Re: S&T C-6 Review
- From: Phil Wheeler <w6tuh-ng7@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:16:15 GMT
Doink wrote:
OK, I've brought this up before and it started a flame war. Let's try to
stay cool....
I read the reviews of telescopes in S&T and am always disappointed that they don't do more rigorous testing or provide some real. The review of the C-6 is no exception. There's a bunch of "writing" about the mount and the "optically excellent 6x30 finder" and then the write states the OTA has "excellent optics". He determines this because he can see the Cassini Division in Saturn. Neat. Those observations are subject to numerous factors; seeing comes to mind. Why don't they bench test the optics? I'd like the stats, not the impressions of an employee of the company paid to sell the stuff.
I find no fault with the review of the optics, perhaps because I expect the usual Celestron excellence in the C6. I have heard worse things about the mount (ASGT) than I read there.
Phil
.
- References:
- S&T C-6 Review
- From: Doink
- S&T C-6 Review
- Prev by Date: Re: DSOs Deserving of Yearly Visitation
- Next by Date: Re: S&T C-6 Review
- Previous by thread: Re: S&T C-6 Review
- Next by thread: Re: S&T C-6 Review
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading