Re: [APML]: Newtonian or Schmidt-Cassegrain for astrophotos?

[Wil Milan <wmilan@airdigital.com>]

Mike Thenhaus wrote:

> I certainly agree that the GOTO capability is a great feature. However,
> there are some people who obtain a great deal of satisfaction in knowing
> exactly where a particular object is in the night sky. I am one of those
> people and would always recommend a much better mount for the money
> rather than the GOTO computer

I strongly second Mike's statement. The hands-off GOTO feature is cute and
clever, but it costs a lot (effectively about $1000 extra on Meade fork
mounts) while adding nothing to photographic capability. If one does not
want to hunt for objects one can add a simple digital-circles computer ($250
- $400 for very capable units) to any mount and be able to find any object
directly. The DSCs also have the advantage that one can move them from mount
to mount as one trades up or if one has more than one mount.

> If you are
> considering astrophotography, which I assume you must be, I would
> recommend a really sturdy equatorial mount with excellent guiding
> features like PEC and TVC corrections. Not only is the equatorial easier
> to polar align, but it also easier to balance IMO.

I gather from the context that in the above  you're referring to a German
equatorial mount, and if so I agree there too: German equatorials are
heavier and more awkward to handle than fork mounts, but for
astrophotography they have the advantages of being less prone to vibration
and usually easier to polar-align.Wil M.
--
"When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars which You have set in place,
what is Man that you are mindful of him,
or the son of Man that you care for him?"  -- Psalm 8