Re: ATM Aplanats - What would I do with it?

[tkrajci@san.osd.mil]

>From: kwhitefire@juno.com

>...I want something that I can look into, using my eyes.  The image has to 
>look good.

This is a vague definition.  We can't help you decide on your design until you 
nail the jello to the wall.  My wife's eyes do not appear sharp - or at least 
she is not very picky in terms of optical performance.  What she 
considers 'good' in a telescope is often unacceptable to me.

What is 'good' to you?

>I also want something that I can attach a camera, and make that same image
>look good on film.

I won't ask what your defintion of 'good' is again, but what size film do you 
want to cover?  What image quality/resolution do you want in the center?...at 
the very corners?

>I don't want to have to focus at different points to see the edge.  The
>fisheye look is out.

This is still vague.  If you use a short focal length eyepiece...just about 
any design will avoid the 'fisheye look.'  Depending on the field stop of your 
eyepiece, focal length of the eyepiece, the ability of your eye to accomodate 
(focus), and other parameters...what works for you may not work for others.

>So I'm a firm believer in the Uniscope.  It's that mythical creature we all
>dream about, what a perfect telescope would be.  What is it called?  That's
>what I'll make.  If it's unknown, then I'll invent it.

Please keep us appraised of your progress.  The more objective your design and 
acceptance criteria are...the easier it will be for you to say whether or not 
your scope is good enough.

Tom Krajci
Tashkent, Uzbekistan