[AZ-Observing] Re: Telrad stellar limit

Mike, the primary reason for replacing the finder with Telrad is for easier 
recalibration of digital setting circles.  Currently some bright deep sky 
object that can be seen in the finder is used.  For me, the finder is rather 
awkward to aim and I want something that is easier and the Telrad fits this 
nicely.  Instead of deep sky objects, bright stars can be used.  My concern 
was the magnitude limit and this discussion has adequately answered that 
question for me.  The Telrad is adequate, in fact it is more than adequate.

Secondary reasons are, as you indicated, space and balance.

I'm now in market for Telrad and will put finder up for sale, but only after 
selecting some bright stars for alignment and loading them into the XP4 Sky 
Commander.

Thanks to all for your excellent comments and in sight.

AJ Crayon
Phoenix, AZ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <cal_donley@xxxxxxx>
To: <az-observing@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "AJ Crayon" <acrayon@xxxxxxx>; <cal_donley@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:01 AM
Subject: [AZ-Observing] Re: Telrad stellar limit


---- AJ Crayon <acrayon@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Reason for the question?  I'm considering a replacement of my 9X50 finder
> with a Telrad and set the limit at 4th mag for the go/no go decision.  Now
> to look at Telrads.

  Unless tube space or balance are limiting factors, I recommend both.  The 
Telrad is always good for knowing roughly where the telescope is pointing, 
but not very good in sparse fields or under light polluted skies.  A finder 
is better for showing faint stars, but it's sometimes confusing to be sure 
the telescope is pointing where you think it is.  Together I think they make 
a great combination.

  -- Mike Collins --
--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
send personal replies to the author, not the list.

--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please 
send personal replies to the author, not the list.

Other related posts: