Re: (IAAC) FWD: What should I buy? (rich field scopes)

    Actually I haven't got the patience or the time to get involved in a big
debate.  Unfortunately my son is in the hospital with a collapsed lung, so
I'm not home much.  You're correct about the religious quality of eyepiece
jihads.  I've seen them waged over Brandons, Clavis, and the holy of all
holies - (respectful silence please) the Zeiss monocentric.
    My serious observing experience spans a mere 21 years.  The two guys
with me took up the slack since they're both older and they both started
younger.  My toungue was firmly planted in my cheek during that reference,
and the come-back humor was appreciated.
    Rutten and van Venrooij is a good reference for a general understanding,
but falls short if you really want to design optics.  Our first edition copy
has some errors, but I think they may have been corrected later.
    Clear skies,  Sue
-----Original Message-----
From: Lew Gramer <dedalus@latrade.com>
To: Internet Amateur Astronomers Catalog - Discussion
Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: (IAAC) FWD: What should I buy? (rich field scopes)
>>The sum of our observing experience totals over 80 years...
>D**n, Sue - that works out to 27 years EACH - unless one of y'all was E. E.
>Barnard! (May he intercede with the Cloud Gods for us all... ;>)
>Seriously, I think if we start talking quality eyepieces, we're into an
>even MORE religious than "the best telescope". Not it may be VERY
>for those of us with less time (or less money) to experiment with oculars.
>please don't get yourselves too personally tangled up in the debate on our
>account! It's clear all the contributors on this thread have had long years
>real life experience with optics and (more importantly) with their
>careful use in observing the sky!
>All your perspectives are respected and appreciated.
>>"Telescope Optics, Evaluation and Design" by Rutten and Van Venrooij.
>Sue, is this a book you generally recommend for folks who want to
understand optics at both the theoretical and practical levels? Have other
folks on the list read it, or used it as a reference?
>Clear skies!