From: someone@anywheret.net   
      
   "JimD"  wrote in message news:201707311048128667-email@nowherecom...   
      
   > That is a cool thing.   
      
   Isn't it though! What's Insane is that it's not being made anymore - I had   
   lots of fun 'bouncing' it all over the sky, and it mounts on a standard   
   camera tripod.   
      
   If I could get a hold of something for making highly accurate scales, I'd   
   like to make a BIG version of that device with circles at least 8" in   
   diameter and a universal attachment for a small scope, and maybe an even   
   bigger one for bigger scopes...probably have to use some counterweights but   
   it would be soooooo COOL!!!   
      
   > Something to keep my eye open for as I garage sale.   
      
   Lots of luck - it was amazing to even hear about it, much less see some   
   pictures online. At least Edmund still makes the planisphere style movable   
   star maps though.   
      
   > Missed a really nice telescope last week by only minutes. Guy bought it   
   > just as I arrived :-)  Oh well, can't find all the deals.   
      
   Who knows if it was even any good?   
      
   > I use a ipad app to find stars. It knows my location, thnks to the magic   
   > of tracking all these devices, and will show me what's overhead at any   
   > time. Plus, you can run the time forward or back by the hour to see, for   
   > example, how long you have to wait for something to be visible.   
      
   I've had software that did things like that.   
      
   > Not worth catching cold, at least for me.   
      
   You won't catch cold, just be cold ;)   
      
   > A camera is a camera. Or at least that's what my intuition tells me.   
      
   But is  it a Good camera? ;)   
      
   > The ccd array in a cell phone is the same as a ccd in a camera.  Same   
   > part, made by the same companies. What's different is the optics. Old   
   > school thinkers want lots of glass, like that somehow makes better pics.   
      
   That's not necessarily true, and the film, or the CCD, makes a Huge   
   difference too.   
      
   > Why was it that Newton invented his telescope again ?  Did that have   
   > anything to do with some of the downside of glass in telescopes ?   
      
   I'm not sure but then the field of optics was relatively brand new.   
      
   > Back to phones, tiny lenses in there do degrade the images some, no doubt.   
   > When I put my prevous " camera " together I took all the optics off, left   
   > just the ccd chip in the optical path.  That worked well, and is what they   
   > did on real observatory telescopes, probably still do. Difference there is   
   > they can afford huge ( inches on a side ) sensor chips. And they actively   
   > cool them to get slightly better preformance.   
      
   In optics, Bigger is usually better because it means Much more Expensive and   
   that means much higher quality, and better results...and since the   
   telescope's extreme high quality optics are doing the job, the scope's focus   
   can be directly on the CCD.   
      
   > Eh, I tried some observing from out in the yard a few nights ago.  The   
   > ground is more stable, but my beer isn't as close, so it's a toss up :-)   
      
   So I had my "observing cookies" in the winter...and you've got your   
   "observing beer" in the summer ;)   
      
      
   > I can do that.  Got other priorities just now, like collimating the thing.   
   > Realized the   
      
      
   > gotta run .... pick tis up later.   
      
   Jim   
      
   I'm sure it'll keep getting more interesting ;)   
      
   Ouisie   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)