On 3 Sep, 18:42, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message

. ..

and instrument:
http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ei...ao2_about.html

I just don't get it.

Hi Wilbur,
I like you. So, I will help you to avoid the extreme embarrassement
that you must feel after displaying the enormous ignorance
which your post exposed.

Why would anybody waste their time and money futzing
around with tiny little amateur lenses taking tiny little amateur deep space
photographs when there are millions of REAL large and detailed photos
available from Hubble alone?

Jeff's photo showed data acquired in x-rays. There is *NO* lens
involved in x-ray photography. Please do not feel stupid
because you did not know this. I'm sure that you are not
alone.


You could look at them your entire life and
not see them all.

Only if your internet connection was extremely slow. If you
only viewed 10 images a day, then you could view the Hubble's
output in a year. I bet that you look at more than 10 images
a day.


Seems to me this amateur snapshot-taking becomes more and more of a waste of
time as time passes and anything but the very large and very large array
telescopes taking photographs is a joke.

Well, here you display the sort of ignorance that makes
me feel embarrassed on your behalf.

I took this photo in just 90 minutes with a 4" telescope.
http://www.astroimaging.org.uk/tener...nal/sh2101.htm

The Hubble could not have done this in 90 minutes. Can you
figure out why?



But, even worse is when people start bragging about how great their inferior
little lenses are. There's nothing great about them. They're tiny and
they're a joke. The photos taken by them are tiny, inferior and a joke as
well.

Have a look at this photo:-
http://www.rdelsol.com/Nebula/IC1805_Everest.html

Isn't it clear that your comments are tiny, inferior and a joke as
well.



What you are doing is using technology that is on par with two tin cans and
a string for a telephone. You shoot BB guns and eschew the howitzers. And
you're proud of it? And you're happy with it. I just don't get it. Perhaps
there's something I'm missing. Perhaps somebody could answer the question:
"Where's the beef?"

Actually, you are missing the point that amateurs are using the
very latest technology. You do not understand that technology
in optics has made enormous advances in recent years. My
4" refractor can outperform a 20 year old 10" reflector.


I hope that you have found my post useful. I don't want
you to look so stupid again.




Regards


Donal
--