But it’s also true that much larger and much less expensive reflectors (like Schmidt-Cassegrains) are also excellent for planets. The statement that " refractors are excellent for planets" is true. The statement about refractors and SC tubes is a loaded one. In answer, what follows is my opinion, based on my background, experience and viewpoint: I believe I read somewhere, that refractors are excellent for planets and SC-tubes are better for deep space? Is that true? What is your reason to prefer a refractor over a SC-tube? Now the source of the question is from Duncan Dovovan here: Most of my experience has been with reflectors (6, 8 and 10-inch Newtonian) and Schmidt-Cassegrains (8 and 11-inch).
![best telescope for astrophotography 2012 best telescope for astrophotography 2012](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c8/e6/49/c8e649d6643bfbf99e98fa098fc9989f.jpg)
Basically we are talking about reflectors (telescopes that employ mirrors), obstructed with secondary mirrors in the light path.Īnyway, here’s my background: I own only 1 refractor (an old Dolland achromat made between ~17). Reflectors, both Newtonian and compound, like Schmidt-Cassegrain, Maksutov, classical Cassegrain, etc.Refractors whose main image-forming element is a lens and.It might be useful to limit ourselves to discussing the merits of two types of telescopes: If this thread should ever come to have many dozens of replies, I would expect that it has outlived its usefulness and has only become a vehicle for fruitless and perhaps unending debate. I suggest that participants make every effort to avoid inflammatory statements that may offend others. So I hope we can do this in a way that is helpful rather than disturbing. Also it matters if we are photographing a wide view or narrow view (like planets).Įventually this question was going to come up. It’s also worth noting there may be differences in how we answer the question, depending upon whether we are viewing or photographing our subject. Either design has its place in astro-imaging – the two designs are complementary and not necessarily in competition. My hope is that we can bring out the relevant points of comparison to help in choosing a telescope for astrophotography. It is not my intention that this thread would have any such effect. Many times these debates only serve to fan the flames of the opposing camps. Our Solar System – Imagery which captures the Sun and its family of planets, moons, asteroids and comets.Who dares to ask that question? Why there have been many spirited debates on the subject, which have discussed every detail and nuance of the question. Jupiter with Io and Ganymede, September 2010 © Damian Peach, winner of the 2011 Astronomy Photographer of the Year competition. All the judges are excited about what we’re going to see this time around.”Īstronomy Photographer of the Year 2012 has four main categories:Įarth and Space – Photographs that include landscape, people and other earth-related things alongside an astronomical subject ranging from the stars, the Moon or near-Earth phenomena such as the aurora. “Every year the competition has brought new surprises, I love the fact that we receive entries from people all around the world and from complete beginners as well as seasoned experts.
![best telescope for astrophotography 2012 best telescope for astrophotography 2012](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1-eXHPco26w/T7ktpXdm5bI/AAAAAAAABUE/zDYXn_4JjFk/s640/m51-2-web.png)
![best telescope for astrophotography 2012 best telescope for astrophotography 2012](https://mcdonaldobservatory.org/sites/default/files/styles/7col/public/images/news/gallery/LCO_1m.jpg)
Marek Kukula, Public Astronomer at the ROG. “Astronomy is becoming increasingly popular with the public which is reflected in the big rise in entries we saw in 2011,” said Dr.