Re: RCX400 review ?
- From: "David Nakamoto" <res07oeg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 07:04:58 GMT
There might be a reason, probably thermal, for the gap. Perhaps a cover while
transporting and after cooldown would be a nice addition.
--- Dave
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinprick holes in a colorless sky
Let inspired figures of light pass by
The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns
Challenges infinity, and is soon gone
david.nakamoto@xxxxxxxxxxx
"George Normandin" <georgepn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3i9kf.116847$qk4.100581@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Phil Wheeler" <> wrote
> ...
>> RMOLLISE wrote:
>>>
>>> 1. The tube is not completely closed. There's a substantial gap between
>>> corrector and tube assembly that allows dust (and even insects!)
>>
>> Imagine what havoc a firefly could wreak :)
>
> About 3 years ago I had one fly into the dome and right down the tube of the
> 20-in RC I was using for CCD'ing. For some reason the image wouldn't
> flat-field properly!
>
> As for the RCX, I suppose you could wrap an Ace bandage around it!
>
> George Normandin
>
.
- References:
- Re: RCX400 review ?
- From: RMOLLISE
- Re: RCX400 review ?
- From: RMOLLISE
- Re: RCX400 review ?
- From: Phil Wheeler
- Re: RCX400 review ?
- From: George Normandin
- Re: RCX400 review ?
- Prev by Date: Re: CMOS vs. CCD -- Link to Article
- Next by Date: Re: Christmas Question
- Previous by thread: Re: RCX400 review ?
- Next by thread: Re: RCX400 review ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|