Flame Nebula

Thanks Dweller, I did also check that out, but the F5 version seems pretty good and is, supposedly, better for AP. I know the 200p has many good reviews for visual observation. Mark

Hi Peter, Things have changed slightly, after Stu's post, and I'm now thinking about an 8" F5. But, as far as I know from my research, a coma corrector isn't used for planetary AP, even for a f4. The common accessories for Newts looks like various Barlows and, an atmospheric dispersion corrector. If I do eventually get the F4, in all likelihood, I'd get a paracorr. For the F5 SW scope, perhaps a cheaper skywatcher coma corrector will do, although I understand at F5, it depends on the observer's preference, as coma is apparently not so pronounced(I'm sure others can comment there) Mark

Hi Piero, I appreciate your advice. In fact, I've already changed course significantly after Stu's post, as he got me thinking, particularly about the potential issues of mounting/dismounting a 12" scope, even if it is only 14 kg, it's awkward shaped, and so as a compromise, I've decided to drop down to an 8", which actually are also very capable imaging scopes. This will allow me to see potential issues going to much larger scopes on an AZEQ6, but at the same time, give me a chance to try planetary imaging, which would be better than anything I can obtain with my current aperture (since aperture does rule in thus case). But, anyway, back to your opening question. Indeed you summise almost correctly, but not fully. I have tried using the ed80 with a D7000, with some limited exposure times, with darks and flats, using DSS to stack. But, getting long enough exposure time per exposure is the killer without an EQ mount. Now, my thinking in the past, has been Heq5 pro, but I don't want to spend > £1k on that mount, when for £1.7k, I could get an AZEQ6, with greater abilities wrt future scopes and az for visual too(good for Newts!) . So, either way I look, the path goes through this mount. I guess at that point, I could stop further scope purchase. But, the good thing about the SW 200pds, is it's cheap😁. Worst case, I use it for visual observation, get used to handling it on the mount, but start getting experience with equatorial dso AP with the ed80. As mentioned, I already have a dslr, so not much additional layout would be needed to start out, except maybe bigger sd memory cards! I've already invested in two 500gb ssd in preparation for memory needs. So, I could go down this path, in increments, and the worst that happens, is I have a good solid versatile Azeq mount and an 8" cheap newt, for visual obs, which would be a significant increase on my current apertures. Of course, I am definitely not ruling out the possibility of a nice 5" apo in the future, if I decide not to continue down the AP path. I would still have reserve in my budget to get a 5" StellaMira apo. I do listen to you guys and consider your wise words. 😉 I don't always totally agree with everything(but that's normal) , but importantly, I do like that it makes me think again. Thanks Mark

Best laugh I've had today! 👍 Poor fella! Let's hope it doesn't progress further. I've been lucky. Before I went to stage 2, one of the members on this forum, gave me a strong dose of Aperturicide! This led to a reduction in symptoms, down to looking at only 8".😁

Hi Cosmic Geoff, I don't know, but many of the imagers on astrobin using a 200pds seems to have managed it, so it must be possible. 😉 Mark

Hi, I'm gathering information on this, and hopefully some experienced planetary imagers can help me. Assumption : scope = SW 200pds on AZEQ6. I've done a few hours research on imaging cameras and looked on astrobin specifically at images taken with a 200pds. From what I've learned so far, I've seen very good images taken with a variety of cameras, usually zwo ones, using a 200pds.But, these were either 2.9 micron pixel size or 3.75. I did think smaller was better, but some superb images of jupiter and albedo detail on ganymede were achieved with a asi224mc (I was really surprised by the ganymede view, as I didn't think 8" could pick out albedo details). What I've also noticed is that they almost all use 3-5x Barlow. As I understand, this is to obtain the desired arcseconds per pixel of 0.1-0.25, for the specific scope, depending on seeing. I also noted that the exceptional images I found took huge number of frames (40000!, at 100fps,10ms per frame, way more frames than I've read is normal, i. e approx 5000) and with a 5x extender, would have been 0.15"/pixel (usually associated with very good /excellent seeing) . Perhaps they had excellent seeing and the huge number of frames pulled out exceptional detail from a few percent of total? I also note that nearly every image from various imagers, included the use of a zwo adc. Since I understand these operate best at f20 or higher, to minimise abberations, that would imply a 4x Barlow or more for an F5 scope. Maybe this explains why the particular imager went with the larger pixel sized 224mc rather than say the 2.9 microns in say a 662mc, so as to keep abberations limited, whilst satisfying the required arcseconds /pixel he wanted. Anyway, it seems that I could follow a similar path. However, I wanted to get some opinions on this. Would you agree on 224mc,zwo adc and 5x Barlow? Or something different? Since I'll be able to track fairly accurately with the az-eq6, what would be the best camera to use, assuming a zwo adc is in place. Thanks Mark

Thanks Stu, I already have a 80mm refractor, so I can practice with that, but I'm up for the challenge with AP, and think it'll be fun to do some collimation (especially the barlowed laser technique) or star test. The 8" Newtonian route may well be a wise intermediate step, so thanks for your words of warning 👍 Mark

Hi Stu, I appreciate your words of warning, and deep down I know you're probably right. 😉 I think the choice of AZEQ6 mount is pretty solid,as it is effectively the centrepiece and future proofs heavier scopes. Of course, from what I've seen in astrobin (and I've looked at a lot of planetary images, as you can imagine), even the best 5" refractors don't match larger apertures. Another path would be to go down the SW 200pds, (8" F5) route, because that would bring me closer to experience what it might be like with a similar length scope to 300mm f4, but less diameter to hold and lighter at about 9kg. If I struggle with that, then..... It would also get me used to collimation etc. Plus, outlay for 200pds OTA is relatively low(£425,new,flo). I'll give it serious consideration. 👍 Best wishes Mark

Thanks rl, You make some valuable points. As background, my prime reason for getting the scope is planetary AP, which it can do in Az mode(I found an excellent example of a photo of Mars with this scope and this mount, in Az mode which proves that ), and visual observation. Any dso AP would be with my ed80, for which this mount would be overkill😊, and rock solid. If orion optics sold this scope with a goto and tracking mount, I would seriously think of that option. Not sure the Sky-Watcher 300pds on a Dob mount, can match the image I found for Mars, for example, at least I have not seen that level of image yet. Doesn't mean they're not out there, but I've done a lot of searching, and only when the 12" SW scope has been on an EQ mount, have I found comparable images. So, I've no doubt this scope in Az mode would serve me for the intended use. HOWEVER, I am concerned about the mounting and dismounting. Sometimes, that can be awkward with much smaller scopes, if you can't get the mounting plate to cooperative and your holding the scope with one arm. This for me is the big concern now. If there is a way anyone knows to support the weight of this scope whilst mounting it, I'd me happy for them to share it. Otherwise I'll need to get to the gym! I can't find any videos of this scope being mounted. I did find one with a big aussie bloke mounting a 300pds onto an neq6 - 26kg! No way would I attempt that! I know how heavy that would feel in one arm! 14kg is something I think I could support for a short time. Emphasis on short! I don't want to be leaning forward with that weight either - recipe for back issues! Assuming, the mounting issue can be made easy, I'm also aware of the much tighter demands on collimation needs F4, although I had a reply from the person who took the Mars image I refer to, and he just used a star test whilst imaging train connected to laptop. No need for coma corrector for planetary AP. But for visual obs, I may need to get one, as I don't like coma and I can't see me only using a 12" newt for AP imaging only! 😊 Anyway, hope this gives you a better idea of the background. Either this or a second hand C11. But I'm put off by the issues I've heard from people saying the visual views in a C11 are not so good, and often beaten by 5" APOs, due to seeing or various reasons. It seems a waste to pay all that money for 11" you can't use for visual, if the seeing isn't perfect. I'm also thinking of getting a 5" apo, but I doubt it will beat a top class 1/10 wave 12" mirror, properly cooled and collimated. 🤔, which can do both planetary AP and visual, in Az mode. Having said that, it would be much easier to set up, and I like refractor views! So, I'm likely to get one of these, possibly used, at some point, funds allowing. Mark

Hi rl, I had heard it was OK when in Az mode. Did you have problems even in this mode? I'm wondering if carrying it on a trolley, then connecting to the az-eq6 mount is an option that would make it easier to handle. Is it the length of the tube that you think caused it to be on the limit, because weight wise it is well within the load capacity that the mount is supposed to be capable of. Thanks Mark

Thanks Space Hopper, This is indeed the dilemma. You could very well be right on this. I'm looking at your photo. Did your adaptation allow goto and tracking? Thanks Mark

Hi Stu, Yes, you offer wise words. Didn't sound harsh to me and is taken as intended. 😉 Not sure if many used VX12 will come up, that are easy to pick up and offer a tempting enough price differential from new. I think after a lot of research, this looks like it could (emphasis on could) achieve the planetary images I'm after. Of course, in Az mode, I'm sure it would be good for visual too, but I'm not ruling out something like a used SW120ED, based on many positive comments, to give me the refractor views I like. I'm getting there. 👍 Thanks Mark

Thanks Scarp. I think you and John have convinced me. 👍. I think partly, in a sort of analogous way, I started thinking "if I can handle and afford the VX12, and I'm getting the az-eq6 mount anyway which can handle it, am I going to be thinking" what if? ", when I'm using the VX10. I suspect I would. But, too late at that point. Because I've been carefully saving up money for nearly three years( thus avoiding any impact on family expenditure) and aiming for the best views of Jupiter in 2024/25, I want to get it right. Can't afford to lose money on resale etc, etc). Probably more info than you needed... 😂😂

Hi Joe, Glad you have enjoyed the posts👍 Since the last one, I have to report that I've contracted a serious dose of Bacillus Aperturitis. The symptoms have come on rapidly. I was warned there was a risk, but I kept researching and now...... 😬 I did think the symptoms had plateaued yesterday at 10", but this morning it's progressed to stage 2, 12". 😞 I don't know if there's a cure now, but this could be chronic. I suspect the only cure now, will be to accept my fate, get a 12" and then as the fever recedes, and clarity returns, I'll be ready for 4-5 inches of apo sanity. 😀😜 Mark

Hi John I'm thinking also about the weight. The OO 12" F4 is only 14kg, and about 4' long, so I can probably handle it in terms of getting on/off mount. Whereas the Sky-Watcher 12" is, I understand, 25kg and an extra foot longer (based on f4.9). The weight of the OTA alone would be at the manufacturer's max loading for the AZ-EQ6 mount (that's not to say it wouldn't work, but certainly I wouldn't want to manoeuvre it😬😬. My mind goes back to when I used to carry 20L drums of water(so approx 20kg,wt), and how heavy that felt, but in that case I had a handle and a straight arm, and many years younger😏) But, you do make a good point, with respect to a small extra cost in terms of relatively small percentage of total cost. I believe you had a used 12" F5.3 OO (Dob version) , if memory serves (which it doesn't always, these days 😉). I seem to remember you were impressed with it? Do you think the 12" would cover most visual needs, based on your experiences? Of course, there are stories about tube flexure, but I'm not sure if that would affect planetary AP and visual observation. Maybe extended dso AP where hours might be spent gathering data. Not sure on that. Thanks Mark

Thanks for letting me know, At the moment, I'm not ready to buy. Need to make sure my 'situation' at work is secure, and I think hopefully assuming the case, by September, I'll be starting to pull some triggers. But my first purchase is very likely to be the mount. I'll be able to test it out with my ed80 first. Then the main scope purchase. Still can't decide on a scope to fill gap between ed80/127mm mak and main scope. I might be able to stretch to a 4" StellaMira around £1K, but that could be acquired later.

Thanks Dweller, Indeed, I can see subtle differences between 1/4 and 1/8, but no difference beyond. So, that would make it worth the 1/8 option, but I can save a few quid not getting 1/10. I've found a really good example of what this scope is capable of, with an image of Mars at it closest for 150 years. I found a lot of good images satisfying my criteria, but not Mars. But the one I eventually found was top drawer, you could even see Mons Olympus! Obviously, this doesn't mean I can repeat this, but it shows the potential, as it was on an EQ6, but I've also found a good one on SGL, and that was done in AZ mode on AZEQ6. Since, this scope is only 14kg and 'short' relatively, I think I could handle it. With an AZEQ6 mount, the options for general visual and planetary AP and DSO AP are tremendous. So, a serious contender I think! And all for significantly less than a new C9.25 OTA. Admittedly, I'll need a good coma corrector, around £250 but that's still 25%less than C9.25, and now I'm reasonably sure a 12" can compete with the C9.25, may be even the C11?!

Hi, I'm considering this scope to go on a AZ-EQ6 for planetary imaging, and general observation, with a coma corrector. I'm interested in hearing from any users of the scope for planetary imaging, and whether you opted from 1/8 or 1/10 wave? Not 100% convinced that these would make a noticeable difference, but if anyone has seen comparative images to show they do, that would be good. Thanks Mark

Thanks. Indeed, it is the weight and option of the 1/10 wave. Yes, I heard about the flexure issue. Maybe it wouldn't be too bad with the VX10, as it's not so long as the vx10L.

OK, thanks Bosun. So, I have to ask; if you didn't have the goto Dob, which one would you go for? 🤔And you mention a coma corrector - this was something I wondered about, as the f ratio is 4.7 (4.8 in the OO), so borderline. Do you need one for visual? As a side note, I read that the 300pds has the same diameter secondary as the 250pds,which would make it only 24%, similar to the OO 10". I've seen superb images of Saturn taken with the SW 300pds on an EQ mount.

Hi Bosun, I've been deliberating further, and quite like your idea of a 180 mm mak and 10" Newtonian combo, on a AZ-EQ6 mount. I can see how these would complement each other and be a big jump from my current scopes. I have researched two 10 inchers. The OO 10VX and SW 250pds. I'm favouring the OO, with option of 1/10 wave mirror. I've also discovered that the secondary in the OO is 25%, compared to 29% in SW. I couldn't find the SW secondary diameter mentioned anywhere in specs, but chat gpt tells me 73mm.😉The OO is 3 kg lighter too! I reckon it would go well with AZ mode on mount I was wondering what dob you had, and what you think of it, for planetary AP and visual observation? Thanks Mark

Hi Mike, Interestingly, I was actually reading an old post of yours, where you reported that, and vlaiv's interesting response.

Very true John, Although I must point out that I'm not looking for any guarantees, even if it may come across that way 😉, and I can understand it might. I'm looking for a 'balance of probabilities', based on gathering as much data as I can from reviews, speaking to knowledgeable people such as yourself and looking at lots of images. I know there is no guarantee (this applies to many things in life), but I also know from years of experience that lack of preparation usually leads to failure too. 😉 I am grateful for your advise and everyone else here, and for all your patience! 👍😊

OK, so I would like to be able to see the Encke gap. I won't use the word resolve, as I think it may be correct, but if you look at Saturn images, you will see what I mean. I have seen C8 scopes do it, but usually it is most obvious from images taken in C9.25 and larger and Newts at 10" or higher. Now, taking your point, I often see a wide range of images with same scope, some better than others, and that will be where the user comes in, and to some extent the seeing, although I understand this has much less effect in planetary AP. Going to jupiter, similarly, I'd like a scope capable of showing the various festoons, e.g. the white oval ones in southern hemisphere. Hope this gives you an idea of what the scope should be capable of: whether my processing skills will be good enough is another matter. 🤔😉

Perhaps a used C9.25 is worth a punt for that.