Norton or Cambridge?

Got a question on astronomy that you'd wanted to ask? Ask your questions here and see if the old timers can give you some good answers.
Post Reply
oxygn
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Jurong East

Norton or Cambridge?

Post by oxygn »

Hi guys,

simple qn... The norton atlas or the cambridge one? recommend for me to buy.

Thanks
Top
alvinsclee
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:21 pm

Post by alvinsclee »

I use Norton... 19th edition (not the latest edition).

I guess it does not really matter which star map you use, as long as you are comfortable with the particular style and it can help you navigate the skies.

Besides star maps, I'm equally comfortable using a planisphere. It's simpler in a way.
Top
User avatar
gwenyi
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Holland Close

Post by gwenyi »

oxygn , alternatively u can proceed to lee kong chian reference library at victoria street to photocopy the star atlases they have. one of the books i found provided star charts with a list of interesting objects u can find in that region of the sky ( eg . globulars , galaxies etc..)
Top
User avatar
neoterryjoe
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 12:15 pm
Favourite scope: c5
Location: je ( 1.34, 103.73 )

Post by neoterryjoe »

Hi,
I do not recommend photocopying unless u are really sure that the results will turn out good. I can lend u the cambridge one to c if u want since i stay rather near you.
If you intend to get one handbook for field use, the cambridge one might be too big though. The sky and telescope starchart handbook might just be the right one. I too have it.
The cambridge is good for its details(specific coordinates of DSOs.)...
Top
User avatar
rlow
Posts: 2405
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:36 pm
Location: Jurong

Post by rlow »

I have both. I prefer & recommend the cambridge. If you need a more detailed sky atlas, then go for the Sky Atlas 2000.0
Top
User avatar
Tachyon
Posts: 2038
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:40 am
Location: Bedok

Post by Tachyon »

Listen to Richard. If anyone is an expert in Sky Atlases, he is...
[80% Steve, 20% Alfred] ------- Probability of Clear Skies = (Age of newest equipment in days) / [(Number of observers) * (Total Aperture of all telescopes present in mm)]
Top
User avatar
rlow
Posts: 2405
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:36 pm
Location: Jurong

Post by rlow »

No lah, I am no expert. :)

Just to clarify: if you need a detailed star chart for star-hopping using a low-power finder, the Sky Atlas 2000.0 is better. If you are just using a Telrad or Rigel Quikfinder, then the Cambridge or Bright Star Atlas will do nicely. If you are telescope-hopping for faint fuzzies using a bigger scope, then you may consider to upgrade to the Uranometria (2 vols) or the Herald-Bobroff AstroAtlas (1 vol).
Top
oxygn
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Jurong East

Post by oxygn »

thanks guys... sky atlas is abit too bulky for travelling.. hmm...
Top
User avatar
weixing
Super Moderator
Posts: 4708
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:22 am
Favourite scope: Vixen R200SS & Celestron 6" F5 Achro Refractor
Location: (Tampines) Earth of Solar System in Orion Arm of Milky Way Galaxy in Local Group Galaxies Cluster

Post by weixing »

Hi,
thanks guys... sky atlas is abit too bulky for travelling.. hmm...
You can photocopy it and put it in a file lor... the star chart area can fit in A4 paper.

Anyway, in my observation file (A4 pocket file), I got a Sky Altas 2000.0, Wil Tirion and Brian Skiff's Bright Star Altas 2000.0 and a Moon chart. It's a SOP item in my bag.

Have a nice day.
Yang Weixing
:mrgreen: "The universe is composed mainly of hydrogen and ignorance." :mrgreen:
Top
oxygn
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:08 pm
Location: Jurong East

Post by oxygn »

u mean they have a4 sky atlas?
Top
Post Reply

Return to “General Astronomy”