| |
Main
Date: 05 Sep 2006 01:26:14
From: Thomas
Subject: the new PST
|
The new PST is $1250 US and boasts 0.5 A or less. The older PST is 1.0 A.
It seems to me the optimal
pass band is 0.5 - 0.7A. What is the advantage of 0.5 or less?
|
|
| |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 02:08:56
From: Alan French
Subject: Re: the new PST
|
"Thomas" <Thomas@telusplanet.net > wrote in message
news:Wm4Lg.3807$0k7.2509@clgrps13...
> The new PST is $1250 US and boasts 0.5 A or less. The older PST is 1.0 A.
> It seems to me the optimal
> pass band is 0.5 - 0.7A. What is the advantage of 0.5 or less?
I believe a narrow pass band is best for showing disk details, while a wider
one works better on prominences. I know our 4 A filter does a fine job on
prominences, but shows little disk detail.
Clear skies, Alan
|
| | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 02:34:41
From: Thomas
Subject: Re: the new PST
|
Ok thanks
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 02:41:12
From: Alan French
Subject: Re: the new PST
|
"Thomas" <Thomas@telusplanet.net > wrote in message
news:5n5Lg.9275$Mh7.4382@edtnps90...
> Ok thanks
You can find a brief description of what the various filters show at
http://www.daystarfilters.com/hydrogen.htm
Clear skies, Alan
|
| |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 01:34:52
From: Phil Wheeler
Subject: Re: the new PST
|
Thomas wrote:
> The new PST is $1250 US and boasts 0.5 A or less. The older PST is 1.0 A.
> It seems to me the optimal
> pass band is 0.5 - 0.7A. What is the advantage of 0.5 or less?
>
>
Ah .. maybe the "new PST" is the regular PST with
a filter added to the nose. Seems like that would
be about the right price, PST+SM-40 filter.
I tried a filter on mine and returned it the next
day: I prefer my PST in its original configuration.
Phil
|
| |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 01:31:19
From: Phil Wheeler
Subject: Re: the new PST
|
Thomas wrote:
> The new PST is $1250 US and boasts 0.5 A or less. The older PST is 1.0 A.
> It seems to me the optimal
> pass band is 0.5 - 0.7A. What is the advantage of 0.5 or less?
>
>
Meade profits rise? ;)
I'd not heard there was a new PST.
0.5 A should provide more surface detail, but
perhaps at the expense of proms.
Mine seems better than 1.0 A (maybe 0.8 or so) ..
and it works very well.
Phil
|
|
