Chris

On 13/02/2022 at 14:14, Mark at Beaufort said:

Very enjoyable video Chris.

I will be interested how you get on with this scope which is impressive only weighing just over 5 kgs.

For the money I quite fancy trying one but I only have a AZ5 mount with the stainless steel legs so I might get some wobbling at high mag.

Hey Mark thanks, glad you liked it  In the words of Mrs Doyle...go on go on go on go on 😜

Very nice Ian, especially the last shot with the full solar disk - good Sun spot detail and you can even make out some faculae! 

11 minutes ago, Stu said:

Nice review Chris. I have a Celestron Omni 120XLT and have had some good views with it. I used it recently at an outreach event and it performed very well on the Moon.

It’s pretty handy for white light solar, you do get used to the green of a continuum filter after a while and it does sharpen up the views. Bit of a big boy next to the FC100DC though.

Lovely Stu! I wish you could still get hold of the OMNI range of scopes new, in which case I would have had real trouble choosing the EVo120 EQ5 over the OMNI 120mm CG4 package! 

I've just remembered I have some spare solar film, hopefully there's enough to make a filter for the Evo 

16 hours ago, neil phillips said:

495 LONGPASS is also good. Neil English convinced me of this. And i have to agree its got some great strengths with achros. Nice post love it. 

Looks like I'll be adding the 495 Long pass to the list of things to try then  Thanks for the heads up Neil, cheers! 

16 hours ago, AMcD said:

This is an image that I did not run through Starnet++ and processed stars and nebula together.  It is really only the brightest star that shows a halo from the L-Xtreme

I'm sure I heard the L-eXtreme causes halos on very bright stars with Apo's also. Now the L-eNhance doesn't cause halos so I'm keen to see how well that works with the EVo as well as the semi apo filter. 

16 hours ago, Ian McCallum said:

You've got the same setup as me. I replied to you on YouTube. 👍

Looks the business Ian! and I see you're using the enhanced motor drive kit for guiding too! 

16 hours ago, Saganite said:

Hi Chris,

I enjoyed the video particularly as I had an Evostar 120 some years ago, and it was a good telescope.  As you know I still have three Achromats at f15, f14, and f10, and they do everything I could wish for, and do it very well.  

Good to see you again, and I am glad that all is well.

Steve

Hey Steve, good to hear from you and I hope all is well with you too! Glad you enjoyed the video, I'm looking forward to having some fun with the Evo : ) 

37 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

I've used a minus violet filter on this scope and it didn't really help much with the CA. What I want to try is my continuum filter on the moon. It turns everything apple green but I suspect it will wipe out CA completely and provide a bit more bite. I'll try it next time the sky is clear and the moon is out.

I once tried the Contimuum filter for white light and it did improve detail a touch, but I was just too distracted by the green.

I've bought a semi apo filter at the same time as the Evo120 and these are supposed to be neutral, looking forward to testing it out. 

2 hours ago, AMcD said:

It is pretty well corrected and the build quality is excellent, at least on this one.  I picked it up second hand.  Herewith two recent pictures - The Rosette is 10 hours of 300 sec subs with an OSC equipped with an Optolong L-Extreme.  The Elephant's Trunk 24 hours on the same equipment.

Hey thanks for posting these! They're better than I expected from the fast 6" fast achromat! Maybe it's worth me popping the Fuji XT1 on the Evo120 after all!

Most of the stars look well controlled so I'm wondering if the L-eXtreme cuts out some CA. I've wondered if this would be the case before.    

1 hour ago, AMcD said:

I do my imaging with a TS152 achromat.  I could get better images with an APO but a 6 inch APO would require a lottery win 🙂  In any event, I have indeed developed a real soft spot for it.

I've heard those TS 152's are well corrected for what they are so I would be interested to see a pic or two from it Looks super nice on the G11 too!

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

I have an older Helios branded scope (with new paint job). They are surprisingly capable. They do have CA, and it is noticeable, but it doesn't stop it revealing fine detail on the moon and supporting x200. With a 42mm 2" fitting eyepiece it can get as low as x23.

If you are at a dark sky site, they are wonderful wide field/deep sky scopes. I had my best ever view of the Orion nebula through mine. It's pretty good on the Pleiades too!

Works just fine on my EQ5. I think the EQ5 plus this 120mm achro is a serious alternative to 6" Dobs for anyone just starting out. 

Looks lovely in the classic white Michael ! I nearly went for a 102 f/10 but thought the 120 f/8.3 would be more versatile as you describe

Hands up if you have a soft spot for the good old affordable classic achromat refractor!? Well I do, so after some time without one I decided to rectify the situation. 

I'm unable to access the planets and Moon from my obsy, so this classic refractor on a motor driven EQ5 will be used to access these to the south (if my neighbour turns his security lights off! Pleural).

Looking forward to showing the kids the planets and Moon through this beast, plus some out reach! One or two of the locals have become curious about Astronomy so why not get them hooked by showing then the rings of Saturn...the gateway drug to Astronomy 🤪  (I've also picked up a Semi Apo filter) 

On 28/01/2022 at 23:09, RobertI said:

Rough, ready and rather lovely. 🙂

Ah thanks Rob  I have tweaked it since though as I realised the background was leaning too much towards the red. 

On 28/01/2022 at 23:47, Naglerman said:

Nice job Chris!  Are you using a mirror less camera?  I’d be interested to learn more as have an older Fuji XE2 that might work?  

Thanks  Yes I'm using a stock Fuji XT1 (circa 2014) connected via a Fuji FX T-ring.

There is no need to astro-modify Fuji's as they let in plenty of hydrogen alpha just as they are 

2 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Which one would you recommend to novice in 1k category:

70mm ED scope + flattener + Az gti mount with mods + DSLR

versus

manual eq5 + single RA motor + 130PDS + SW 0.9 CC + DSLR

If mainly interested in DSO imaging then the ED70 AZ GTI (with the wedge, counterweight mod, and firmware update) might be the better option because you can get around the lack of a polar scope by plate solving with software, and guiding works well with these setups. You also have the goto to help locate faint objects to image. You can also upgrade to the ASI Air plus to make things easier at some point down the line. 70mm isn't a great deal of aperture for observing or planetary imaging so best kept purely for DSO imaging. 

If they would like to dabble with a bit of everything it's hard to argue with a moderate sized 130pds/150p f/5 reflector on an EQ5 mount with basic drive. These have a bit of aperture for the visual side of things, and with regards to DSO imaging you can start off imaging the brighter DSO's with 30 second exposures, then upgrade to the Synscan goto upgrade or Asterion goto upgrade kit at a later date. 130pds/150p will be relatively good for planetary Lunar imaging and observing, just add a Barlow and planetary cam.   

15 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

This is very good combination for wide field imaging, let's see what sort of money that will all cost and main question - how likely is for novice to upgrade from that gear in some future after purchase?

Around 1k all in for everything, give or take : )

I'll counter that thought with how likely is a beginner to keep a portable rig if they upgrade to something larger and more capable? 

E.g. I have a Star Adventurer for portability and widefield, and a more serious rig in the obsy. 

What if they drop 2k plus on an HEQ5 pro based rig and decide it's not for them. 

We can spin this several different ways, but I don't think we can find a black and white answer to this because 2-3k is pocket change to some but an absolute fortune to others, and some will love AP and go deep into the hobby and for others an imaging rig might end up collecting dust. 

2 hours ago, malc-c said:

But I can't see that being the case... There's not much point buying a huge mega pixel camera that weighs a few kg and then attaching it to a mount that lacks the fine accuracy and precision to take advantage of that pixels/ mm count the sensor will offer.

I'm not sure how many people would recommend a several Kilogram camera with a huge megapixel count to a beginner? 

Your 400D weighs around 500g and has about 10MP.

My Fuji XT1 is similar to this too.

E.g. a Canon 400D with ED72 plus 0.8 flattener would give you 3.5"/seconds ish. 

To me this seems like a reasonable pixel scale and camera for someone starting out. (although the 450D would be better with live view)  

The AZ GTI in EQ mode can handle a the above, and so can the EQM35. 

45 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I have to correct myself - EXOS2 can't take 13Kg photographic payload (18Kg visual) - that seems to be error on @FLO

We'll look at this on Monday Vlaiv, thanks   

I'm probably not the only one to suggest shorter focal length (more forgiving) setups to beginners, and I feel you don't need an HEQ5 at shorter focal lengths/larger pixel scales.

I've personally had bad luck with second hand mounts, it's the one part of an imaging rig I'd recommend buying new. The HEQ5 Pro currently retails for around £950. 

Putting yourself in the shoes of someone starting out it's hard to jump to the suggestion of an HEQ5 pro sometimes when they say I want to do AP my budget is 300 quid.  

You need to find a middle ground

I agree the HEQ5 Pro used to be the default answer, however things have changed over the years, and with the advent of the Star Adventurer, Skyguider Pro, AZ GTI (in eq mode), and the EQM35. It's easier to get good results with less expensive equipment.

Plus there's the advances in software and camera sensors too.

We now live in good times for AP, I remember struggling with an EQ3 that performed about half as well as my current Star Adventurer  

Flaming Star Nebula in Auriga - 10 x 10 minutes unguided - StellaMira 90 EDT plus 0.8 RF - Fuji XT1 + L-eNhance Filter - GEM45 mount - Just light frames so rough and ready. 

Hi Stefan, welcome to SGL from Chris (also in Suffolk). 

P.s Zeus looks like an impressive beast!

6 hours ago, Elp said:

Useful comparison. What I would say is with the l-enhance you do have to expose for longer or slightly higher iso to get a similar star field as to one without a filter.

4 hours ago, iantaylor2uk said:

3 mins is ok for the L-enhance, but you need to divide the exposure time by 3 to get the right exposure time for no filter or a simple UV/IR filter, so I think a better comparison would have been comparing against a stack of three one minute exposures.

Ok guys point taken  The no filter element was only included to show that 'no filter = bad' I suspect this would have still been the case on with a 1 minute exposure in terms of signal to light pollution noise. 

If I do a follow up video I can always do a 3x1 minute stack as well as my preferred single 3 minute sub to match the other sub lengths. My thought process was "what do  w, x, and y look like with z exposure length"        

2 hours ago, Astro Noodles said:

Thanks Chris. That was very interesting. I am in the market for a filter to help me with imaging in moonlight. It seems from @iantaylor2uk is saying that the l-extreme requires a longer exposure time. I am limited at the moment to sub 2 minute exposures so would an l-enhance be a better option for me?

Glad you liked it  I'm confident either the eNhance or eXtreme will give much better results with the Moon about, compared to the cameras UV/IR cut filter alone (Even with 2 minute exposures)

As an owner of the L-eNhance (tri band) I can very much vouch for it, however I've only heard peoples positive accounts of the L-eXtreme (dual band) rather than used one myself.

The main difference seems to be that the L-eNhance lets in the H-Beta line which the L-eXtreme filter blocks. Now the HB emission line tends to be a lot weaker than Ha because HB takes a lot more energy to emit, so it's debatable how useful allowing HB in actually is?

When deciding between the two filters I could have gone either way. I just thought, well it wouldn't hurt having the HB pass there, and you never know it might show more detail in energetic regions? 

All this talk and I'm now keen to add the L-eXtreme to the collection to actually see if it shows a difference 😆

I quick test/ side by side comparison to see how well these Optolong filters handle Moony Mc Moon face. 

You could go much more in depth with this with non Moony shots as a control, but for now I simply place each of the 3 minute RAW sub exposures next to each other so we can see the relative difference.  

I know the L-Pro is more broad band and the L-eNhance is triband so we know which filter is likely to win, but the relative strength of each filter is interesting I thought.