Okay then
Thanks Frank. Actually, I felt (which is why I included that word above) that on occasion with a McKinley (which is why I asked for that comparison). Really, I think, I was looking hard for problems, having been "educated beyond my station" in optics by this forum.
The McKinley also has the same superb optical design, but the model run had QC problems, which affected that individual instrument. For me it had two major issues which, going by your reports above, have been very well corrected in the Questa: deficient outer-field sharpness, and the rolling globe effect.
PS. Here is another smart guy. (But he gets a standing ovation.)
Thanks Frank. Actually, I felt (which is why I included that word above) that on occasion with a McKinley (which is why I asked for that comparison). Really, I think, I was looking hard for problems, having been "educated beyond my station" in optics by this forum.
The McKinley also has the same superb optical design, but the model run had QC problems, which affected that individual instrument. For me it had two major issues which, going by your reports above, have been very well corrected in the Questa: deficient outer-field sharpness, and the rolling globe effect.
PS. Here is another smart guy. (But he gets a standing ovation.)
Last edited: