The Pentax because it's no longer being produced? :-)
All of the rest can be purchased relatively easily..
Which would you choose and why?
- orly_andico
- Posts: 1616
- Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: Braddell Heights
- Contact:
- orly_andico
- Posts: 1616
- Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: Braddell Heights
- Contact:
I would choose the WO - the rest are Japanese, this one is different! I feel that WO really put Asia (ex Japan) firmly on the map of Telescope design and manufacturing. For that, I salute them!
[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)]
- orly_andico
- Posts: 1616
- Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: Braddell Heights
- Contact:
That said... I think W-O mechanicals are better than GSO mechanicals. If the 10:1 GSO crayford on my homebrew Newtonian is a representative sample (compared to my Zenithstar).
But yes GSO and Synta are responsible for today's low-cost astronomical equipment craze. Let's also not forget Synta bought/bailed out Celestron. Meade is on life support.
What about Astro-Tech? who makes their scopes? Kunming?
But yes GSO and Synta are responsible for today's low-cost astronomical equipment craze. Let's also not forget Synta bought/bailed out Celestron. Meade is on life support.
What about Astro-Tech? who makes their scopes? Kunming?