Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

378 Excellent

1 Follower

About SamAndrew

  • Rank
    Proto Star

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    SW London
  1. Add an observatory to the list - I don't think anyone buys an EQ6, and then puts up with setting it up every night for long.
  2. I must have missed the email, had to have a look at their forum to see what the deal was for existing customers: Starting with the not yet released version 4, the yearly subscription will be $59 and if you already own version 3 then the initial cost of $149 has been waived. If you already own version 3 you can continue to use it forever without any cost and will still receive updates for version 3. It is also my understanding that if you own version 3 then the initial cost to upgrade to version 4 (when released) has been waived, and you will just need to pay the subscription fee of $59.
  3. Given the choice, I'd go with the 12" for galaxies given you've got an EQ8. These Newts are relatively cheap, you can also pick up an 8S second hand for a few hundred and the switch between the two when you want to change field of view.
  4. Keeping the sampling rate the same means keeping the focal length the same. Adding apature while maining the same focal length will reduce your sub length. Adding appature and focal length in the same ratio (e.g. keeping the f ratio the same) results in a bigger image of the object you're capturing, but the sub length will be the same.
  5. No because it's spread over more pixels, so still takes the same amount of time to get the same signal to noise ratio.
  6. F ratio is the "speed"; if you want to reduce exposure time you need to increase the speed, the same way you would for a normal camera lens. To increase speed you need to add aperture while maintaining the same focal length. A 12" scope with 1000mm focal length would be 44% quicker than a 10" scope with 1000mm focal length. The 12" scope would be F3.3 in this case
  7. This isn't how it works; sub lengths will be the same length if the F ratio is the same, the 12" has a longer focal length, so a smaller area of the sky is projected onto the camera which offsets the increased light gathering. I had a 10" but now use the 8" as I wanted a slightly larger field of view, and the 8" with an ASI 1600mm gives 1" per pixel.
  8. If you're only shooting colour with a mono camera, then you can refocus for each colour, so colour correction is no longer important (although field flatness is still important)
  9. Great scopes, excellent value for money, 8s is the sweet spot if you haven't got an observatory.
  10. I think it's up the manufacturer or retailer to quantify the benefit. Ask FLO if they'll let you test one
  11. An Autofocuser is essential in my opinion when using a mono camera as you'll want to refocus regularly and between filter changes. Deepskydad is a great value choice if you don't fancy building one yourself. The EQ6-R isn't portable, you'll need reliable weather conditions if you plan to take that out into the field otherwise you will quickly tire of the setup process. CEM45 plus the Esprit would be a good paring for portability. CEM70 + a tripod is getting on for 3 times the price of the EQ6-R; the EQ6-R offers excellent performance, I don't think you'd notice the difference between the CME70 and the EQ6-R in the final result. ZWO filters get the job done - I'd only consider upgrading from these if you've got money burning a hole in your pocket.
  12. I think you'd have to remove one of the screws to confirm; the screws on the skywatcher focusers I have are all M3 from memory, but length varies.
  13. Sounds like you're miles out of focus - how did you focus? it's very easy to miss the focus spot if you're moving the focuser all the way through it's travel trying to find the focus point.
  14. Coma corrector spacing is important, I've found with the Skywatcher Apalanatic coma corrector, being even 0.2mm out wrecks the corners. Take a short exposure of a defocused star at the centre of the FOV to verify your colimation and eliminate tracking errors.
  15. I don't think either is the wrong decision, they will both get the job done, EQ6-R is tried and proven and a lot cheaper, but very heavy and not a mount I would want to be setting up and tearing down for each session, so for a portable setup the GEM45 is probably the better decision.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.