Надо знать американцев - удавятся из-за доллара.
Просьба к модератору: постараться избегать подобных оскорбительных выражений в адрес иностранных посетителей данного форума, а также наших зарубежных пользователей и потенциальных покупателей. В зарубежных астро интернет-форумах не встретишь подобных оскорбительных выражений в адрес русских... или армян...
Несколько иной уровень общей культуры.
Далее: Эрнест высказал утверждение, что единственная причина, по которой иностранцы
приобретают телескопы НПЗ, - низкая цена.
С нашей точки зрения, это утверждение является ошибочным.
Розничная цена изделий НПЗ за рубежом выше, чем цена китайских масс-продакшн
(мид, селестрон, орион итп) аналогов (ШК и МК).
Ниша продукции НПЗ на западном рынке - "лучшее из недорогого".
Цель НПЗ - поддержание определенного компромиссного соотношения цена/качество.
Большое число пользователей телескопов НПЗ за рубежом считают это соотношение оптимальным для себя.
При этом качество оптики оценивается ими, как правило, "выше среднего", механики - "среднее".
По их мнению ТИПИЧНЫЙ Клевцов от НПЗ превосходит по характеристикам ТИПИЧНЫЙ
китайский ШК.
One of the best things about TAL scopes is that they are Russian - big,
brawny, minimal plastic,
not easily damaged but easily fixed if they are.
Not like a Ferrari, more like a T-34 tank.
Tom Knight
<tjknight...pelfreez.coxatwork.com>
Their products are advantageously priced for their intended market. Another
way to say that is that the value for dollar spent is good, and the
equipment definitely lifts the buyer out of the "junk" and "toy" markets,
without elevating them to the somewhat lofty heights of the nearly
undisputed Astro-Physics/TeleVue and the like of engineering excellence.
Gregory Santos
<influence_c...yahoo.com>
_________________________________________________
_______________________
Далее...
Кто-то здесь просил более серьезных тестов? Пожалуйста!
Пример отчета о тестировании ТАЛ-200К (прошедшего заводской ОТК).
(автор отчета не является дилером продукции НПЗ.)
Сам он из Калифорнии...
* * * * * * * * *
Observing Conditions:
Suburban residential area
limiting magnitude: about 4 (sky glow)
Seeing: 7-8 (!) (occasional very thin high clouds)
Equipment available:
Novosibirsk TAL200K 200mm f/10
Klevtsov-Cassegrain serial no. 0130 (mfg. October 2001)
with supplied TAL 1 1/4" diagonal, mounted on a
William Optics GT-ONE GEM with rosewood tripod
Eyepieces used : Celestron 35mm Ultima, TAL 25mm plossl,
TAL 10mm plossl, TAL 2x barlow, TeleVue
9mm Nagler (original type I),
Pentax 5.2mm XL
Objects observed in this session:
Jupiter
Saturn
M42
The observing session:
There was a good deal of stray light. There was some coastal humidity, but
not an unusual amount. The atmosphere was quite steady for a change. The
OTA had about a 45 minute cooldown period. I began.
--> Jupiter
I found Jupiter through the 35mm Ultima, and aligned the mount. The image
seemed unusually crisp, so I prepared for a good night. I put the 25mm TAL
plossl into the diagonal.
The view was good. VERY good. Even at 80x, I was seeing some good detail;
five ammonia bands, the darker polar region, and the Galilean moons (all on
one side) most clearly disks, most definitely non-stellar. It was
beautiful.
I put in the 10mm TAL plossl and had a look. It was great; the bands were
more obvious, with one extra visible, and the SEB obviously "split" into two
thinner bands. Some hooks and festoons clearly visible, but no sign of the
Great Red Spot.
After admiring the view for a good ten minutes, I couldn't wait to try
Saturn. I put the 25mm back in, and swung the mount into position.
--> Saturn
It was beautiful, just a beautiful jewel. Three moons clearly visible, nice
delineation between the ball of the planet and the rings. I popped out the
25mm, and put in the TAL 10mm plossl, and took a look.
All I can say is: WOW! You know the feeling, when something deep inside you
says, "I am KEEPING THIS TELESCOPE!" ? Well, it happened to me right then.
I stared and stared at the perfectly black Cassini division, the crepe ring,
and the smooth but detailed surface of Saturn. Then I stared some more.
When I could tear myself away, I decided to try the Nagler 9mm. It had to
be better, right? So, I swapped it in. The result: wider field, yes;
slightly greater magnification, yes; better, no! It was quite a surprise. I
had always been a "more eyepiece elements means a better eyepiece,
especially when it is a TeleVue", kind of guy. Not any more. I went back
to the TAL 10mm plossl. Brighter, sharper, better.
My next thought of course was, "I spent all that money on eyepieces for
NOTHING!" Well, maybe not for nothing, but it goes to show that expensive
eyepieces are not always the best viewing eyepieces for a given type of
object.
So, I then got the TAL 2x barlow out, and fit it on the 10mm eyepiece, and
focused on Saturn.
My jaw dropped.
EGAD! It was just wonderful. So clear, the crepe ring like gossamer, and I
swear, I SWEAR, I saw the Encke division CLEARLY at the "anse", the part at
the far ends of the ellipse formed by the rings.
Now, understand that the telescope through which I have looked most often of
late is an Astro-Physics (ASTRO-PHYSICS!) 155mm (that's 6.1 INCHES)
apochromatic triplet refractor. I SAW MORE THROUGH THE TAL200K!
Yes, the AP view is "better" in the sense that the views are oh-so-perfect,
stars are dimensionless points against a velvet black background, and it
soaks up magnification beautifully. It is definitely more of a "picture
perfect" view, for what it can see, and everyone who looks through it says
"ahh". It is probably one of the best pieces of optical equipment on the
planet.
My experience illustrates what many will say when questioned about telescope
optics: first and foremost, APERTURE is KING. Second, the main limiting
factor is THE ATMOSPHERE, so good seeing is critical for visual observing.
Thirdly, a good optical figure is essential for enjoying the first two. The
rest is cake.
Saturn's three visible dim moons were still there, although starting to
"fuzz out" from the increased magnification, which was either 400x or 348x,
depending on my tube's focal length, which is in doubt. I didn't care; I
was experiencing what amateur astronomy was all about, just admiring and
admiring nearly endlessly.
So, the view through the Pentax 5.2mm should be even better, yes? No! It
was a wider field, of course, but NO SHARPER than the TAL 10mm plossl plus
barlow. Go figure.
--> M42
Finally, I wanted to see what the trapezium would look like in good seeing,
albeit with lots of light pollution. I put in the TAL 25mm and swung the
mount into position.
It was beautiful, of course, with the "E" component clearly and constantly
visible. Was that a hint of the "F" component? To make sure, I inserted
the TAL 10mm plossl and had another look. There is was, the elusive "F"
component, constantly and clearly visible, no averted vision required. At
this magnification, the stars began to exhibit the characteristic "fuzzy"
appearance of an obstructed optical
system, but again, I didn't care. I was
seeing more than I had through the AP 155, and that was enough for me.
Sure, I had seen the "F" component through the AP, but not quite this way,
so clearly and cleanly separated. Aperture is king.
Before shutting down, I took a look at Castor, just to do another split
before the evening was over. Again, a clean, clear split.
Wishing I had more time to try other, harder splits, I reluctantly shut down
in order to have enough time to complete the evening chores.
* * * * * * * *
I would like to extend my thanks again to those who calmed my fears and
urged me to take delivery of the 200K. It is becoming one of the most
fulfilling astronomical forays I have experienced, at a price I could
afford.
Bravo, Novosibirsk!
Gregory Santos
influence_c...yahoo.com
