Why do competitors bash Stellarvue?
Vic Maris
enjoying astronomy, my astronomy students finally talked me into
starting a small company making hand made telescopes. The standard was
going to be (and continues to be)we ship nothing unless I would
personally own and use it. This was my response to all those years
struggling with inferior instruments.
Stellarvue has always stated that our refractors offer excellent color
correction. This has resulted in many spirited responses criticizing
our marketing efforts. As stated many times in the past, we have found
we can obtain better zonal control using glass that is more expensive
than bk7 f2 in
production. As stated previously, we obtain excellent color control by
making the lenses right, mounting them right, aligning them right and
triple
testing each optic before it leaves our factory. These are American
assembled telescopes using lenses of our own design that offer wide
flat
fields and excellent color correction. WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED OUR
ACHROMATS
PROVIDE APO OR EVEN SEMI-APO PERFORMANCE. We have been very careful
about
this.
But compare the AT1010 with the Chinese imports with which they are
most often compared. Do it yourself. You will see that it is not magic
but
hard work that makes the difference here. So I respectfully ask my
business
competitors to stop claiming that we are claiming magic. We are proud
of
what we do and we will continue to be proud and ethusiastic. We will
also
continue to compare our PRODUCTION scopes with other PRODUCTION
scopes. Sure
you can get a good sample from anyone. But how do they all do? That is
what
matters and it is what we spend so much time working on.
This forum offers a valuable service to the amateur community seeking
information. It should not be taken over by manufacturers and that is
why I
rarely post here. But I must point out when inaccurate statements are
made -
when I can. Introducing our new line of telescopes, I had limited time
to
respond to the last round of anti-SV statements. Now that we are
producing
our new apos, I have more time now to try and articulate the truth and
to
take other appropriate action which I am doing. I did not start this.
I do not criticize my competitors. That is not my job. My job is to
make the best telescopes I can and tell people about them.
Look at the astrophotos and read what noted and respected
astrophotographers
are now saying with the real evidence regarding the EDT. This is much
more
powerful than retoric based on a lack of experience with any scope in
question. Again, the EDT is not an apo. Never said it was. We now make
apos
so I expect this will turn up the heat even more. I am not looking
forward
to this but it is my 2000+ customers that keep me going, and a handful
of
competitors will not slow me down. I have a lifelong dedication to
amateur
astronomy and I love making telescopes. Helping people - especially
young
people - get a good start in astronomy is what we are all about. That
is
what it should be.
Compare our 80/9D achromat with other Chinese 80mm refractors on the
market.
Hopefully, a review will soon be made of this scope compared to actual
like
scopes. We keep getting our achromats compared to apos. Flattering,
but
unfair. Achros should be compared to achros. ED achros should be
compared to other ed achros and apos to apos. Only then will we begin
to see the real differences. Then and only then will the resolution
and color
differences of production models be clarified. That is what we are
talking
about. Not the theoretical differences - but what people really get.
Recently, some posters used old ads (showing the f-6.1 apo we made for
a
short time), claiming we are calling the EDT an APO. Never did that.
The web
site is clear and the advertising is accurate. With the dedicated
following
we have, why would we do otherwise? This is not to say we are closed
minded.
We have benefitted from criticism in the past and we remain open to
constructive criticism. Our goal is to make things clear. But we
have never called an ed achromat an apo or a standard achromat a semi
apo.
Others have, not us.
All posts are a matter of public record. When a poster, especially a
business person or one in partnership with a business person, quotes
out of
context, adds a letter to a telescope part number and/or applies the
feature of one telescope to another in a public forum, it appears that
the intent is to decieve and cause harm to the other business. When a
US business firm becomes involved in this we call it slander. So I
offer up all the posts made previously by Stellarvue, Stellarvue
owners, competitors (posting under various names) and partners as
evidence of what is really happening here. My advise: See what the
actual users think and do not expect our achromats to provide you with
three color crossings. They are good but they aren't that good. Never
said they were.
Sci-astro is here to serve the amateur astronomical community by
providing information. When business people provide mis-information,
it serves no one.
Clear skies to all of you.
Vic Maris
Stellarvue
www.stellarvue.com
Brian P. Murphy
I have never used one of your scopes. I examined one at Astrofest and it
looked very well-made. Your products get reviews by the users and that is
the best testimony to their quality. Your posts always appear to be written
by a gentleman.
As I've read the many posts I have come to share some of the confusion I see
others struggling with. Let me first state what I understand:
You say the EDT isn't a standard achromat and it isn't an APO. It uses glass
that isn't the typical bk7,f2 combo. The choice of glass and the attention
to build-quality allow it to perform better than a typical f 6 achromat.
This is certainly plausible IMHO. You don't want to post certain details
about production/construction. That's fine and I can see why you don't.
Other refractor manufactures/designers don't reveal all either.
In your post below you say "ED achros should be compared to other ed achros
and apos to apos." What other "ED achro" is your scope comparable to and
how does it differ? Since I haven't used an SV EDT, but I want to evaluate
one for purchase, it would be helpful if you could direct me to the most
similar scope in the market to compare it to. This is where my confusion
lies. I can't get a handle on what other scope yours compares to in the
marketplace.
Brian
"Vic Maris" <v...@stellarvue.com> wrote in message
news:755b97d4.02062...@posting.google.com...
David
David
Brian Tung
> WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED OUR ACHROMATS PROVIDE APO OR EVEN SEMI-APO
> PERFORMANCE.
Yes, you have.
> We have been very careful about this.
No, you haven't. You may not have meant to claim it, but when your
table said your achromat gave "excellent" color correction, and an
unnamed semi-apo gave only "very good" color correction, that is
exactly what you claimed.
Look, I am pleased you corrected the table, and I will accept that
it was an honest mistake. But if you now try to clear the story with
"WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED..."--well, sorry, I won't go along with that.
The proper thing to say would have been "We have never meant to claim
that..."
You want to know why some competitors bash Stellarvue? Not because
of your scopes. Not even because of some errors in some table on a
web page. But because, when such errors are pointed out, instead of
saying "Oops, we didn't mean to say that," what we get instead is,
"WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED."
You're better than that.
> Recently, some posters used old ads (showing the f-6.1 apo we made for
> a short time), claiming we are calling the EDT an APO. Never did that.
Funny. Someone posting with your account conceded that they corrected
the aforementioned table, based on reports such as mine. Why discount
that?
To be honest, this post leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Bleah.
Brian Tung <br...@isi.edu>
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt
JAFO
I have. I used to own an Orion ST-80 & currently
own an AT1010. There is no comparison.
The AT1010 is so much better mechanically, and
much better corrected for spherical abberation
and astigmatism. The plastic lens cell used on the ST-80
is a piece of crap. The difference in secondary color
is about what you would expect going from
f/5 to f/6. But that is what I expected.
As for bashing, in the case of Valery, he just
has his head up his ass.
Randy Roy
> Vic Maris wrote:
> > WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED OUR ACHROMATS PROVIDE APO OR EVEN SEMI-APO
> > PERFORMANCE.
>
> Yes, you have.
>
> > We have been very careful about this.
>
> No, you haven't. You may not have meant to claim it, but when your
> table said your achromat gave "excellent" color correction, and an
> unnamed semi-apo gave only "very good" color correction, that is
> exactly what you claimed.
>
Forgive me for splitting hairs, but hasn't the term "Semi-APO" been
used by some as simply a marketing term? Aren't there scopes out there
marketed as "Semi-APO" when they are nothing more than achromats? In
the world of marketing jargon, I can easily see how a well built
achromat could outperform another achromat with the marketing label of
"Semi-APO". I like that Stellarvue does not use marketing terms like
"Semi-APO" to describe their achromats. That said, I for one wish
there were a universally accepted standard for the term "Semi-APO."
Randy
Al M
I don't really think that competitors are bashing Stellarvue. Whether
deliberately or not, SV scopes are being given performance claims that
rival those APOs that worked hard to acquire.
Few comparisons have been made between SV and other makes. The
Cloudynights review was well done, but was not well received by SV
supporters. Virtually all the various manufacturers have received a
few poor reviews and made almost no response except to improve.
The APO ad in question was very recent (jun 02') and perhaps
misleading. I do understand that ads are ordered well in advance and
may not reflect possible changes in products.
Corrections rather excuses would go so much further in instilling
confidence.
Meade and Celestron have been bashed so often for so many years. For
the most part these giants remained silent and steadily improved. I
have become more and more impressed by their products.
Al M
Al M
br...@zot.isi.edu (Brian Tung) wrote in message news:<af8t3q$siv$1...@zot.isi.edu>...
Alan Figgatt
argument. I owned one for 2 years and I would regard it as an apo. The VX-102ED
(f/6.5 version) has excellent color correction, very close to my TV-85. There
were no obvious magenta/purple fringes around bright objects. My VX-102ED had
good optics, but it did have more spherical aberration than my TV-85 and the
mechanics were typical middle of the road Vixen. Sold the VX-102ED because I
recently acquired an AP 130 ;-).
I saw the SV 102EDT at NEAF and was impressed with the build quality of the
mechanics, especially the JMI dual speed focuser. Optics looked good, but
looking at a dollar bill on the wall with indoor lighting didn't tell me
anything about the color correction. I have looked through a SV 102D at Jupiter
and it was obvious that it was a short focal ratio achromat, but StellarVue has
never claimed otherwise, AFAIK.
The EDT thread that will not die (kept alive because Valery doesn't know when
to quit) has piqued my interest in looking through a 102EDT at night sometime.
If a fellow club member ever shows up with one at one of our observing sites,
maybe I can star test it on a some bright objects and compare the color to my
experience with the VX-102ED.
Clear skies,
Alan Figgatt
Randy Rourke
> Three years ago, after spending all my life making telescopes and
> enjoying astronomy, my astronomy students finally talked me into
> starting a small company making hand made telescopes. The standard was
> going to be (and continues to be)we ship nothing unless I would
> personally own and use it. This was my response to all those years
> struggling with inferior instruments.
You are bashing your competitors "inferior instruments" yet from the
title of your post you do not seem to appreciate the same.
While there may certainly be instruments that are inferior, these
instruments also cost considerabley less. Also there are certainly
instruments that are equal to SV products.
> WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED OUR
> ACHROMATS
> PROVIDE APO OR EVEN SEMI-APO PERFORMANCE. We have been very careful
> about
> this.
I recently noticed your website states that the SV78LM was compared
directly to APO at Riverside.
A while back I noticed one of your "user testimonials" claimed that
the 80mm 9/D offered color correction equaling instruments that cost
five times the price.
> But compare the AT1010 with the Chinese imports with which they are
> most often compared. Do it yourself. You will see that it is not magic
> but
> hard work that makes the difference here. So I respectfully ask my
> business
> competitors to stop claiming that we are claiming magic. We are proud
> of
> what we do and we will continue to be proud and ethusiastic.
You have many happy customers which is nice, it shows your sincerity
and dedication. Yet you are comparing the AT1010 to scopes that cost
$100.00 to $200.00. For the additional cost I would expect the AT1010
to be better.
It is nice to have the choice of beter built short tube. For some the
price difference is worth it for others it is not.
We will
> also
> continue to compare our PRODUCTION scopes with other PRODUCTION
> scopes. Sure
> you can get a good sample from anyone. But how do they all do? That is
> what
> matters and it is what we spend so much time working on.
>
There you go again, bashing your competitors quality control.
Introducing our new line of telescopes, I had limited time
> to
> respond to the last round of anti-SV statements. Now that we are
> producing
> our new apos, I have more time now to try and articulate the truth and
> to
> take other appropriate action which I am doing. I did not start this.
> I do not criticize my competitors. That is not my job. My job is to
> make the best telescopes I can and tell people about them.
>
> Look at the astrophotos and read what noted and respected
> astrophotographers
> are now saying with the real evidence regarding the EDT. This is much
> more
> powerful than retoric based on a lack of experience with any scope in
> question. Again, the EDT is not an apo. Never said it was.
Other optical designers (Who are your competitors and not Valery D.)
have stated that using even the least expensive "real" ED glass in a
well figured triplet will yield APO level results. Hence the "fake" ED
speculation. The EDT does not achieve APO performance, nor has it been
advertised as such.
While you are certainly not obligated to reveal any proprietary design
information, the EDT is a triplet design, while other ED scopes are
doublet designs. Advertising an A-B comparison chart that lists
"Stallervue Optical Accuracy" as a feature not found on competing
brands does not cut it for me. At this price level one expects a less
sophmoric approach. Is the EDT Cement Spaced? Are the competitors
doublets air spaced? Are these differences one might consider in
making a choice?
The SV102EDT triplet configuration as opposed to the doublet
configuration that the other ED scopes use is bound raise legitimate
questions. Assuming you are using REAL ED glass, and I have no reason
to doubt you and given what has been said regarding ED glass in a
triplet, then something has to give. Yet nothing seems forthcoming.
We now make
> apos
> so I expect this will turn up the heat even more. I am not looking
> forward
Well hopefully not since you are at the top of the food chain here.
Good luck.
> Compare our 80/9D achromat with other Chinese 80mm refractors on the
> market.
> Hopefully, a review will soon be made of this scope compared to actual
> like
> scopes. We keep getting our achromats compared to apos. Flattering, but
> unfair.
AGAIN your own website makes the claim with the SV78LM at Riverside
bit.
You invite the comparisons, then cry foul.
> My advise: See what the
> actual users think and do not expect our achromats to provide you with
> three color crossings. They are good but they aren't that good. Never
> said they were.
That is half the battle. for example, Cloudynights has two reviews of
the
AT1010. One is very flattering, and written by the Stellarvue Yahoo
group moderator. It seems to indicate a performance level that is not
typical of fast achromats. Some may find this deceptive. Your website
contains a link to this review and in doing so the reviewers claims
become your claims. The other review is a mixed bag making some good
and some not so good points. Yet the negatives in this review are
typical of fast achromats. If they offer similar planetary performance
compared to longer f ratio achromats, then no one would make or buy
long f ratio achromats.
> Sci-astro is here to serve the amateur astronomical community by
> providing information. When business people provide mis-information,
> it serves no one.
> Clear skies to all of you.
>
> Vic Maris
> Stellarvue
> www.stellarvue.com
No doubt you may find much of this negative. Please understand, that
my intent is to give you some constructive insight as to the
impressions I have which are both good and not so good. I applaud your
company for making a middle market offering such as the AT1010, a nice
choice between a Pronto or a ST80, and I wish your company sucess. I
will probably be a customer at some point as I am looking for a scope
to piggyback on my 8 SCT. However, I do find some of your advertising
to be a reach.
Lastly much of the debate here on SAA is flamed by your own
supporters. They do you more harm than good. I really do not care what
kind of car Valery D. drives, but I am interested in knowing the real
differences in doublet and triplet designs such as the EDT. I joined
the Stellarvue Yahoo group and the first post I read was a satirical
personal attack on Valery D. needless to say it was not the best
impression. I believe the group moderator made the original post. I
also noticed the group moderator recently offering up a beer can for
use as a telescope tube in a derogatory post regarding ST80's. When
your supporters start flaming people and products, some will be
offended and your company will get caught in the crossfire.
Good Luck
Randy
Clive Gibbons
Vic Maris <v...@stellarvue.com> wrote:
>Stellarvue has always stated that our refractors offer excellent color
>correction. This has resulted in many spirited responses criticizing
>our marketing efforts. As stated many times in the past, we have found
>we can obtain better zonal control using glass that is more expensive
>than bk7 f2 in
>production.
True, you've always said that.
But, when other very respected lens makers have asked what exactly you're
talking about, you haven't been able to explain this.
BK7 and F2 are the industry standard glasses for making fine achromats.
They have been for donkey's years. They aren't difficult to work and
because they're made in such huge quantities, they are typically of very
high purity, free from strain, straie, etc. If you wish to make a lovely
achromat, you don't need anything more exotic than BK7 and F2.
So, what do you mean by "better zonal control"?
>As stated previously, we obtain excellent color control by
>making the lenses right, mounting them right, aligning them right and
>triple
>testing each optic before it leaves our factory.
Certainly.
As does anyone else using the right glass to make achromats, mounting them
in a good lens cell and checking the product before it leaves the factory.
It's the sign of a good manufacturer, which you are.
>These are American
>assembled telescopes using lenses of our own design that offer wide
>flat
>fields and excellent color correction. WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED OUR
>ACHROMATS
>PROVIDE APO OR EVEN SEMI-APO PERFORMANCE. We have been very careful
>about
>this.
Some of your promotional material at the Stellarvue website has implied
this in the past. I'm referring to the EDT vs. 102ED "comparison chart".
That material has been removed or modified, to your
company's credit. However, it was there until fairly recently.
>
>But compare the AT1010 with the Chinese imports with which they are
>most often compared. Do it yourself.
The AT1010 vs. 80mm f/5 short tubes clearly shows the superior quality of the AT1010.
How about the AT1010 vs. the Guan Sheng (Taiwan made) 80mm f/6?
Unfortunately, the Guan Sheng isn't marketed very widely in the US, unlike the more
ubiquitous f/5 short tubes.
If anyone has tried a side-by-side between the AT1010 and the GS 80mm f/6, perhaps
they could post their results?
>Recently, some posters used old ads (showing the f-6.1 apo we made for
>a
>short time), claiming we are calling the EDT an APO. Never did that.
IIRC, that ad was in the June 2002 issue of Astronomy magazine.
Are you suggesting the ad never appeared?
Probably it was an error made my the magazine, but it happened.
If it was the magazine's fault, say so, but don't just say "never did that."
>The web
>site is clear and the advertising is accurate. With the dedicated
>following
>we have, why would we do otherwise? This is not to say we are closed
>minded.
>We have benefitted from criticism in the past and we remain open to
>constructive criticism. Our goal is to make things clear.
Vic, if you truly want to "make things clear", try offering up a bit more
information about your products. Don't bother coming on s.a.a. and retelling
the "Stellarvue Story", or restating all the things you've been unable or unwilling
to elaborate on in the past. WRT the mysterious EDT, why not merely provide a
color correction chart at the SV website. You wouldn't need to tell anyone what
glass is used in the lens. AP and Takahashi give their customers such information
in one form or another. I know Tele Vue doesn't, but that's another story... ;)
The fact is that most Stellarvue telescopes aren't readily available for
potential buyers to examine and "see for themselves". In light of this, it would be
good if the company could provide more in the way of real technical data, rather
than very subjective terms like "excellent color correction", "better zonal control"
or "low color".
If you don't want to do this, then perhaps it would be best if you followed Al Nagler's
example and refrain from posting to this group.
Sincerely,
--
Clive Gibbons
Technician, McMaster University,
School of Geography and Geology.
Tdcarls
<<<Some of your promotional material at the Stellarvue website has implied
this in the past. I'm referring to the EDT vs. 102ED "comparison chart".
That material has been removed or modified, to your
company's credit. However, it was there until fairly recently.>>>
Todd
http://www.simpleastrophotography.com
http://www.naturetrails.on.ca
Brian Tung
> Forgive me for splitting hairs, but hasn't the term "Semi-APO" been
> used by some as simply a marketing term? Aren't there scopes out there
> marketed as "Semi-APO" when they are nothing more than achromats? In
> the world of marketing jargon, I can easily see how a well built
> achromat could outperform another achromat with the marketing label of
> "Semi-APO". I like that Stellarvue does not use marketing terms like
> "Semi-APO" to describe their achromats. That said, I for one wish
> there were a universally accepted standard for the term "Semi-APO."
The difference is that Stellarvue didn't put "semi-apo" in quotes or
anything in their previous table. They simply stated it, as if it
aptly and accurately described the telescope. I recognize that even
if we give it some kind of meaning (say, color correction of one part
in 5,000 or so), there aren't any glasses and designs that would yield
that kind of correction for any less than you could create a bona fide
apo.
The second point is that Stellarvue clearly recognized that the first
table was inaccurate and/or misleading. That's why they changed it,
and I commend them for that. I just don't think that Vic can really
state that "WE HAVE NEVER CLAIMED..."
(I mean, really. If he hadn't put it in all caps, I would probably
have just passed it by.)
Brian Tung
> I don't really think that competitors are bashing Stellarvue. Whether
> deliberately or not, SV scopes are being given performance claims that
> rival those APOs that worked hard to acquire.
Well, one man's bashing is another man's honest criticism. The
difference to many is simply whether you agree with it or not and
how the criticism is delivered--politely or brusquely. I can go
quite a ways in tolerating delivery, but come on--some of the people
are rude to the point that I can understand why the target would
call it bashing.
I am just pointing out that they could avoid such criticism by not
making false statements. (Or, at the very least, explain clearly
why they aren't false, instead of setting the chip so carefully on
their shoulder.)
> Corrections rather excuses would go so much further in instilling
> confidence.
I agree, but I do not really see excuses per se from the Stellarvue
management. I just see a bit of defensiveness--understandable, I
suppose--but best to be avoided if you're a business.
> Meade and Celestron have been bashed so often for so many years. For
> the most part these giants remained silent and steadily improved. I
> have become more and more impressed by their products.
I agree that silence is usually the best policy. Have you noticed
how often the Naglers poke their head in? Neither have I. The most
that usually happens is that Steve "Bulldog" White posts a quick reply,
and then the whole thing blows over.
Mike M
<big 'ol snip>
> Compare our 80/9D achromat with other Chinese 80mm refractors on the
> market.
> Hopefully, a review will soon be made of this scope compared to actual
> like
> scopes. We keep getting our achromats compared to apos. Flattering,
> but
> unfair. Achros should be compared to achros. ED achros should be
> compared to other ed achros and apos to apos.
Words to live by. One can only compare apos to apos, never compare apos to
oranges. ;)
Sorry, couldn't resist. As you were.
c ya
Mike
Ron B[ee]
"Brian Tung" <br...@zot.isi.edu> wrote in message
news:afaloa$uh6$1...@zot.isi.edu...
> I agree that silence is usually the best policy. Have you noticed
> how often the Naglers poke their head in? Neither have I. The most
> that usually happens is that Steve "Bulldog" White posts a quick reply,
> and then the whole thing blows over.
>
> Brian Tung <br...@isi.edu>
However, the Naglers are quite accessible via old Ma Bell telephone.
Anyone with any questions about Tele Vue product can try this. Just
call Tele Vue up and ask to speak with Al and/or David. If they're
available
(eg. not in the factory, on the other line, in meetings, travels, etc.),
you'll
be connected to a very pleasant gentlemen. Speaking with my ISDN
telephony experience, that is ;-).
Ron B[ee]
Thomas Michael Trusock
<snip>
: However, the Naglers are quite accessible via old Ma Bell telephone.
<snip>
: you'll
: be connected to a very pleasant gentlemen. Speaking with my ISDN
: telephony experience, that is ;-).
: Ron B[ee]
They are just fine via POTS line too!
<g>
Tom T.
--
On a clear night you can see forever!
Tom Trusock - Technological Systems Consultant
Vic Maris
> misleading. I do understand that ads are ordered well in advance and
> may not reflect possible changes in products.
Al: I reviewed the ad in question. I want to make sure things are
clear and accurate. The June '02 sky and tel ad calls the 102EDT by
name and the caption is in the picture with the 102EDT. Underneath
this, outside of the box, we identify the new 85 and 102 apos. These
are clearly not related. If you propose they are, why would two
numbers be listed as a caption under a picture of a single telescope
which already has it's caption in it's picture box? This does not make
sense to me. Please feel free to e-mail me directly to clarify:
ju...@stellarvue.com
>
> Corrections rather excuses would go so much further in instilling
> confidence.
I can easily make corrections in the magazine and here on the
internet. Mistakes always happen and this is routine. But the example
you give I still see no error. Help me out here.
Vic Maris
I certainly do admit we made a mistake with the chart. It was not
clear. I sure thought it was at the time. Many scopes listed as
semi-apos are just achromats as we all know. That is why I always
avoid the term as I think it is too vague. Everyone has their own
interpretation.
Admit we made a mistake? You bet. We make mistakes all the time. We
are human. But they are honest mistakes.
I said it before, Jan and Judy have said it. I will say it again. You
were right about the chart.
We continue to benefit from constructive criticism. But there is a
huge difference between constructive criticism and the charge or
implication of purposeful deception. We do not do that.
Vic
br...@zot.isi.edu (Brian Tung) wrote in message news:<af8t3q$siv$1...@zot.isi.edu>...
Brian Tung
> I certainly do admit we made a mistake with the chart. It was not
> clear. I sure thought it was at the time. Many scopes listed as
> semi-apos are just achromats as we all know. That is why I always
> avoid the term as I think it is too vague. Everyone has their own
> interpretation.
>
> Admit we made a mistake? You bet. We make mistakes all the time. We
> are human. But they are honest mistakes.
I am certain they are, and it is good of you to own up to them. I am
simply pointing out that in the midst of this sort of criticism, it is
unwise to insist on things that are not quite true. Although it is
surely *substantially* true, it still lessens your credibility in the
eyes of many who don't feel obliged to give you the benefit of the
doubt.
> I said it before, Jan and Judy have said it. I will say it again. You
> were right about the chart.
Thanks. But I am not interested in being right, so much as I am
interested in businesses bending over backward to avoid misinterpretation.
In my opinion, the original post in this thread did not quite do that.
Your reply here certainly clears it all up, and much thanks to you for
that.
> We continue to benefit from constructive criticism. But there is a
> huge difference between constructive criticism and the charge or
> implication of purposeful deception. We do not do that.
No, I don't think you do.
jerry warner
is the universally-accepted-practice. It's predictable this
debate would come up in the refractor crowd as a
"universally-accepted-hypocracy". Universally-accepted is as
Universally-accepted does, and it changes almost daily depending on whose oxe is
getting gored (or simply threatened) and which
body-politic is involved at some transaction and which regime has the upper hand at
some time. Geeeeeeeeeez! Red pants, green pants, blue, or uniform black - get the kid
out the door and off to
school!
The ability of some people to split hairs on a patient that is
incurably bald ..................... just astounds me!
Semi-APO may actually stand for: "Semi Appropriate"!
Jerry
jerry warner
amateur astronomy these days, you have missed the boat completely.
Jerry
Cover2Cover
With your help we should be able to keep this thread going for at least
another month! ;-)
- the Hermit
Gert Weber
Hi,
>
> Forgive me for splitting hairs, but hasn't the term "Semi-APO" been
> used by some as simply a marketing term? Aren't there scopes out
there
> marketed as "Semi-APO" when they are nothing more than achromats? In
> the world of marketing jargon, I can easily see how a well built
> achromat could outperform another achromat with the marketing label
of
> "Semi-APO". I like that Stellarvue does not use marketing terms like
> "Semi-APO" to describe their achromats. That said, I for one wish
> there were a universally accepted standard for the term "Semi-APO."
I do like to split hairs too...
I own a so called 100mm f6 semi APO, wich is one of the worst scopes I
have ever looked through, because it shows lots of colours.
My question is, wht "Semi-Apo" may mean. An achromat is corrected for
two colours, normally red and green; an APO is corrected for three
colours (red, green blue).
How does anyone correct a Semi-APO - does he use a "Semi-Colour" like
"bl" instead of "blue"?
--
Dunklen, klaren und ruhigen Himmel!
Gert
(unter der Lichtglocke einer rheinischen Großstadt)
gert....@netcologne.de
Clive Gibbons
I'd say the most critical issue affecting my personal enjoyment
of amateur astronomy is the fact that we've had NOTHING BUT CLOUDS, HAZE,
DRIZZLE AND GENERAL ATMOSPHERIC CRAPPINESS for the past week, with more
predicted for the next few days.
A friend of mine purchased an AP 130 EDF last week.
Based on that, this weather should continue on for most of the summer. ;)
In article <3D195218...@inav.net>,
--
Jackie LaVaque
"Clive Gibbons" <gibb...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA> wrote in message
news:afcet8$6...@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca...
> I'd say the most critical issue affecting my personal enjoyment
> of amateur astronomy is the fact that we've had NOTHING BUT CLOUDS, HAZE,
> DRIZZLE AND GENERAL ATMOSPHERIC CRAPPINESS for the past week, with more
> predicted for the next few days.
> A friend of mine purchased an AP 130 EDF last week.
I purchased a Tak FS102 last week. Hell's bells, I knew this would happen!
> Based on that, this weather should continue on for most of the summer. ;)
I just looked out my window and the sky has this very peculiar shade to
it... wha..? What color is that? Why, it almost looks like robin's-egg blue.
Holy crap! Could it be that I might be able to use my new scope tonight?
Jackie
Who is not getting her hopes up, though
Clive Gibbons
Not the June Sky and Telescope.
It's in the June '02 issue of Astronomy.
The ad shows a picture of what appears to be the 102EDT.
To the lower left of the image it sez:
SV102
Triplet
APO
Since the EDT is the only triplet Stellarvue presently makes, it's
plausible that some folks would think the ad is claiming the EDT is an
apo. The ad in the July issue of Astronomy has been corrected and there's
no problem with it.
In article <755b97d4.02062...@posting.google.com>,
Vic Maris <v...@stellarvue.com> wrote:
--
Clive Gibbons
Yup, comparing apos to old Celestron SCTs is usually a very unsatisfying experience!
(rim-shot!!) :)
Clive Gibbons
Alan Figgatt <afig...@erols.com> wrote:
> Why does the Vixen f/6.5 102 ED get dragged into this StellerVue achro vs apo
>argument. I owned one for 2 years and I would regard it as an apo. The VX-102ED
>(f/6.5 version) has excellent color correction, very close to my TV-85. There
>were no obvious magenta/purple fringes around bright objects. My VX-102ED had
>good optics, but it did have more spherical aberration than my TV-85 and the
>mechanics were typical middle of the road Vixen. Sold the VX-102ED because I
>recently acquired an AP 130 ;-).
Hi Alan.
Anyone who's interested should have a look at your excellent comparison of the
Vixen 102ED vs. the TV-85 at the CloudyNights website.
http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews/tv85.htm
I found it to be very interesting reading.
>
> I saw the SV 102EDT at NEAF and was impressed with the build quality of the
>mechanics, especially the JMI dual speed focuser. Optics looked good, but
>looking at a dollar bill on the wall with indoor lighting didn't tell me
>anything about the color correction. I have looked through a SV 102D at Jupiter
>and it was obvious that it was a short focal ratio achromat, but StellarVue has
>never claimed otherwise, AFAIK.
Vic states that the 102D is an "attentuated" achromat.
The webpage for the SV102D at Stellarvue's site is presently unavailable.
However, from www.archive.org, a previous edition of the 102D listing includes this:
"This is a very well made achromat. Like all achromats, it has some subtle color on bright
objects, but much, much less than other competitive short tube 102's and those erroneously
defined as semi-apo. The visual appearance shows a very minimal
amount of color - like a much longer focal length telescope."
This statement would seem to be at odds with what you observed, Alan.
Maybe some folks are just more sensitive to spurious color than others.
Color insensitivity might increase if you manufactured or own the scope in question.
:)
>
> Clear skies,
> Alan Figgatt
>
>
>
>David wrote:
>>
>> Vixen 102-ED F6.5
>>
>> David
>>
>> "Brian P. Murphy" wrote:
>>
>> > Since I haven't used an SV EDT, but I want to evaluate
>> > one for purchase, it would be helpful if you could direct me to the most
>> > similar scope in the market to compare it to.
>
Jon Isaacs
I would be interested in understanding this further.
Possibly in the interest of openness and further understanding, Vic could
comment on exactly what the term "Attenuated Achromat" means.
Does this mean that some wavelengths are attenuated in a similar fashion to say
a Minus Violet filter so as to reduce the false color??? To me that is the
obvious implication but it may be erronious.
I would be interested in a clarification on this point.
jon isaacs
Ron B[ee]
> Vic states that the 102D is an "attentuated" achromat.
> The webpage for the SV102D at Stellarvue's site is presently unavailable.
> However, from www.archive.org, a previous edition of the 102D listing
includes this:
>
> "This is a very well made achromat. Like all achromats, it has some subtle
color on bright
> objects, but much, much less than other competitive short tube 102's and
those erroneously
> defined as semi-apo. The visual appearance shows a very minimal
> amount of color - like a much longer focal length telescope."
>
One of the web page for the 102D is available but not easily accessible,
Clive.
It is available from the Order button.
http://www.stellarvue.com/items/item176.htm
> Clive Gibbons
> Technician, McMaster University,
> School of Geography and Geology.
Ron B[ee]
PS I too greatly enjoyed Alans' review.
Clive Gibbons
Ron B[ee] <ro...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>One of the web page for the 102D is available but not easily accessible,
>Clive.
>It is available from the Order button.
>http://www.stellarvue.com/items/item176.htm
Thanks for the link, Ron.
From that listing:
"The optical system was design to reduce false color to an absolute minimum. We acheived this goal using special glass, a
special full multi-coating, extremely accurate figure and alignment. The optical system corrects for and attenuates false
color. Many are reporting no color on most stars and planets and only a hint of color on the brightest stars and planets. This
is unlike any conventional optical system."
Who needs an EDT? :)
--
Alan Figgatt
it almost 2 years ago in a bit of a rush and I wonder if I should add a
follow-up note sometime now that I sold the VX-102ED (and brought a AP130). I
also meant to submit a review of my Celestron 9.25" SCT, but never did get
around to it, in part because it's an SCT - what exactly do I say? I find
reviews which compare 2 or more scopes to be useful as you can bounce the 2 off
of each other. The crazy idea has occurred to me to buy a DSBS side by side
mounting plate for my G-11 and do a simultaneous comparison shootout of the AP
130 vs the 9.25" SCT ;-). But my 9.25" SCT has developed an irritating mirror
flop problem and I need to fix it first; also I don't have the time or energy to
do this anytime soon. A fairer test for limiting mag might be to use a 8" SCT,
but still I could see such a review stirring up a flame thread or 2 ;->.
As for the SV 102D, as I said, it looked like an obvious 4" f/6 achromat to me
on Jupiter. Lots of purple and some yellow. Maybe the one I looked through
predates the "attenuating" minus-violet filter? Clive is right about this stuff
on the 102D, SV would have been better off just calling the 102D a high quality
achro and leaving it at that. What exactly the 102EDT offers compared to their
102APO is confusing. I will have to keep an eye out for either one at star
parties or club gatherings.
Clear skies,
Alan Figgatt
ValeryD
> >But compare the AT1010 with the Chinese imports
>
>
> own an AT1010. There is no comparison.
> The AT1010 is so much better mechanically, and
> much better corrected for spherical abberation
> and astigmatism. The plastic lens cell used on the ST-80
> is a piece of crap. The difference in secondary color
> is about what you would expect going from
> f/5 to f/6. But that is what I expected.
>
> As for bashing, in the case of Valery, he just
> has his head up his ass.
These words in your mouth is a compliment for me. Why? Easily.
Let see which kind of private e-mails I constantly receive from
peoples, who know well what is what and who is who. I will not
full-fill this topic with many examples od such letters, I will
show you one, which exactly describes persons like you are.
Note, that this were written by a very valuable among amateurs
person.
"I tell you the truth. Stellarvue peoples are STUPID, STUPID, AND MORE
STUPID!!
You can talk them. My stupid dog is more intelligent.
Now we will see more stupid statements from them. KEEP IT UP!"
V.D.
Cover2Cover
I didn't quite get that, what was that person trying to say?
- the Hermit
Ian Molton
ar...@mercury.kherson.ua (ValeryD) wrote:
>
> You can talk them.
Well, then their grasp of the English language surpasses even yours!
Al M
I just finished reading the information on the 102D at:
http://www.stellarvue.com/items/item176.htm
It appears very clear that some sort of minus-violet coating is being
applied. I came up with that idea last year and coated several dozen
objectives, including a few for Stellarvue. The idea has probably been
used by others in the past.
At f/6.9, the 102D will need a moderately aggressive minus violet
coating. If too aggressive, the coating will impart a yellow hue to
the image. If the 102D's color is brought to the level of the C102, I
would consider that enough. I find the color in the C102 acceptable,
though not my 5" f/9.3 refractor.
The TAL100 uses glass that absorbs violet. Whether that was
deliberate, I don't know.
I did find the statement 'exceptional zonal correction', puzzling
though.
More recently, I have been coating Neodymium glass with the MV1
formula. This filter has strong violet/blue rejection, yet exhibits
very neutral color images. Perhaps, achromat doublets could use
neodymium glass with a MV coating, as one of the elements.
Al M
Al M
Jon Isaacs
>applied. I came up with that idea last year and coated several dozen
>objectives, including a few for Stellarvue. The idea has probably been
>used by others in the past.
In my way of thinking, if one wants to filter the false color of an Achromat,
then one ought to just use a filter of ones choice. This gives the user the
option of having the reduced through-put or not.
I can see that a Minus-Violet filter has advantages for certain situations, but
I fail to see the advantages of building it into the objective rather than just
using a separate filter.
Jon Isaacs
JMc
the objective. It's essentially an aperture stop where the f-ratio for
blue and violet is much higher than the f-ratio for the full lens. In
theory, you get the light grasp and resolution of say a 6" f/8 lens,
with the color correction of a 3" f/16 lens.
Jim McSheehy
39:03 N
108:34 W
JAFO
>STUPID!!
But our English is better.
My IQ tested at 140. What's yours?
OK, you're probably pretty smart but
your personality is about as pleasant
as a deep rectal itch.
Jon Isaacs
>the objective. It's essentially an aperture stop where the f-ratio for
>blue and violet is much higher than the f-ratio for the full lens. In
>theory, you get the light grasp and resolution of say a 6" f/8 lens,
>with the color correction of a 3" f/16 lens.
>
>Jim McSheehy
>39:03 N
>108:34 W
>
> > Jon Isaacs wrote:
>
This is a scope with an 102 mm objective. This can have no better light grasp
or resolution than of a 102 mm (4 inch) objective.
Were one to start with a 6 inch F-8 objective, and use a frequency selective
mask of the outer 1/2 of the objective, then you would be reducing selected
frequency by 3/4. This is not really the same having the color correction of
an 3 inch F16 scope because the view will be missing 3/4 of the light at the
rejected frequency.
One could still do this with a filter, it would just have to be an aperture
filter.
jon isaacs
Wes Bolin
> > we made for
> a
> short time), claiming we are calling the EDT an APO. Never did that.
> providing information. When business people provide mis-information,
> it serves no one.
>
> Clear skies to all of you.
>
> Vic Maris
> Stellarvue
> www.stellarvue.com
Hello
I am an EDT owner and want to state that Vic NEVER misrepresented any
infor-
mation to me when I was purchasing this telescope. I have owned high
end
refractors from AP and TMB and TAK, and I was well aware of what an
APO image
would be on bright objects and faint objects. I am not an optician,
but I
do know that the EDT has less color fringing and better dfinition than
the
only other 4 inch achromat that I have owned, namely the BORG 100
Achro. It
does not have the color purity of the AP, TAK, and TMB scopes. The
definition
is not as good as those telescopes either. The reason I bought it is
that it gives me more light than the 80mm class scopes and the color
is minimal for
my viewing. Mechanically the JMI focuser is great and easy to use, and
the
workmanship is to be applauded. Vic cautioned me that the EDT would
not give
me images like the APO's- he said I would see some color and lose some
clarity. I said OK. He did say the colors were "truer" than the 102D,
and I
can confirm this. Never once did he make derogatory comments about
other
manufacturer's instruments. Vic has helped me with a couple of
problems
in a timely manner, as did Thomas and Roland help me in the past. I
am very
happy with the EDT and its limitations that Vic told me about. I am
very
happy with the service and sales that Vic has provided. If that makes
me
stupid, then "Stupid is as stupid does".
Regards,
Wes
Cover2Cover
say that Vic Maris ripped them off and now won't return their calls?! Have you
received emails from people that aren't happy with their scopes from
Stellarvue?! Have you received emails from people that say that Vic Maris has
perpetrated some sort of fraudelent telescope selling scheme that hooked them
and now they have a scope that they can't resell?!
If you aint happy with your Stellarvue scope just tell Vic. See what happens. My
bet (name the wager) is that Vic will bend over backwards for you.
So what's your point Valery. Sour grapes?! Are you trying to save all of us from
some unseen menace?!
Vic removed the offensive text... now all that people are left with are
semantics.
What's your point Valery?!
Or are you just trying to get this thread to last till Christmas! This post will
help!
- the Hermit
ValeryD
> Hello
> I am an EDT owner and want to state that Vic NEVER misrepresented any
> information to me when I was purchasing this telescope.
And what with the following statement? Or it was addressed to
absolutely
naive amateurs?
""The optical system was design to reduce false color to an absolute
minimum.
We acheived this goal using special glass, a special full
multi-coating, extremely accurate figure and alignment. The optical
system corrects for
and attenuates false color. Many are reporting no color on most stars
and planets and only a hint of color on the brightest stars and
planets. This
is unlike any conventional optical system."
V.D.
ValeryD
> Am I missing something here Valery. Have you received emails from people that
> say that Vic Maris ripped them off and now won't return their calls?! Have you
> received emails from people that aren't happy with their scopes from
> Stellarvue?! Have you received emails from people that say that Vic Maris has
> perpetrated some sort of fraudelent telescope selling scheme that hooked them
> and now they have a scope that they can't resell?!
>
> If you aint happy with your Stellarvue scope just tell Vic. See what happens. My
> bet (name the wager) is that Vic will bend over backwards for you.
>
> So what's your point Valery. Sour grapes?! Are you trying to save all of us from
> some unseen menace?!
>
> Vic removed the offensive text... now all that people are left with are
> semantics.
>
> What's your point Valery?!
>
> Or are you just trying to get this thread to last till Christmas!
>This post will help!
I can't compete with you in english words equilibristic, I just can let
you read one more recent letter from your co-sitizen and who know well
what is going on. Read:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hello Valery,
I agree with you .... Many in Stellarvue are stupid.
Stephen Pitt is more emotional. He has good understanding, but is driven by
emotion.
Peoples, who spend so much money on mediocre equipment, are not very
intelligent. Many of these peoples don't have much money and must save up.
I feel that Vic is not very truthful, by permitting this nonsense.
Best regards, "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V.D.
Cover2Cover
someone who was not satisfied with their scope and Vic wouldn't help them.
I can show you letters that were sent to me saying you are an asshole but that doesn't
prove anything, it says nothing of your accomplishments, abilities or failures...
besides, I could have written those letters.
Enjoy your day. You don't have to be a prick to get along in this world.
- Don
JAFO
Gary Hand
You and I have never met. All I know about you comes from your postings on the news
group. Based on that and the fact that I am older and am known to speak my mind too, I
humbly offer the following advice.
1. Never insult the competition. You will never will the argument. People will question
the motives and the integreity of the writter as much as what the writer is saying. By
these personal attacks, you are helping foster a mindset that it is acceptable to attack
people, manufactures, and therefore vendors.
2. In the words of no so famouns poet " Strong language is the sign of a weak argument"
If you have to resort to insults, inuendo, sarcasm and cursing, you are admitting that you
really never had anything important to say.
3. I don’t carry Stellervue or your stuff either. But of all people, YOU should know how
much bone crushing effort and resources it takes to start a company from scratch and
maintain a good reputation. Your off hand and always negative comments, not only minimize
Vic’s outstanding efforts but yours too. (and mine).
4. The first thing everyone learns in the very first class in marketing is NEVER MENTION
THE COMPETITION. In the last 4 days Stellarvue has been mentioned at least 100 times and
you company has been mentioned 0. Think about it.
Gary Hand
Hands on Optics
Tony B
never dealt with him. I suspect he is very capable and talented.
Nevertheless, the impression he has created by his seemingly obsessive and
negatives posts that I've come across on this group and other forums has
left a negative impression in my mind. He definitely is not doing himself
any good as you point out. Valery, its never too late to start turning
things around...
The best to all of you....
Tony
--
When Replying, Please Replace SPAMNOT With tony_bonanno. Thank you.
-----
"Gary Hand" <gary....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3D1C85DA...@verizon.net...
Jon Isaacs
>never dealt with him. I suspect he is very capable and talented.
Doing a web search of the various projects VD has handled it is clear he is
capable and talented.
Why does everyone find it necessary to attack Valery here? He has actually
posted very little here and mostly when someone has mentioned him.
Rather than bashing Valery, why not wonder a bit about a scope that achieves
its "color correction" by filtering. Personally I find it a rather strange
way to go about it, after all, this could be duplicated with an aperture filter
or even nearly duplicated with an eyepiece filter and then objective would not
be compromised.
I would like to see the issues discussed and not the people.
Jon Isaacs
Cover2Cover
What newsgroup have you been reading, it sure aint SAA?!
- Don
Jon Isaacs
>
>- Don
I have been reading SAA and I have read all of this thread that has been
available to me.
It is much easier to discuss Valery, but discussing Valery is just an easy way
to side step the basic issues.
It has taken a fair amount of effort but I think I have gotten the straight
scoop on what an "attenuated achromat" is and how it functions.
Now what I would like to see is some comments on the technique of applying a
coating to part of the objective in order to reduce the color. Personally I
find it questionable because it seems to me that the same thing can be done
without committing the objective to this limitation with a partial aperture
filter.
So again, rather than discussing Valery, I would like to see some comments on
this issue.
Jon Isaacs
Richard
>Three years ago, after spending all my life making telescopes and
>enjoying astronomy, my astronomy students finally talked me into
>starting a small company making hand made telescopes. The standard was
>going to be (and continues to be)we ship nothing unless I would
>personally own and use it. This was my response to all those years
>struggling with inferior instruments.
Lots of writing and absolutely NO specifics. More B.S. from the king.
So here's a question for you:
Crown flint Achromat: 1/2000 f.l. colour corrected.
Doublet Fluorite: 1/16000 f.l. colour corrected.
EXACTLY WHERE DO YOU SCOPES PLACE?
Maybe then your more idiotic supporters who have CLAIMED better colour
correction than is possible will either provide some proof themselves
or simply fade away?
-Rich
Cover2Cover
You're living in the past.
You should have written two weeks ago. All that has been more or less
cleared up.
The only thing we're discussing now, apparently, is the stupidity level of
Stellarvue supporters. I see that you've covered that though.
Also Rich, I would reccomend from the level of your post that you join us
as a Stellarvue supporter, I can see that you are more than qualified.
(You can take that as an insult or a compliment...depending on which
person you listen to)
- Don
Stephen Pitt
I believe there is no issue. There is a choice.
If I select a TAK, I may find an amber tint. So,
I make another choice.
The customer is informed, then makes
a choice. It is that simple.
Stephen Pitt
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
ValeryD
Gary,
Anyway thank you much for your care about me. But what I can tell you and
others my critics is:
1. I am not born yesterday. I know well what you do speaks about.
This is obvious and trivial for understanding and do not deceive
yourself thinking I do not understand all negatives you mentioned.
2. However you and many others forgot, by unknown for me reasons, that
telling truth can't make a man bad. I can _looks_ bad in you or somebody
else eyes, but this does not mean I am a bad man.
3. You all forgot completely, that I never said, that SV scopes are bad.
Who can give me the link to my words where I told this. All I told, and
the reviews confirmed this, that SV scopes are not as good in color correction
vs others as this bravely advertised at SV website.
4. If only this discssions were in SV favor, Vic never appears here again
as he promised. But, I hope, that the things becomes not so good for SV
due to their false ads and in the reality - peoples deceiving in such or
another way. Step by step, under the pressure from peoples, who wish to
know the truth, Vic and his stuff confirmed, that not all was correct in their
ads policy, while they still continue to state, that they are honest.
But far not all peoples are so knewlegeless as they may think.
> 4. The first thing everyone learns in the very first class in marketing is >NEVER MENTION THE COMPETITION. In the last 4 days Stellarvue has been >mentioned at least 100 times and you company has been mentioned 0. Think
>about it.
To be absolutely honest if I interested in more orders, then I can say - very
very little. We are backlogged about seven to nine months. And if peoples
and organization, who interested in serious optics/scopes, find, that we are
reliable and professional enough and pay us tens of thousands $ downpayments,
this does mean we are on the right track and we don't need to correct our way
at all. Our developments are first class done and we plan to continue this
way.
And we will never use the way of deceive peoples and wash their brains with
words like "very minimal colors", "new formulae" etc, which are nothing but
nonsense.
And be sure, if any company like SV will start to wash peoples brains, I will
be here and ask for the truth.
As for strong words/weak arguments. You are mistaken. My english words stock is
quite limited and I don't like to spend any significant time to lean english
more to be able to write with nuances and shades each english-speken man can
do. Let speak in russian and you will never tell me - your arguments are weak.
Sincerely,
V.D.
Cover2Cover
- D
Jon Isaacs
>
>I believe there is no issue. There is a choice. If I select a TAK, I may
find an amber tint. So, I make another choice.
>The customer is informed, then makes
>a choice. It is that simple.
>
>Stephen Pitt
I agree it is important that the customer be informed. I also believe it is
important for the manufacturer or seller to make that information available.
Jon Isaacs
Vic Maris
When I started this thread I made a short list of people I thought
would react and this list is now nearly complete. I fully expected the
reaction that ensued. I need say no more.
But then something unexpected happened. Right after posting this, I
started receiving totally unsolicited e-mails from people I do not
know. Each and every one of them offered support for what Stellarvue
is trying to accomplish. Most were not pleased with many of the
reactive posts. We are talking major distain here. Many mentioned that
they were personally e-mailing me because they did not want to get
mixed up in the fray. I cannot say that I blame them and I will
respect their desire to stay anonymous. We always protect the privacy
of our customers.
So if you are so inclined, please e-mail me with your thoughts. I will
personally answer each e-mail. I have found that when people e-mail me
personally with advise, it is often the best advise as it is offered
freely and without motive.
So I would like to publicly thank all of you who e-mailed me. I spent
several hours and answered each one of you and I will not share your
names but I do want to state publically how much I appreciate your
kindness. You are the kind of people I enjoy spending the night under
the stars with.
Vic Maris
www.stellarvue.com
Gary Hand
L I G H T E N U P !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your highly defensive response, proves my point.
You responded that you know what you are talking about. ..... I never said you didn't at any time.
You responded that you are honest. ,..... I never questioned your honesty at any time.
You are defending that you are not a "bad man"...... I never implied you were at any time.
You defended your insults, cursing and negative comments with.. " We are backlogged about seven to nine months." What the hell does that have to do with it. You make a good product and no one is competing with you yet.
As for my personal opinion, You have set your self up as a Policeman defending us from your competitors. No thanks we don't need you to do that. I like 99% of the people who read the group are fairly smart. We just don't need a
person telling us how bad everyone else is and we must believe them. If you started talking like that at a party, we would walk away from you. We need information and communication not Big Brother Destroyer of All.
Your cursing, insults and innuendo translate very well. It has nothing to do with speaking Russian or English. Your meaning of your wording is clear. Your motives are clear to most. Many would think you are successful IN SPITE
of your behavior on this group, not because of it. What do you think?
Take care and again lighten up.
Jeez,
Gary
Gary Hand
Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
Attack, Attack, Attack,
Rich good for you, you found another person to attack. You tell him or his
customers to speak up or fade away.
In the last two years, Vic has built a sound business with thousands of
customers and destined to be a major payer in the telescope world and rich.
You however have been banned from some telescope stores in Canada and most
in this group don't take you seriously anymore. From all points of view it
is you who is fading away.
Thank God you are here to protect us.
RICH SAVE US.
Yawn....
David
ValeryD wrote:
> .....We are backlogged about seven to nine months.
Backlogged or "production problems" ?
Is it true that the Chromacorr II will be offered not before winter ? Chromacorr-M ? Safix ? Special Aries Ronchi ? Interference filters ? Extenders sets ? Super Orthos?
"Soonest" ?
David
ValeryD
I think you don't know one important thing: we doing main our income with
production far from accessories like you mentioned. These accessories have
the lowest priorities among our production.
Also, much better to spend some more time to develop production to a better
level, than offer too fresh incomplete items.
1. Ronchise are ready for shipment to John Hopper
2. Chromacor-II were made in small quantity to see if our lasses internal
properties measurement are correct and if not which correction we need
to make to have them done right.
Same with new batch of Chr-I
3. Super ortos were never promised. Another type of planetary eyepieces were
promised and they are in progress.
4. The first batch of SAFIXes are under the test in assembly. How many of them
will come out good we don't know. Will be known (for our dealer) next week.
So your attempt to pinch me looks quite idiotic. Don't you think?
V.D.
ValeryD
> What do you think?
>
>
> Take care and again lighten up.
> Jeez,
> Gary
Gary,
If you interested what do I think - re-read my previous post you so
promptly answered.
I heard enough good and enough far not so good about you, but I never
commented your person and will stay away of this.
V.D.
Richard
wrote:
>Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
>Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
>Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
>Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
>Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack, Attack,
>Attack, Attack, Attack,
>
>Rich good for you, you found another person to attack. You tell him or his
>customers to speak up or fade away.
>
>In the last two years, Vic has built a sound business with thousands of
>customers and destined to be a major payer in the telescope world and rich.
>You however have been banned from some telescope stores in Canada and most
>in this group don't take you seriously anymore. From all points of view it
>is you who is fading away.
>
>Thank God you are here to protect us.
>RICH SAVE US.
>
>Yawn....
>
>
You are a dealer, beholding to (or wishing to be beholding to)
whomever provides you with an income stream.
It doesn't matter much though; There are plenty of companies
content to get by on merits rather than exaggeration. Hopefully,
most people will gravitate toward them.
But your lack of concern regarding legitimate questions about
products speaks volumes about your ultimate opinion of customers.
-Rich
Randy Rourke
>
> When I started this thread I made a short list of people I thought
> would react and this list is now nearly complete. I fully expected the
> reaction that ensued. I need say no more.
>
Gary Hand
even you said so below, but you just have that boner about venders don't you and
had to say something. This isn't about me or anyone defending Vic or anyone
else. It is about YOU and your constant vindictive, negative, and downright
nasty postings.
Here is a posting I sent this group about you April 20 when you were attacking
me. Nothing hs changed.
Subject: Re: Rich Anderson
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 17:45:19 -0400
From: Gary Hand <gary....@verizon.net>
Reply-To: astr...@handsonoptics.com
Organization: Hands on Optics
"................... So you cuss and call names. You call everyone names. You
fabricate arguments to get people riled up and then guide with additional
postings to meet your agenda. You tear everyone down so you look bigger. You
have attacked mostly people from behind, so to speak, that don't read the news
group or are in a position where it would not be practical to fight back. You
hit where it will do the most damage and make the biggest impact. The word
Terrorist has been thrown around allot lately, but that is a good a definition
as most. Your arguments are innuendo, half truths, misstated facts, out of
context snippets, threats in the case above, out and out lies.
YOU HURT PEOPLE. Let me repeat that, you hurt people. You hurt good people.
Usually very good people. People that have accomplished more than you. People
that have put blood and long hours into this hobby. People that are building
something not tearing it down. And you just can't stand that. And you do it on
purpose. I feel sorry for you. I really do. You know telescopes, but you don't
have to hurt people to show it."
Rich...You are a Diaper Rash. You pop up periodically, irritate people, a
impossible to get rid of, a pain in the butt and there is no practical use for
you.
Randy Roy
>
Hey Rich,
A quick search on SAA with key words "Rich" and "B.S." just got 223
hits! From that, I would say you are the "King of B.S.".
Congratulations and keep up the good work!
Randy
Alan Figgatt
>
> Gary,
>
> Anyway thank you much for your care about me. But what I can tell you and
> others my critics is:
>
> 1. I am not born yesterday. I know well what you do speaks about.
> This is obvious and trivial for understanding and do not deceive
> yourself thinking I do not understand all negatives you mentioned.
>
> 2. However you and many others forgot, by unknown for me reasons, that
> telling truth can't make a man bad. I can _looks_ bad in you or somebody
> else eyes, but this does not mean I am a bad man.
> Sincerely,
>
> V.D.
Valery, if I may join in here, I agree with Gary, please give it a rest! I only
posted to attempt to set the record straight on the Vixen 102-ED, which was
somehow getting dragged into this SV 102 EDT flame war. I'm not happy that you
then dragged my name into starting a new thread attacking StellarVue under the
subject "Attn: Stephen Pitt!". I have not looked through a SV 102EDT at night;
only saw one indoors at NEAF. I was impressed with the mechanics, but I can not
say anything one way or the other about the EDT color correction, so leave my
name out of this.
Valery, you have made your point on the 102EDT over and over again. Until you
have the chance to see one in person or somehow get the details on the optical
design & glass, please stop posting on this topic.
Clear skies,
Alan Figgatt
ValeryD
And what we hear from the SV?
Said: "Very minimal colors". The truth: attenuated objective. Same effect cane
achieved by simple 1.25" MV filter purchase and installing it in the star-diagonal.
Said: "Excellent color correction". The truth: color correction is the same
1/2000 F.L. within and few % for all achromats made of standard glasses.
Said: "constant reports that almost to no colors on planets".
The truth: standard for achromats purple or/and magenta halos and
the cry: "do not compare achros to apos!".
Said: "EDT" . The truth: far far from the real EDT. Clear attempt to catch
peoples on a very popular abberaviation EDT (AstroPhysics).
Said: "Better zonal control". The truth: complete NONSENSE! BK7-F1 allow to
have no zonal aberration at all for optimized wave length.
Again - obvious attempt to catch peoples with words playing.
Said:"Our ED scopes exceed other ED scopes". The truth: Vixen 102 ED easily
exceed any SV so called ED scopes in terms of color correction and definition.
Stephen, how you soul feels? You supproted this game any time.
V.D.
Cover2Cover
Truth: Customers can buy whatever they want to buy.
Truth: More than a couple of thousand people have bought Stellarvue scopes.
Truth: More than a couple of thousand people who bought Stellarvue scopes were happy with them.
Truth: Stellarvue will stand behind their products 100%.
Truth: I have never read an account of a person who has been unsatisfied by their Stellarvue scope and
not received the solution they needed from Stellarvue to resolve the problem.
Truth: Vic Maris, the team at Stellarvue, and countless members of the Stellarvue Group on Yahoo are
very well respected members of the astro community who have contributed a great deal of knowledge and
understanding to said community.
Truth: I may not necessarily be representative of the above mentioned Stellarvue Group.
Truth: Valery is an excellent optical engineer.
Truth: Valery is also a first class jerk.
Truth: This thread is getting really long and boring and I'm not helping it any.
- the Hermit
Truth: Stellarvue scopes live up to any claim that can now be found in any current literature provided
by Stellarvue.
William Bahus
"ValeryD" <ar...@mercury.kherson.ua> wrote in message
news:5c4a4ee7.02062...@posting.google.com...
> And what we hear from the SV?
>
> Said: "Very minimal colors". The truth: attenuated objective. Same effect
cane
> achieved by simple 1.25" MV filter purchase and installing it in the
star-diagonal.
I don't see anything that says "how", just "what." Why would I want to add
two more air/glass interfaces when it appears that an "attenuated objective"
works just as well?
>
>
> Said: "Excellent color correction". The truth: color correction is the
same
> 1/2000 F.L. within and few % for all achromats made of standard glasses.
So that means that everybody has "poor" color correction? What is the
objective definition of "excellent"? Could it be that "excellent" means "the
best possible for this type of (name your noun)?" For that matter what the
heck does "within a few %" mean? Is it a few % better? worse? what?
>
>
> Said: "constant reports that almost to no colors on planets".
> The truth: standard for achromats purple or/and magenta halos
Granted, customer reports are purely objective; but quotation marks are
supposed to mean that you are repeating verbatim what someone else has said
and I highly doubt that native english speakers would have such obvious
trouble with subject/verb agreement. I am not trying to belittle your
english, anyone that can speak/read/write more than one language has my
respect, but where exactly are you quoting from?
>and
> the cry: "do not compare achros to apos!".
Are you saying to compare achros to apos or what?
>
>
> Said: "EDT" . The truth: far far from the real EDT. Clear attempt to catch
> peoples on a very popular abberaviation EDT (AstroPhysics).
Been covered before, but your post implies that you are now psychic as well.
How else would you know what was going through Mr. Maris' (or whoevers)
mind?
>
>
> Said: "Better zonal control". The truth: complete NONSENSE! BK7-F1 allow
to
> have no zonal aberration at all for optimized wave length.
> Again - obvious attempt to catch peoples with words playing.
Don't know nothing about it.
>
>
> Said:"Our ED scopes exceed other ED scopes". The truth: Vixen 102 ED
easily
> exceed any SV so called ED scopes in terms of color correction and
definition.
Exceed in what way? I have read on the chinese refractor group the list of
things that *should* be done to Vixen/Synta/et al to make them mechanically
sound. I have don't remember seeing/hearing about it from SV users; I would
say that these things alone can make SV "better" than other ED scopes, even
if the optics are the same
I own a Newt. and have no plans to purchase a refractor any time soon. I am
replying because your arrogance is absolutely astounding and I honestly
believe that you are upset because there is a refractor that is moderately
priced that doesn't have to have your products to be a decent instrument.
Let me save you the trouble of a reply: I is Stupid, foolish and lazy.
Bill B.
Brown Bear
Stephen Pitt
I am truly honored. Stephen Pitt
Jon Isaacs
>two more air/glass interfaces when it appears that an "attenuated objective"
>works just as well?
One reason would be because it would give you a choice to either use the
correction or not. Air to glass surfaces are not such a big deal that people
avoid the use of barlows and regular filters.
>
>So that means that everybody has "poor" color correction? What is the
>objective definition of "excellent"?
One definition would be observable color. A scale would probably start with a
single lens, then to an achromat, then to an APO and then to a reflector.
>Are you saying to compare achros to apos or what?
How about comparing scopes of equal cost....
jon isaacs
ValeryD
> Valery
>
> Truth: Customers can buy whatever they want to buy.
Yes. But sometime they buy things being misleaded by agressive
and intentially false ads. Exactly the case with some SV scopes.
This is possible due to lack of special knoweleges among buyers
and SV uses this fact in it's benefit. How hight business ethics!
> Truth: More than a couple of thousand people have bought Stellarvue scopes.
Another part of this truth:
At least a great part of them were spoiled by intention false ads by
SV.
The original review at the Cloudy Night shows all.
> Truth: More than a couple of thousand people who bought Stellarvue scopes
>were happy with them.
Doubtful. Again - re-read the discussed review at the Cloudy Nights
(please, don't mix! Read the review of SV 102 EDT vs TV85, and not the
review of SV scope written by SV group moderator!)
> Truth: Stellarvue will stand behind their products 100%.
Of course! They have no another choice! They continue to convince
peoples,
that their scopes has "excellent" color correction (while it was
filtered
and not corrected), "very minimal colors" (while it is same as in
similar
achromats), "exceed other ED scopes" (while similarly priced Vixen ED
does not has any obvious magenta fringing when SV does!)
>
> Truth: I have never read an account of a person who has been unsatisfied by >their Stellarvue scope and not received the solution they needed from >Stellarvue to resolve the problem.
This is the same doubtful. You don't know what peoples really think.
Even when peoples switched to other brands, say, TV, they prefer to
write privately and to not show publically, that they were foolished
to pay more than 1.5K for achromatic triplet while they were able to
buy an excellent used TAK FS-102 APO or new Vixen ED APO.
>
> Truth: Vic Maris, the team at Stellarvue, and countless members of the >Stellarvue Group on Yahoo are
> very well respected members of the astro community who have contributed a great deal of knowledge and
> understanding to said community.
What is the base of the respect you did mentioned?
> Truth: I may not necessarily be representative of the above mentioned Stellarvue Group.
No doubts you are!
> Truth: Valery is also a first class jerk.
This is your and some others private point of view. You have the right
to own one. However, please, understand finally, that for not all
peoples has blind eyes like yours.
Read this truth too:
"I just wanted to thank you taking the time and effort for pointing me
towards the TV-102 earlier this year. After that review, I am glad
that
I didn't pay all that cash for the EDT (especially when the 85 seems
to
outperform it in nearly every way and is about the same price)."
> Truth: This thread is getting really long and boring and I'm not helping it >any.
You obviously think other way because you still writes here.
The truth is that with your biased point of view you really can't
help amateurs to do a right and open choice of equipment. What you
can help is to help the SV to earn money selling mediocre optically
eauipment for the price of true APOs.
> Truth: Stellarvue scopes live up to any claim that can now be found in any >current literature provided by Stellarvue.
I can warranty you, that this SV campaign in peoples deceiving and
competitors products bashing will ends up with SV loss reputation as
a manufacturer, who stay not behind their production, but behind their
words.
Peoples will know - we can't trust to SV ads concerning their
equipment
properties and better be away from buying these EDT or whatever and
buy
a scope from reliable in all respects manufacturers, whoth words fully
corresponds to their deals.
V.D.
ValeryD
> Valery, if I may join in here, I agree with Gary, please give it a rest! I only
> posted to attempt to set the record straight on the Vixen 102-ED, which was
> somehow getting dragged into this SV 102 EDT flame war. I'm not happy that you
> then dragged my name into starting a new thread attacking StellarVue under the
> subject "Attn: Stephen Pitt!". I have not looked through a SV 102EDT at night;
> only saw one indoors at NEAF. I was impressed with the mechanics, but I can not
> say anything one way or the other about the EDT color correction, so leave my
> name out of this.
>
> Valery, you have made your point on the 102EDT over and over again. Until you
> have the chance to see one in person or somehow get the details on the optical
> design & glass, please stop posting on this topic.
>
> Clear skies,
> Alan Figgatt
Allan,
With all respect I should note, that you took a wrong way.
I am not care is a SV or Gary feel well. I like to see, that
customers are informed, even indirectly.
I don't use your authority or the name as an "argument" , I just
point this to Stepehen, that the estimation about Vixen ED 102
color correction was not mine. No more. I believe you estimation
was correct, because in private e-mails I read the same estimations.
As for EDT color correction - read the review we originally discussed.
Because you noted, that Vixen ED 102 F/6.5 has similar to TV 85 color
correction, this allow to make indirect comparition between scopes
in question (questioned by SP) SV 102 EDT and Vixen 102 ED F/6.5
And this indirect comparition confirmed, that Vixen 102 ED F/6.5 should
easily exceed SV's 102 EDT in terms of color correction .
This all what customers need to know! And they should thank you to give
them the possibility to know this even if indirectly, because if one
hopes to receive any objective information from the SV - he just wastes
his time.
Valery Deryuzhin.
Cover2Cover
If we based our choice of scope only on cost we'd all own a big truss dob with a
first class mirror.
- Don
Cover2Cover
Lucky you and everyone else on SAA. This will be my last post concerning this thread.
Your responses to everything I have said show what a truly sad person you are. You may be a wonderful optical engineer but your lack of respect for other people goes beyond the pale.
You demean every person that lives by saying that they do not have the intelligence to think for themselves.
No matter how hard you try Valery you cannot destroy Vic Maris and Stellarvue. I would imagine by now you have helped bring the Stellarvue name to everyone's lips, not in a negative way
as you would like to believe, but in a positive way. People are now aware that Vic makes a wonderful compact wide field scope, a series of wonderful long scopes, a compact and a long apo
scope. They are now aware of the truly exquisite 2 speed focuser offered on these scopes. People are now aware of the high quality of these scopes and that Stellarvue will back their
purchase 100%.
People have seen the way that Vic answers this slander. Always polite. Always doing his best to make things clearer. Always doing his best to get people pumped about astronomy.
There will always be naysayers. When manufacturers listen that's how things get improved. Vic and the Stellarvue team are listening. The proof is in the pudding... the web site and other
literature has been changed. I'm sure Vic has other changes and surprises for all of us just around the corner. Stellarvue is a young company. So far their track record looks very good to
me.
Don't think that I have any monetary association with Stellarvue. Yes, I own one of Vic's scopes. It is everything and more than I expected.
Don't think that Vic has put me up to these postings. In truth I am sure that Vic would probably want to disassociate himself from anything I say.
Please continue to think that I am stupid and that I have been brainwashed by Stellarvue. Truth is not your strong suit anyway.
In hopes that you will chill Valery I wish you well.
- Don
Jon Isaacs
>
>If we based our choice of scope only on cost we'd all own a big truss dob
>with a
>first class mirror.
>
>- Don
Not necessarily. Portability is an issue that is equally as important as
aperture. Anyone with a big DOB will most likely tell you that they have
other more portable scopes.
In my view the main variables are: Useability/Portability, Aperture/Optical
quality and Cost/durability.
But clearly if one limits the scopes to say 4 -5 inch refractors then one can
compare them as a function of cost. In this case the question could be "what
does $1700 buy in a 4 inch refractor?"
Personally I would like to see a comparison of a variety of 4 -5 inch
refractors, say start with a Synta 102, a Synata 120, a Synta with a
Chromacorr, a SV 102D, a SV102 EDT, some Vixen Scopes, some TV scopes and then
maybe a couple of TMB and APs of different apertures.
And such a comparison would best be done not only via side by side
observational testing but also laboratory testing of the optics for
transmission, thru-put, etc....
Jon Isaacs
ValeryD
> No matter how hard you try Valery you cannot destroy Vic Maris and Stellarvue.
This idea - to destroy SV's business does exists only in you ill mind.
The real intention is to force the SV to stop:
1. Using lack of peoples special knoweleges and wash their brains with
nonsenses like "very minimal colors", "glasses with minimal colors",
"new formulae", "better zonal control" and etc.
2. Bashing other manufacturers production constantly telling about
SV achromats color correction superiority. Especially about ED scopes,
where as many know ED scopes from Meade, Celestron, Vixen abd BORG
easily exceed SV's so called EDs.
This ALL. Nothing more.
V.D.
Ian Molton
ar...@mercury.kherson.ua (ValeryD) wrote:
Hmm. Valery... you are quite obviously a complete dickhead.
> The real intention is to force the SV to stop:
>
> 1. Using lack of peoples special knoweleges and wash their brains with
> nonsenses like "very minimal colors", "glasses with minimal colors",
> "new formulae", "better zonal control" and etc.
Alls fair in marketing (as long as its true).
they may well claim to have very minimal colours. the definition of
minimal is up to you.
same goes for 'new formulae' etc.
Buyers are NOT that stupid as to not check this sort of thing. And if
they ARE that stupid, well, they probably wont care anyway.
> 2. Bashing other manufacturers production constantly telling about
> SV achromats color correction superiority.
What do yo u want them to do? claim their product is 'no better' or
'worse'?
Dont be so bloody stupid.
> Especially about ED scopes,
> where as many know ED scopes from Meade, Celestron, Vixen abd BORG
> easily exceed SV's so called EDs.
If they ACTUALLY do (and this means their entire range, unless SV
specified which models they are better than), then complain to trades
descriptions (or whatever US equivalent there is).
Of course, you havent done this, which means that either you are a liar,
or you dont have the rocks, OR you cant back up your claims.
OR, more likely, all three.
Please shut up now. everyone has heard your puny whining and nobody
cares. stop wasting bandwidth.
muttermuttermutterfoulmouthedresidenttrollmuttermuttermutter
David
to promote one's product without going into exaggerations ;-)
From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MakScopes/files/00_ARIES_10inch_Maks/,
description of the fourth 10front1.jpg file:
"New model ARIES 10" F/14 MCT. Front view. Seen: extra small secondary
mirror (22% central obstruction) and exceptionally effective baffle system
for absolute minimization of scattering light level.
Extra small central obstruction, maximally effective baffle system, very
best smooth optics - all together result images with contrast never reached
in >>any another MCTs<<."
>>emphasis added by me<<
Don't get me wrong, I would take this scope w/o hesitation if I'd win the
bet with V.D. that SV 102 EDT does NOT have 6x worse color correction than
Vixen 102-ED 6.5 (sorry, Alan) but still I would have a question on my
mind, how come that Roland has his Mak waitlisted and the Aries sample in
Arizona waits and waits for his owner despite lower price.
David
ValeryD
> Aries sample in
> Arizona waits and waits for his owner despite lower price.
The low price is $9800 + shipping + insurance.
Do you have these money readily available? You personally. I think not.
V.D.
David
price. Also, Brad has many more attractive offerings currently, like the 14" RC.
Gary Hand
Gary
Gary Hand
And yes there are many reading your post that might have been thinking buying a better
scope like that in the USA. The same ones that are deciding if and when to buy
something made by you. All they know about you is what you have posted.
Gary
Gary Hand
revenue stream. My Customers.
I thought I would never get that through to you. Amen.
But nice try to change the subject, though.
This is not about your "legitimate" questions. It is about your constant
attacks, half truths, piling on looking for weaknesses, and snipping. I am all
for legitimate questions. Occasionally you pose a few. Mostly you just attack,
set up then attack again. You have some interesting information that you could
share with the group. You could add so much to this group, but you seem to
thrive on feeling important be tearing people down.
In the last year or so, you have attacked
Televue,
Anacortes,
Stellervue,
Hands on Optics,
Vernonscope,
Celestron,
Meade,
Eclipse Optics,
Ebay, and I think Takahashi, Adorama and a few more.
I know this list is far from complete. This also does not include individuals
you have personally attacked.
ALL THESE ATTACKS WERE UNDER THE GUISE OF BEING "LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS" and then
you attack the people that defend the companies above.
Gary
Jan Owen
http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=4666&m=102
http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=4670&m=102
http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=4671&m=102
http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=4667&m=102
"ValeryD" <ar...@mercury.kherson.ua> wrote in message
news:5c4a4ee7.02062...@posting.google.com...
Jon Isaacs
>The same ones that are deciding if and when to buy something made by you. All
they know about you is what you have posted.
Just a note:
If I were in the market for a high end scope and willing to put much of my
saving into it, a scope made by Valery would certainly have to be considered.
He obviously knows his optics and he is also not afraid to take a risk by
sharing his knowledge and thoughts.
Jon Isaacs
Greg Arnold
be attacked personally by V.D.?
"Jon Isaacs" <joni...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020701143258...@mb-cu.aol.com...
Jan Owen
It's all just noise (from BOTH sides). Listen to it if you wish, or ignore
it. But for Chrissakes DON'T be afraid of it!!!
"Greg Arnold" <Soa...@REMOVEcox.net> wrote in message
news:2j1U8.1335$0c1....@news1.west.cox.net...
Jon Isaacs
>be attacked personally by V.D.?
No, I actually figure that if there were a problem with the scope, Valery would
understand the problem and make sure that it were fixed.
I also think that the scope I would get from Valery would be well designed both
optically and mechanically.
Jon Isaacs
Steven
>
> With all respect I should note, that you took a wrong way.
> I am not care is a SV or Gary feel well. I like to see, that
> customers are informed, even indirectly.
Valarie
I want to thank you for directing my attention to the 102 EDT. It is
not even a scope I would have considered without all this talk. After
I started reading about it on this site, I put in an order for one. I
knew I was going to RTMC, and would have the opportunity to look
through one before I purchased it, so I wanted to get on the wait
list.
At RTMC I had the opportunity to look through the EDT and many other
scopes from the various manufacturers for three days and two nights.
The viewing at night was not terrific at night, given clouds/haze and
a full moon, but it certainly was a good opportunity to look at
several bright objects through various telescopes. The days, however,
were bright and clear.
I must state that I am somewhat particular. I tend to overanalyze
everything prior to making a purchase. Taking quite sometime to
purchase anything after detail review of everything. I am extremely
analytical.
I do not believe I meet your definition of a "stupid" person. I have
an extensive background in computers, teaching as an undergrad at the
University (I was also two years ahead in school, graduating
highschool after I had just turned 16, and then college at 20). I
worked in the development of networking computers that did not exist
at the time, and then was involved in marketing and sales prior to
attending law school. I have been an attorney for 12 years, I am a
pro-tem Judge (appointed and re-appointed by two different mayors),
and been appointed by our governor to chair a state entity. My
intelligence level is above the 99th percentile, an I have been a past
member of Intertel. My point being, I may not be necessarily who you
generalize as "stupid".
I have to say that the people I have met that own SV scopes are
scholars, educators, chemists, etc. I would not classify them as
stupid either.
In my experience as a litigator, and judge, I find that people who
rely on or resort to stating how long they have been doing something,
or resort to calling people names, usually lack any factual
information to substantiate their arguments.
As a consumer, and as an attorney, I never found any of the
advertising that SV has done, objectionable. In my opionion, it was
neither illegal, or intentionally misleading. Manufacturers are
entitled to promote their products using comparisons. Those
comparisons are, by definition, not objective. They are the
manufacturers opinion. You may not agree with those opinions, and you
don't have to. If you were somehow forced to believe everything you
read or see in advertising was more than just the manufacturers
opinion, everytime you saw a coke commercial you would believe that
coke is better than Pepsi, and vice-versa. Just as an example, those
commercials are very specific, naming brand. In SV's case, it was
generic, lessing the impact of any potential legal problem. Further,
using customer comments, are perfectly legal as well. Again, you may
not agree with those opinions, but that is your choice, and those are
just customer opinions, no more, no less. The broad terms such as
"less color", etc. are once again, manufacturer opinions and perfectly
legal.
Frankly, since no one seems to have a definition of what a semi-apo
is, (in my estimation, and in very general terms, it is a well built
achro or a poorly built apo)the comparison was extremely general.
Having said this, I do note that SV has, at the request of mainly the
people at this site, changed the advertising at their website, to be
less controversial. Legally speaking, in my opinion, they had no
obligation to do so.
The advertising in both S & T and Astronomy, in my legal opinion, were
clear. Fast reading of something, sometimes results in
misinterpretation. Of course, people seem to be looking for reasons
to complain about SV.
> I don't use your authority or the name as an "argument" , I just
> point this to Stepehen, that the estimation about Vixen ED 102
> color correction was not mine. No more. I believe you estimation
> was correct, because in private e-mails I read the same estimations.
>
> As for EDT color correction - read the review we originally discussed.
As an analytical person, I never rely on what someone else reports,
except in the most general terms. In other words, I take such
opinions in account, BUT I look for myself. This is not because I
believe someone is being less than honest, but rather, each person's
tastes, dislikes, eyes (in this case), background, expectations, etc.
are different.
As I stated earlier, I spent three days and two nights viewing through
the EDT and various other scopes. I even had the opportunity to
compare it directly to an 85 APO, which were next to each other. I
did not see the same things as the reviewer. BUT, and I want to make
this perfectly clear, I am not saying that he did not report what he
saw, however, his experiences were not the same as mine. I found that
it was a very bright scope, with an extremely flat field (without a
field flattener)that was extremely well corrected for spherical
abberation. I also did not detect any purple haze during the day,
whatsoever. AGAIN, I want to be perfectly clear, I am not saying he
did not see it, I am saying I did not, after three days of viewing.
Further, I have since received my EDT, and still have yet to see any
such aberrations that he spoke about under bad seeing conditions or
good (RTMC was pretty bad).
> Because you noted, that Vixen ED 102 F/6.5 has similar to TV 85 color
> correction, this allow to make indirect comparition between scopes
> in question (questioned by SP) SV 102 EDT and Vixen 102 ED F/6.5
>
> And this indirect comparition confirmed, that Vixen 102 ED F/6.5 should
> easily exceed SV's 102 EDT in terms of color correction .
>
> This all what customers need to know! And they should thank you to give
> them the possibility to know this even if indirectly, because if one
> hopes to receive any objective information from the SV - he just wastes
> his time.
I, as an analytical person, depend alot, as you do on theory and past
history and knowledge, but I am also aware that without actual testing
of a particular product or design, my theories remain, just that,
theories without any basis in actual fact. I would never presume to
make guesses of how something really performs, based soley upon
theories. As a scientist, or even a technician, making a hypothesis
is fine, but until actual testing is done, it remains just a guess.
As a result, I made the tests that would satisfy me. I do not have to
satisfy the world, I am not the protector of the free world. When I
make a purchase, all the knowledge I gain in testing is on account for
my final decision, for me.
I do not need anyone telling me how or what I should purchase. I do
not need anyone pointing out what they perceive as faults in a
manufacturers legal marketing, especially when done so from a
competitor. I expect to receive subjective marketing information
(except in the case of dimensions, specific measurable readings,
etc)from a manufacturer not objective, that includes you, SV or any
other manufacturer.
As it turns out, the EDT is exactly, what I was looking for. I was
looking for a well made telescope, that I could use for
astrophotography as well as visual, and that was extremely portable
(these were my general requirements). Specifically, I was looking for
a fast scope (as close to f6 as possible), a flat field, rugged, and
as well corrected as possible (both spherical abberations, as well as
color). I happend to have found less color in this scope than other
achromats I looked through, but again, that is my opinion and since I
am the one I have to satisfy, it is the only opinion I rely on. I
also had a budget, and wanted only to purchase new. I personally felt
that if I was spending that kind of money, I wanted all the
warranties, etc. Last, Iliked the idea that these are hand built
scopes, and that every scope is tested to assure quality and accuracy,
not mass produced. I was fairly certain I would receive a quality
instrument without having to hope for one, or try and pick one out.
Yes, I could have purchased an 85APO for the same price, however, I
felt that the extra inch of aperature and the speed of the scope, and
portability was worth giving up the APO (that is my opinion, which by
the way is not good or bad, it just is). Further, I rather liked the
idea of not having to add a field flattener, as it is just one more
item I need to purchase, ultimately adding to the cost of the scope.
Yes, price mattered as well, however, I am somewhat sensitive to
wringing out the best deal for the money, and for what I was looking
for, I believe I did. Others, may not agree, and that is their
opinion, but then may want something other than I did.
Luckily, we are all individuals, able to make choices for own specific
needs. The gentleman that did the review found that the EDT did not
meet his specific needs or desires, and there is nothing wrong with
that. I did.
After all, if I did not like the scope, even after I purchased it, I
could have returned for a full refund, as the reviewer did. As a
matter of fact, that goes for all SV scopes. In my experience and
opinion, only manufacturers that are sure of the quality of their
product offer such a liberal return policy.
Normally, I would have not even made such a statement as I did here,
but I suppose I just was fed up with someone speaking for me as a
consumer. I understand that this is your work, but it is my enjoyment
and hobby. I do not depend on income from this hobby, nor do I
receive any. This is a great hobby, one my kids and I enjoy and will
continue to do so without anyone's help on what scope I should or
should not purchase or whom I should purchase it from.
The statements in this post, only reflect my opinion, nothing more or
less. You may not agree with it, but that does not make it any less
valid than yours, the reviewer, or anyone elses.
Steven
Zane
(snip)
>I, as an analytical person, depend alot, as you do on theory and past
>history and knowledge, but I am also aware that without actual testing
>of a particular product or design, my theories remain, just that,
>theories without any basis in actual fact. I would never presume to
>make guesses of how something really performs, based soley upon
>theories. As a scientist, or even a technician, making a hypothesis
>is fine, but until actual testing is done, it remains just a guess.
I have a couple of opinions to express relative to this that are
philosophical in nature -- that is, not directed at whether or not a
specific scope is good or bad.
One has to be careful about turning up one's nose at theory, especially in
the context of believing either marketing claims or evaluating subjective
"tests". This is especially true if the area in question is not one where
the person is an expert, no matter how brilliant he is otherwise. Being a
golfer, I see claims made all the time by marketers that are obviously
bogus, violating basic principles. I see even more people making general
declarations based on _their_ "tests" of a particular product -- for
example a golf ball or golf club or golf shaft -- that are equally absurd,
often violating the laws of physics.
Some things are known to be true in certain fields without the use of
continuing tests. For example, an expert in car engine design will be able
to tell you very accurately the maximum horsepower a normally aspirated
engine of a given displacement is capable of at a given rpm, without
testing. Claims higher than accepted limits will raise a red flag.
The same is true for the performance of standard achromats -- there is no
magic available to change the _general_ range of inherent chromatic error
without the use of exotic glasses. (Or masking some of the errors by
tradeoff with other parameters, like the use of zoned color filtering.)
A word about observing "tests" to judge the degree of color correction.
People in this argument have been nearly exclusively using the visibility
(visually or in photographs) of "haze" or "fringes" around bright objects
in their "tests" to compare different scopes. This is not always an
accurate way to compare two refractors -- one may be corrected at different
colors than the other. It may show more violet "haze", for example, than a
second scope and therefore judged to be poorer, but actually have better
planetary contrast due to the more dominant colors in the middle of the
spectrum being more "tightly" focused. This is not to say that the bad
esthetics (or bad photographic artifacts) of a haze around an object are to
be ignored.
>As a result, I made the tests that would satisfy me. I do not have to
>satisfy the world, I am not the protector of the free world. When I
>make a purchase, all the knowledge I gain in testing is on account for
>my final decision, for me.
(snip)
Misleading marketing has gotten to be a curse upon the land, IMO. (I'm not
accusing Stellarvue of this.) It's gotten to the point that almost nothing
can be believed, and even though there may not be demonstrable false
statements, things are omitted or phrased in misleading ways. I, for one,
have gotten to the point it makes me mad. I'm sure it does other people as
well. I think that, contrary to what you say in the above paragraph,
people need to challenge _all_ misleading advertising and shout any
examples to the rooftops. _Especially_ in a forum of "brothers" in a
particular hobby. Sharing of knowledge has been the primary reason we don't
still live in caves or take Geritol when we get old.
I say more criticism rather than less -- things that pass the resulting
discussion are to be valued.
Zane
Boxlock
Really Valery, gee he changed his advertisments for you once, but you
bashing hasn't stopped! Isn't the real reason you bash Stellarvue
outlined in your previous statement?
"Some peoples asked why Valery jumps at SV, Money. Of course money.
Why Vic
saying, that MV filters and Chromacors are not necessary for color
correction improvement (Chromacor) and secondary spectrum influence
decreasing (MV)? This is clear public misleading. Experiments clearly
suggest directly opposite! Vic was the VERY FIRST person who asked me
to see
if a Chromacor will work with his scopes and SV was THE VERY FIRST Co.
which
I asked to use a Chromacor as a standard accessory or build -in. Why I
asked - because Vic do a strict QC for all objectives and such
achromats are
the best for Chromacor application. Vic refused for whatever reason
and this
does not offensed me at all. Instead of straight honest claim, that
his scopes are nothing that well build and well corrected for
spherical and astigmatism achromats, he tell public something doubtful
about his scopes superiority vs other similar scopes in color
correction and that his scopes can't be improved with additional color
correctors."
Did Vic actually ever say his scopes "couldn't" be improved with these
devices? Could you include a link as I must have missed that post. All
I ever heard Vic explain was it would not be economicly advantageous
offering his $450 80mm acromat, with a built in $750 accessory that
would only work in his slow f/ratio scopes, when for a few hundred
more than the total of the two, he offers a fast 4" ED scope and a
85mm Flourite APO.
I would certainly like to see you provide a link where Vic bashes
other manufacturers, as you have bashed him, by openly and publicly
calling them liars and cheats, with statements like these, that you
made,
"When you and SV fighters will finally understand - without ubnormal
dispersion glasses use even God can't make achromat which will has
significantly better color correction than another, made by human
achromat of the same D and F/D.I bet, that he will never comment it,
because this reference table is uniformly lie, false at least. Vic
makes money telling peoples false info about his scopes miracle
properties vs other scopes. Vic misleads his present and future
customers telling that any another "adaptive" color correction device
are not appropriate for SV scopes (he mean, of course Chromacor and MV
filters). Vic's false ads can hurt selling of others products like ED
apos and semi-apos or fast ED apos. However it will be really naive to
wait such sincerity from SV, when their ads was build completely
around false claims:Really, how we can ask such company to tell us a
secondary spectrum in their scopes? Of course, if everybody will know,
that SV scopes are nothing, but plain achromat, who will readily pay
3x cost for better quality control? Of course, somebody will pay, but
not many peoples will do this, at least not as many as before. _This_
is the key of the problem."
Of course you haven't kept your promices either, you promiced:
"Vic, "vindettes" will over when you will stop lie in your false
ads.Understand?"
Vic eliminated the table you speak of months ago, just to apease you
and your followers who voiced offence at it, but your bashing hasn't
stopped has it, you have made many questionable and misleading
speculations, which you still repeat at will, such as Vic's use of FK5
or "Fake ED" because he could not possible use "Real ED" at the price
of his 102EDT. Yet in your next post you claim the Vixen F/6.5 ED that
sells for $100 less than the Stellarvue EDT uses "Real ED" glass and
has 5X-12X better color correction than the Stellarvue EDT, and argue
the Stellarvue EDT is overpriced, then go back to maintaining your
argument that the Stellarvue could not have "Real ED" glass as the
Vixen does, even though it costs more. You also warrenty that the
Vixen has better color correction, though he has planely clairified to
you that he does not use FK5 or any incarnation of it, but instead
used "Real ED" and you admit you have never even seen a Stellarvue
EDT.
I find it mildly amusing that you can get so vile about Vic's
"Exadurated Claims, citing literal interpetations of specific wording
such as "very minimal colors", and "better zonal control" etc... on
Vic's website, while you yourself make such fantastic claims about
your products as:
"I can say, that there are no such cheap super APO on the market which
can be compared in performance/price factor vs 102mm F/10 Synta +
Chromacor with 28-32mm extention tube.If a given achromat will be
correctly matched with Chromacor and resulting SA will be small, I can
warranty you, that this combo will give sharper images than any
high-end APO of the same aperture. There is no difference be this
high-end APO from TAK or from X company - for your choice."
Gee, I gess everyone better run out and sell their AP's, Takahashi's,
Televues, Zeiss, Pentax, what have you, and all buy Synta's with
Chromacorrs, since according to Valery, no APO in existance can
compare! What a guy, he actually tested EVERY high end APO out there
to be able to make such a claim? Right? I think not! I think your
false speculation and slander have been unfruitfull, and your not
mature, nor secure enough to let anyone post anything posative about
Stellarvue without being blasting them with half-truths and
insinuations and defying them to "Prove you wrong!". You seem
determined to do everying in your power to continue this Ventette,
despite your promice to do so when the table in question was removed
from the website. Sorry Valery, but you seem quite hypocritical to me!
JDBraddy
Stephen Pitt
the way Anacortes/Vixen describes
differences in 2ndary colour levels
among the varying f.l.s & element
groups interesting.
And, I thought APO=zero colour. Here,
we have a range from "dramatically
reduce" to "no trace" (of 2ndary
spectrum).
Boxlock
> k5...@cs.com (Wes Bolin) wrote in message news:<34460b30.02062...@posting.google.com>...
>
>
>
> > Hello
> > I am an EDT owner and want to state that Vic NEVER misrepresented any
> > information to me when I was purchasing this telescope.
>
>
> And what with the following statement? Or it was addressed to
> absolutely
> naive amateurs?
>
> ""The optical system was design to reduce false color to an absolute
> minimum.
> We acheived this goal using special glass, a special full
> multi-coating, extremely accurate figure and alignment. The optical
> system corrects for
> and **ATTENUATES FALSE COLOR****. Many are reporting no color on most stars
> and planets and only a hint of color on the brightest stars and
> planets. This
> is unlike any conventional optical system."
>
>
> V.D.
First of all Valery, you misquote the source, it's from the 102D page,
not the 102EDT page, and it clearly states right there, that the
optical system attenuates false color, indicating an attenuated
objective on the 102D, Vic clearly states elswhere that the 102D uses
an attenuated objective, and is the only scope he currently produces
with an attenuated objective, yet you call it misleading, implying all
his scopes are so treated, and that it applies to the EDT, when it
states what is what, in black and white, right on the page in front of
you! The only one who seeks to mislead Vic's customers appears to be
you, Valery!
Boxlock
>
> With all respect I should note, that you took a wrong way.
> I am not care is a SV or Gary feel well. I like to see, that
> customers are informed, even indirectly.
I don't think Allen took anything the wrong way, if you are so
concerned about customers being informed, why tell them biast
speculation, lies and half truths?
Amazing how any argument that fits your agenda, becomes difinitave and
unshakable truth, yet hundreds of reviews are dismissed as rantings of
cultists and self congradulatory drivel, if they do not support your
arguments. You quoted him out of context, as is your practice, and
twisted his writings for your own purposes. I think you clearly owe
him an appology.