http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/ ... p;page=1#pid2726954
http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=18250&kw=dome&st=2
http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=11613&kw=pi-cdk17&st=3
Comparison: CDK vs Ritchey-Chretien...The simulations below compares the optical performance of the CDK design to the Ritchey Chrétien (RC) design. The Ritchey design was popularized as an astro-imaging telescope due to its use in many professional observatories. Although very difficult and expensive to manufacture and align, the Ritchey is successful in eliminating many of the problems that plague many other designs, namely off-axis coma. However the Ritchey does nothing to eliminate the damaging effects of off-axis astigmatism and field curvature.
The CDK design tackles the off-axis coma problem by integrating a pair of correcting lenses into a two-mirror design. The beauty is that this design also corrects for astigmatism and field curvature. Because the lenses are relatively close to the focal plane (unlike the Schmidt corrector plate found in various Schmidt-Cassegrain designs), and because these lenses work together as a doublet, there is no chromatic aberration. The CDK offers a wide aberration-free, flat field of view that allows the user to take full advantage of the very large imaging chip cameras in the marketplace today.
Having an aberration-free telescope design means nothing if the optics cannot be aligned properly. Many Ritchey owners never get to take full advantage of their instrument’s performance because the Ritchey is very difficult to collimate. Aligning the hyperbolic secondary mirror's optical axis to the optical axis of the primary mirror is critical in the Ritchey design, and the tolerances are unforgiving. The secondary mirror of the CDK design is spherical. It has no optical axis and so the centering tolerance of the CDK secondary mirror is comparatively huge. With the help of some very simple tools, the CDK user will be able to set the secondary spacing, collimate the optics and begin enjoying the full performance potential the instrument has to offer within a few minutes.
In the comparison shown above the drastic difference in performance between the CDK and the RC is apparent. The biggest component that degrades the off-axis performance of the RC is the defocus due to field curvature. In many diagrams shown by RC manufacturers, the diagrams look better than this because they are showing a curved field. This is fine for visual use because the eye can compensate for some amount of curvature of field. But CCD arrays are flat and so in order to evaluate the performance a spot diagrams and/or diffraction simulations requires a flat field as shown in this diagram.
按他的介绍，貌似这玩意儿比RC牛多了、、、
|
|
置顶卡
变色卡
千斤顶
显身卡
