Posts Made By: Alex McConahay

Okay--just to note progress if anybody else is having a similar problem.....

I went back to DSLR website, download area, and found a new update for the 20D.

Camera is now connected and operating from the computer control. However, the IMage Display is blank on both focus and capture. So, I cannot yet focus.

Any ideas here?

Alex

Ben,

Televue's reputation is well deserved. I would hardly characterize it's competitors as "OK at best." There are many who swear by them. More than a few people list the Meade's as their favorties, and you will find adherents to almost all eyepieces.

I would not personally rate Parks in the top tier, but it is an established and well respected name.

And one of the problems you have with the "Meade and Celestron" statement is like saying--"Hey how does Ford and GM compare with BMW? Ford and GM represent an extremely wide range of products. You can get about the cheapest of the cheap or the premium. If your impression of Ford is the Escort, and of GM is the Escalade, then you haven't really compared the products fairly. I mean, how many BMW pickup trucks do you see on a construction site?

There are lots of good eyepieces in the world. You have to decide what is best for you and your scope and your eyes, and your wallet...

Alex

If you are coming to SOuthern California during the Memorial Day weekend, YOu probably want to travel two hours north to Big Bera, and take in RTMC-Astronomy Expo. There will be a couple of thousand of your type there, and a whole lot of related activity.

See http://www.rtmcastronomyexpo.org/

Alex

Is there a Digital SLR from Olympus? I thought Olympus got out of the SLR business years ago.

Oh, and I don't know the answer you are looking for.

If you have an Olympus Digital SLR, and it uses the same OM-1 lenses that the OM-1 used, then yes, the photo adapter will work. If it does not work with your Digital SLR, then there is probably a T-ring that needs to be removed from your photo adapter and replaced with one made for your digital SLR.

Alex

Alex

It is not surprising to me that there is a plan for a war in ten other nations.

As a matter of fact, I believe our military has a plan on how to capture and hold every part of the earth (and every part of space up to and including geo-synchronus orbit). Every country, large or small, friendly or not. I believe, the military has a plan as to how to capture and hold Heath Row airport if necessary.

That is what they do for a living. If something were to happen all of a sudden, they don't want to take the time to do any studies!

Alex

If you have much focal length, I'd suggest you may actually be happier with a longer eyepiece, rather than a shorter.

And, by the way, I'd go for a Barlow..

Alex

This is a rather common problem. It's called lack of backfocus.

If you are using a diagonal, remove it and try again.

Getting a new webcam may solve your problem, but may not. It is simply a question of where the chip is compared to where the optics of the eyepiece would be. THe refractor focuses an image at a certain point. The job of the focuser is to hold the optics of an eyepiece (or in your case webcam)at that point. A focuser is movable because different eyepieces are built to different specifications. (And because if you were using the telescope at less than infinity, it would need to move the eyepiece further out, and because the length of the tube changes when it gets cold or hot, and for a number of other reasons.)

In some eyepieces the actual optics are further up the tube of the eyepiece than in others. The focuser compensates for this.

Your webcam's "optics" just happen to be further back than your typical eyepeice. So, even when your focuser tube is "shortened" as far as it can go, the chip is not where it belongs.

Alex

I have heard that the smallest thing you can resolve on the moon from the earth is about the size of the Colliseum in Los Angeles (Or other large athletic facility).

However, if you want to see the landers, it is much easier to just go to wherever the soundstage is that they used to film the landings. :S

Alex

I was out surfing the web, and found this piece of information:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/olympus/lenses.htm

It looks like the OM-1 lenses do not fit the new Olympus DSLR's.

Alex

>>"For that matter, my questioning continued: why not 60°. Or more?"

As has been pointed out, the purpose of the cut is so that you can shorten the whole scope and lower the eyepiece. If you did not cut that corner, you would have to make the rocker box slightly higher to accommodate the mirror box swinging through.

You can cut it to any pattern you like. But you cut off as much corner as you can cut at 45 degrees.

If you want to cut more, you aren't shortening the scope, but you are eventually losing strength in the box. (Your 45 degree cut loses some, but it is worth the loss.)

Therefore, 45 degrees does what you want in the way of shortening the scope, and any more weakens the box unnecessarily.

Alex