Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Solar imaging question


Philip Benson

Recommended Posts

Given the average seeing conditions we get here in the UK I would be interested to hear from those with experience in solar imaging which you think would give the better results between a TMB152/F8 apo with a Quark Chromosphere and a Lunt LS152T.

One is obviously a self-contained dedicated solar observing/imaging scope with a 60mm .65A ERF where as the Quark has an aperture of just 21mm regardless of the aperture telescope is it used with.

The cost of the Quark though is small though compared to the significant price tag on the Lunt even though additional power is required to use the Quark.

I realize that the better optical performance of the TMB is not an issue for Ha observing since you are only using a single wavelength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen full disk images with the LS152, but with the Quark that is not possible. Hardly an issue, as any chip will struggle to give full detail with the LS152 at native focal length. The moment you involve Barlows to match the resolution of the scope to the pixel size you lose the ability to image the entire disk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure, Phil. The Lunt 152 is clearly a mighty scope, but the Quark is also producing some great results in various apertures, so I would at least expect the Quark to run it much closer than the price difference would suggest.

How are you finding the Lunt 152 for your typical conditions? I find my 120mm and Quark generally okay my way. More often than not I use it, though no doubt it is not at top speed many a time. I drop down to 85mm and Quark if conditions are bad or too windy for the 120mm.

I don't find the power requirement much hassle for the Quark, only takes a mo to plug in, I use a portable battery pack. Warm up time is about ten mins, which for my tracked imaging is no issue at all as I power it up while I set up the rest of the gear, which takes me more than 10 mins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Michael and Luke for your replies.   I got the Lunt early last year as an upgrade from a 60T.  That of course was before the Quarks came on to the market and so to me the 152T was the ultimate solar scope.  I was amazed at the fantastic close ups of active regions on the website of the person who sold it to me.  To find a 152T coming up on the used market at a price I could just about manage was an opportunity too good to let go and I decided it was worth selling off my DSO imaging gear to raise funds to get the Lunt and concentrate on some serious solar imaging.

Last summer I was unable to match the incredibly detailed images of the previous owner and this left me feeling rather despondent.  Then this year by accident I enabled the drizzle option in Registax and suddenly my solar images were taken to the level I was looking for. The only thing holding me back now it seems is getting some good steady seeing to achieve maximum resolution.  Do I go for the middle of the day when the Sun is highest but the air at its hottest or early in the day when the Sun is low but the air relatively cool?

As regards equipment I find myself in a bit of a quandary.  Do I keep the 152 and perhaps upgrade it later in the year with the internal double stack module and perhaps a CaK module or do I use get a Quark instead to use with my 6" apo refractor and sell the Lunt to raise funds for other kit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't where you are based but last year good seeing for Solar, Planetary and DSO was at a premium and continues to be so

Lower seems to be the choice of the expert imagers but give it a chance to clear the thickest of the air mass - unfortunately not an option for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, I think that's a great suggestion from Michael and as you have such a dream scope (I was dreaming of the Lunt 100 before I heard about the Quark) I'd be tempted to stick with it. I just like something with 100mm upwards as my main imaging scope, and you have that. And as it works really well for visual too I would be loathe to give up a proven performer!

Don't feel down about your imaging, you have done some good imaging and it takes a while to put it all together, I'm still learning I think nearly two years in :eek: If you're not quite happy with your next results, please post them up and say you're not quite happy and would like suggestions.

I always feel, if it looks good at the eyepiece, it will image good, so I would say image when your eyeball reckons the seeing it typically best for you.

For a lot of people, including myself, the most steady time generally seems to be mornings, but it varies over the year and from day to day and depending on location and surroundings. I am just back from my hols and one day was the best seeing I have had for a long time, rock steady. I am wondering if it had anything to do with the Sun being over a rather large body of water, the sea :)

I have found that over winter with the Sun low seeing has generally been a bit lower, I think we are coming more into prime time for the big guns :laugh: :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.