Which is better for astrophotography?

[yelsac]

I'm not greatly experienced so I wanted to ask you guys (the experts) what maybe a silly question but I'm going to ask it anyway

If you had the choice between a 10" quattro at £515 (steel version) http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-quattro-f4-imaging-newtonian.html

or

a Revelation/GSO 10" with a mirror cooling fan at £399 http://www.telescopehouse.com/acatalog/Revelation-10--f-4-M-LRN-Optical-Tube-Assembly-OTA.html

they are both f4 scopes with nice focusers & good light gathering abilities for visual & designed for photography.

I think what I'm trying to say is the 10" quattro worth the extra £115 & if so why?

hope that makes sense

[RikM]

I haven't used either scope personally but expect the Quattro to give slightly better results due to the internal baffling improving contrast. I use an Explorer 150p and 250px myself.

[lensman57]

I'm not greatly experienced so I wanted to ask you guys (the experts) what maybe a silly question but I'm going to ask it anyway

If you had the choice between a 10" quattro at £515 (steel version) http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-quattro-f4-imaging-newtonian.html

or

a Revelation/GSO 10" with a mirror cooling fan at £399 http://www.telescopehouse.com/acatalog/Revelation-10--f-4-M-LRN-Optical-Tube-Assembly-OTA.html

they are both f4 scopes with nice focusers & good light gathering abilities for visual & designed for photography.

I think what I'm trying to say is the 10" quattro worth the extra £115 & if so why?

hope that makes sense

Neither of those will be my choice for a first imaging scope. A fast, short and wide ED or Apo will be much more user friendly and a lot more suitable for " widefield " AP either using a DSLR or a CCD. The FOV is much more suited to the large nebulae and the demand on guiding is not so great. Either of those scopes you mentioned is capable but in the hands of an experienced imager and the choice of targets that normally suits these are galaxies and planetary nebulae. I have the Quattro 8s and I am still hesitant to use it over my much slower 100 ed @ F7.6.

A.G

[The BFJ]

Hi,

the only thing I can ad to this is that I was warned that an f4 scope is very sensitive to collimation and, if you're planning on doing a long evening's AP you may need to re-colli it very frequently so ensure the best results. I was told by the guy that runs the local astro society that a few of his members went to the Quatro them traded them in shortly after for slower f-ratio scopes as they found them too demanding.

Hope that helps...

[ollypenrice]

Hi,

the only thing I can ad to this is that I was warned that an f4 scope is very sensitive to collimation and, if you're planning on doing a long evening's AP you may need to re-colli it very frequently so ensure the best results. I was told by the guy that runs the local astro society that a few of his members went to the Quatro them traded them in shortly after for slower f-ratio scopes as they found them too demanding.

Hope that helps...

This would be my fear. The problem is that 'fast' and 'budget' don't sit together easily. I wonder if dropping from the more standard F5 to F4 is really worth it? With a really well engineered scope (ie expensive) then yes. But at F5 things are easier for the manufacturer and for the user.

These are pretty big scopes and have a metre focal length. Is that the focal length you would like for the targets you'll be selecting?

Olly

[Earl]

I have seen very good resutls with quatros, however you need to spend time in collimating them very very well.

[yelsac]

This would be my fear. The problem is that 'fast' and 'budget' don't sit together easily. I wonder if dropping from the more standard F5 to F4 is really worth it? With a really well engineered scope (ie expensive) then yes. But at F5 things are easier for the manufacturer and for the user.

These are pretty big scopes and have a metre focal length. Is that the focal length you would like for the targets you'll be selecting?

Olly

I have to confess it is, I've been using a 150p reflector & really want to get a bigger view & pictures of Galaxy's & the planets

[yelsac]

Neither of those will be my choice for a first imaging scope. A fast, short and wide ED or Apo will be much more user friendly and a lot more suitable for " widefield " AP either using a DSLR or a CCD. The FOV is much more suited to the large nebulae and the demand on guiding is not so great. Either of those scopes you mentioned is capable but in the hands of an experienced imager and the choice of targets that normally suits these are galaxies and planetary nebulae. I have the Quattro 8s and I am still hesitant to use it over my much slower 100 ed @ F7.6.

A.G

Thanks for your reply

I have been using a 6" reflector for targets & basically want to get bigger views of Galaxies & the planets. 

If I'm honest I'm not really interested in Nebulae apart from the obvious ones like in orion, the ring & dumbell

I'm a bit limited too with a basic unmodded Dslr & webcam for planets

so just wanted to get an idea of which scope to go to next

[ronin]

Agree with Lensman I wouldn't go near a 10" scope for AP.

You will need the NEQ6 that you have and almost at least the NEQ6 for a 10" scope if not a biger one.

[RikM]

Thanks for your reply

I have been using a 6" reflector for targets & basically want to get bigger views of Galaxies & the planets. 

If I'm honest I'm not really interested in Nebulae apart from the obvious ones like in orion, the ring & dumbell

I'm a bit limited too with a basic unmodded Dslr & webcam for planets

so just wanted to get an idea of which scope to go to next

250PX

[Tinker1947]

I use a 250P-DS + NEQ6, it work well if its got good balance, the PA is set several times via the handset routine although for AP i feel a 150P-DS might be better a bit more forgiving on the mount and just make life a bit easier when setting up....you will need a Coma Corrector and if not used with EQMod on a permanent set-up then just setting up each session will begin to get a bit of a grind there's a lot to do other than press the imagine button.....

[lensman57]

Thanks for your reply

I have been using a 6" reflector for targets & basically want to get bigger views of Galaxies & the planets. 

If I'm honest I'm not really interested in Nebulae apart from the obvious ones like in orion, the ring & dumbell

I'm a bit limited too with a basic unmodded Dslr & webcam for planets

so just wanted to get an idea of which scope to go to next

In which case I think that you should consider the RC variety as well. More expensive for sure but I have seen quite a few of these being used very effectively for galaxy hunting. The 6" for sure has the FL that you are seeking and well within the budget though a dedicated reducer is needed to drop it  down to around F6. F4 scopes are extremely demanding both in collimation and set up and have an unforgivingly short depth of focus. With my Quattro I found that the best focus achieved in the start of session after the cool down was no longer valid after an hour of imaging as the temp drops a few degrees and I was not in the mood to spend a fortune equipping the scope with a robotic focuser. My main reason for getting the Quattro ( I bought it at less than 1/2 price from a chap that couldn't use it ) was to go for very short exposure because of my severe local LP but it did not fulfil that role.

A.G

[Xplode]

These f/4 scopes aren't very good choices, they aren't stable enough mechanically so you will have a hard time because of flex, focus drift, collimation etc.

If you want a f/4 bigger than 6" you want a carbon tube, better mirror cell and a stiff spider, but that at least doubles the price of the scope.

If you go for an 8" f/5 you will be ok with a cheaper scope

With a permanent setup a cheaper 10" f/5 could also work ok.

If you go for a newtonian go for GSO, Teleskop Service has lots of parts to upgrade the scope with better parts if you find that something should be upgraded

[laser_jock99]

Not sure why the Skywatcher is more expensive since both scopes are much of a muchness and would probably perform equally well in good hands. The baffles on the Quattro might help if you suffer from local light pollution sources like a nearby street light - but a home made dew shield would sort that out anyway.

On the plus side the GSO scope has a substantial monorail focuser.

To echo some of the above coments- neither of these scopes is going to be 'plug-n-play' and as such can't be recomended for the in-experienced user.

All my of F4 Newtonians have undergone a certain amount of 'fettling' to make minor improvements in stability- such as stronger primary mirror springs, fitting decent dovetail bars, top bars, etc. As has been noted above some people sell these scopes on due to lack of understanding on what is needed to get them working.

They can be made to hold collimation (and I use mine at F2.9....) - but with the steel tube models you will need to check focus between targets if there is much of a temperature drop during the session.

Not sure what all the fuss is regarding collimation of an F4 scope? It should take only 1-2 minutes max, if it needs adjusting at all (my GSO 6" F4 is rock solid).

Personnally I would go for the 8" GSO F4 or even 6" F4 (peach of a widefield scope) since they are easier to handle. If you get on well with the concept of what is required then maybe upgrade to the bigger scopes. You could end up with the monster 12" F4/F2.9!

Finally, the icing on the cake with F4 Newts- if you think F4 is a tad slow........add one of these correcter/reducers.

[ollypenrice]

For most galaxies you need focal length and a metre is hardly enough so an F5 would be better for you. Even more would be better still if you can mount and guide it. Long FL is hard to guide. 8 inch RC might be good.

Olly

[laser_jock99]

Long focal lengths are indeed good for galaxies - but this is not what the F4 Newts are really about. For me the main application is the 'middle ground' nebulae objects like M45, M8  or the Iris Nebula where a reasonable (read manageable) focal length combined with fast optics win out. 

Going back to the OP - If you did buy the GSO you could spend the difference on a decent quality coma corrector either the Baader MPCC III or Skywatcher Aplanatic and then start saving for high quality laser collimator. Neither of these accessories can be skimped on @ F4 and should be budgeted in from the start if considering fast Newtonians.

[Earl]

I would consider an RC, but is shop around for a tried and tested model with all the attachments you need.

Problem is though your goign to need exposure time for an average F8 RC but you do get the focal length.

  Its a balancing act with astrophotography, Personally speaking I go for the Fastest F I can as this gives good rewards quickly, which is why i stick with the F3.6 FSQ106 as it delivers (with all its side issues) If I wanted a longer focal length i could look at the F3 600mm Veloce RH 200 hoever id need an atlas focuser, much bigger camera.. and a pot of gold...  .....

[laser_jock99]

  Its a balancing act with astrophotography, Personally speaking I go for the Fastest F I can as this gives good rewards quickly, which is why i stick with the F3.6 FSQ106 as it delivers (with all its side issues) If I wanted a longer focal length i could look at the F3 600mm Veloce RH 200 hoever id need an atlas focuser, much bigger camera.. and a pot of gold...  .....

All very nice scopes (especially your Tak) but probably not within the OP's budget.

One of the areas of this hobby I'm interested in, is in how good (or bad!) results you eek out of essentially what is budget equipment. I would include the GSO and Skywatcher Newtonians firmly in the low cost equipment camp. So it's part of the 'challenge' to see how well they can be made to perform. Not everyone's cup of tea of course, many people prefer an out-of-the-box solution- but that costs more money. 

[Earl]

A 6" RC could be a good alternative. and of similar price. Id be aware of focuser issues though.

[sunka]

I agree f/4 is hard to collimate (I just cant seem to get those stars round with http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p4762_GSO-6--Imaging-Newton---150mm-Oeffnung-f-4---2--MONORAIL.html).

But I heard RC is also not very easy to collimate?