Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    jimg@sonic.net's Avatar
    jimg@sonic.net is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 23,682, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!5+ Referrals Achievement!400+ Posts AchievementFirst 1000 Experience Points50 Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Freestone, CA
    Posts
    1,667
    Points
    23,682
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    168
    Thanked 481x 374 Posts

    Default Why do you suppose.....



    Why do you suppose it is conventional to speak of the diameter of an eyepiece in inches and the focal length in millimeters? Why didn't eyepieces go totally metric?

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    Orion XT12i Intelliscope on a Tom Osypowski Equatorial Platform
    Low profile helical focuser allowing prime focus with a Canon T2i DSLR
    4mm and 5mm 1-1/4" TMB Planetary II, 10mm and 25mm 1-1/4" Plossils, 15mm 1-1/4" Garrett Optical SWA
    20mm 2" Explore Scientific 100 degree, 26mm and 38mm 2" Orion Q70s

  2. #2
    mplanet62's Avatar
    mplanet62 is offline SUPER GIANT
    Points: 7,498, Level: 60
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 52
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!200+ Posts Achievement!Visitor Messenger Achievement!Got three FriendsFirst 1000 Experience Points
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    @
    Posts
    1,223
    Points
    7,498
    Level
    60
    Thanks
    638
    Thanked 493x 367 Posts

    Default

    It comes to very old traditions and history of design. There is no rational reason not to go all metric except 1.25" translates in rather inconvenient sequence of numbers in metric system.

  3. #3
    MG1962's Avatar
    MG1962 is offline SUPER GIANT
    Points: 9,803, Level: 68
    Level completed: 51%, Points required for next Level: 147
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!400+ Posts AchievementFirst 1000 Experience Points50 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,407
    Points
    9,803
    Level
    68
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 531x 401 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mplanet62 View Post
    It comes to very old traditions and history of design. There is no rational reason not to go all metric except 1.25" translates in rather inconvenient sequence of numbers in metric system.
    Which throws up the wonderful problem of having a 203mm telescope. But in the real good old days telescopes used to be measured by the length of the tube
    Celestron SE8 - 25mm and 15mm
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    Epic II ED. Baader Hyperion 21 mm 17mm plus 14 and 28mm tunning ring

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. I suppose I should.......
    By carpetshark in forum Forum Welcomes Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-29-2009, 11:36 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 12:54 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-18-2008, 04:47 AM
  4. we suppose the worldwide prejudice
    By owen@ilalgyra.net.mx in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-14-2007, 07:57 AM
  5. suppose there was an earth sized watermelon?
    By neurocratic malfunction in forum General Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-11-2004, 12:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:17 PM.