Comments by "Lawrence D’Oliveiro" (@lawrencedoliveiro9104) on "" video.

  1. 3:17 “Is that an ionic charge imbalance in your pocket, or are you just pleased to see me?”
    3
  2. Not to mention it was the other way round compared to the others.
    2
  3. And it has worse optics than something he found in the trash ...
    1
  4. No good for direct viewing as a terrestrial telescope; only two lenses means images will be upside-down.
    1
  5. 8:19 Aperture defines how much light is captured only when expressed relative to focal length, not as an absolute distance measure. E.g. an aperture of 50mm with a focal length of 200mm is actually f/4, while if the lens focal length is 400mm with the same 50mm width, then that’s f/8, which means you only get one quarter the light.
    1
  6. 10:02 So the aperture is actually 50mm/360mm = f/7.2.
    1
  7. 10:42 Not to mention a longer objective focal length means a smaller aperture in f-terms (for the same aperture in absolute distance units), which means less light-gathering power!
    1
  8. 11:07 f/6, only slightly better than your Celestron.
    1
  9. 9:38 Thought: the rounding discrepancy between 0.965” and 24.5mm is maybe one part in 2000. Would there be any problem with a part made to one measurement fitting to one made with the other? On the other hand, 1¼” is exactly 31.75mm, so there should be no problem using SI units there.
    1