This book of elderly, sometimes fuzzy photos and rough drawings is outrageously overpriced, even with the small Amazon discount.
Try to find a copy of the far better Rukl Moon Atlas, or write lots of letters to Kalmback to get them to reprint Rukl.
The only virtue of this book is the paucity of any Moon Atlas - a juicy opportunity for someone - Hello Msrs. Tirion, Dickinson, Ottewell, Crossen, Kepple or O'Meara?
Help, help!

Old pictures and quite badly drawn maps of the moon makes this book feel to expensive no matter what it costs.

Although, it gives you (as a matter of facts) very much information of the lunar surfice when it come to manmade names of the different places. Still some names misses, like the crater named after Neil Armstrong - where is it?

I also wish a book that says it is an Atlas of the moon, sold year 2001, would contain fresh photos of better quality (The Hubble Sky Telescope could maybe do something for us moonfans!) and better drawings. And why not more information about how and where the names of the places came to real and, what I really miss - pictures of parts of the earth placed on the lunar surfice to give me a view of how big the craters and the moon as a whole actually is. And why not a part in the book with pictures from the Apollo missions?! More could be done.

The importance of a good reference is incalculable for those who do any serious lunar observing, or for those who need to know exactly what they're looking at (or at least what they should be seeing). The Hatfield Atlas is by far the best lunar reference available. But rather than subject you to further ramblings-on about the merits of this book, I'll just state some straightforward points in simple fact:

The membership of our club includes about 140 dedicated amateur and professional astronomers. Many of us gather at our dark site facility to attend monthly star parties. If there is even the slightest moon that evening there may be a dozen or so telescopes trained on it well before dark. And those of us who do any serious lunar observing may already be consulting a single particular book which is kept on a desk in the observatory. Care to guess which book that is? "Yo, who's got the Hatfield's?".

The Hatfield Atlas is our 'official' lunar reference. Other references have been left out for the membership to browse and sample. Two of them drew favorable comments about their indices and cross references (and which are explicit advantages over Hatfield's). But as expected, we always go back to the Hatfield Atlas, and there are reasons. Plain and simple, you won't find better or more accurate renderings anywhere. If you want an exact reference, or if you need to match detail and gradations with what you see in the eyepiece, this is the book to have.

The first time one examines a reference of this quality, there is generally some astonishment at the high level of detail involved. My first inclination was to 'read' it from cover-to-cover, as one would regard a centennial issue of National Geographic. You will likely find the renderings here to be of equal or better quality and possibly more fascinating.

I highly recommend the Hatfield Atlas for both amateur and professional astronomers who have a need for the finest lunar reference available.