image quality. However, you always see people spewing about
>>how how they can "push" their little gems to 200X's. SO, my point is,
>>the 30 X's to whatever rule has to be explained or just not believed at all.
>>
>>-StarFuka
>
>These are just rules of thumb and must be applied with the understanding that
>each of us has difference needs, desires, eyes and interests.
>
>You have discovered that you prefer 60x over 120x on the moon with your
>particular scope. Someone else might have a different experience....
>
>Pesonally I find 140x or more is fine with my 70mm Pronto.
>
>jon
***************************************
Well whoever thinks that a 85mm APO cant handle over 200x then they are nuts!

My FS-78 would take 300x without a prob, you can throw out the 50x per inch
rule, i push all my scopes way above that.

But i do have the seeing that allows such crazy powers!!!

Chas P.

Quantcast