SW Quattro like hens teeth

[sulaco]

Evening folk, 

I'm thinking of changing my setup from a SW 200p to either the Carbon SW Quattro or the Altair astro 6" RC, I've noticed that the Quattro rarely ever come up second hand.

Even though I'm happy to buy it new is this sparseness in second hand scopes a reflection on how good they are.

The Altair looks a great scope as I've followed John R. Taylor blogs and it's primarily for imaging it will be used, the Quattro isn't that often listed in peoples setups.

Any views?

Thanks

Campbell

[johnrt]

I'd agree neither the Quattro or the 6" RC come up that often 2nd hand.

They are quite different beasts though, the 8" Quattro is f/4 @ 800mm and the 6" RC is f/9 at 1390mm. Of course the 6" RC can be reduced with an Astro Physics CCDT67 to around 900mm but is still quite slow at f/6 and a bit. Collimation will be critical on the skywatcher, and although you won't be able to reduce it you will still need a comma corrector with a dslr size chip.

It's an interesting choice, personally I think the 6" RC is the most underrated imaging scope going and is capable of competing way above its price bracket, but then I would because I'm biased

[JamesF]

Although there is a Quattro for sale in the classifieds right now  First one I've seen for some time though, I would agree.

James

[johnrt]

Although there is a Quattro for sale in the classifieds right now  First one I've seen for some time though, I would agree.

James

Ha! Typical!!!

If I say there's never any Mesu mounts for £50 in the classifieds will one appear!?!?

[sulaco]

Hi John,

Speak of the Devil eh….thanks for the reply, I am heavily swayed to the RC as I've liked why you have achieved with it. Also its overall size is more favourable on the HEQ5, It's the speed of the Quattro that tempts me at f4 and I'm going to be sticking with the  modded DSLR for a while.

It's the lack of them cropping up which makes me feel that they're keepers perhaps.

Thanks again

Campbell

[johnrt]

Hi John,

Speak of the Devil eh….thanks for the reply, I am heavily swayed to the RC as I've liked why you have achieved with it. Also its overall size is more favourable on the HEQ5, It's the speed of the Quattro that tempts me at f4 and I'm going to be sticking with the  modded DSLR for a while.

It's the lack of them cropping up which makes me feel that they're keepers perhaps.

Thanks again

Campbell

FLO quote the weight of the 8" Carbon Quattro as 9.2kg's with accessories, you need to add the weight of the camera and any guiding hardware to that. Perhaps pushing it on an HEQ5?

[Bender]

Telescopeoutlet have a Quattro listed as well.

[sulaco]

FLO quote the weight of the 8" Carbon Quattro as 9.2kg's with accessories, you need to add the weight of the camera and any guiding hardware to that. Perhaps pushing it on an HEQ5?

I read somewhere that the CF version was 7.5Kg without the rings, if it is 9kg then it wouldn't be ideal.

[lensman57]

Hi John,

Speak of the Devil eh….thanks for the reply, I am heavily swayed to the RC as I've liked why you have achieved with it. Also its overall size is more favourable on the HEQ5, It's the speed of the Quattro that tempts me at f4 and I'm going to be sticking with the  modded DSLR for a while.

It's the lack of them cropping up which makes me feel that they're keepers perhaps.

Thanks again

Campbell

Hi,

HEQ5 will handle a Quattro but just. The speed of the Quattro is desirable but also it is extremely difficult to get the orthogonality and the collimation right. It took me 3 months   of fiddling to  get the collimation to an acceptable level and I mean acceptable not perfect so be aware. I have not any issues with the steel version but I employ two long dovetails, one on the top of the rings and one at the bottom of the rings to ensure rigidity. The position of the guide scope is also critical in reducing flexure.

Regards,

A.G

[sulaco]

How long roughly would an exposure with f6 take to achieve a compatible one with f4, If that's not as clear as mud.?

[JamesF]

How long roughly would an exposure with f6 take to achieve a compatible one with f4, If that's not as clear as mud.?

Assuming the same aperture in each case,  you'd need 2.25 times as long with the f/6 to get the same level of exposure (photons arriving per photosite for want of a better term) as for f/4.

James

[laser_jock99]

If weight is an issue then the GSO/Teleskop Service 6" F4 imaging Newtonian is worth a mention.

Tube weight is 3.7Kg http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4762_GSO-6--Imaging-Newtonian---6--f-4---2--Monorail-focuser.html

I haven't given mine as much imaging time as I should but it makes a cheeky little fast, short focal length imaging scope.

M42 6" F4 scope 180s @ ISO2000

[lensman57]

How long roughly would an exposure with f6 take to achieve a compatible one with f4, If that's not as clear as mud.?

James is correct so long as the aperture is the same as stated but also in AP how much the target occupies on the sensor is also a factor, so the relationship may not be so staright forward.

A.G

[Dave_D]

personally I think the 6" RC is the most underrated imaging scope going and is capable of competing way above its price bracket, but then I would because I'm biased

PROVE IT!!

Oh wait... you do, all the time