LukeSkywatcher

A thought crossed my mind today. If i spend X amount on a Quark, why would i use it on a 100 euro scope (70mm Travel scope). Wouldnt i be better off using it on my 8" SCT?. That means i'd also need to buy a solar filter (ready made...please). Then another thought came to mind. The SCT, AFAIK wont find or track the Sun (for safety reasons). I suppose i could track it manually if i just want to observe it. This could be tricky.......looking at the computer screen and tracking with the scopes hand control. So, i find myself with a couple of Q's: 1/ Does the Quark need a computer (USB port) to be powered or can it run off of house mains? 2/ Can you look directly through the Quark EP to observe the Sun (obviously with safety filter in place). I havent read too much about them. Guess i have some homework to do.

Its gonna be a Quark for me. I'll hold off for a coupe of months before buying. Spring 2018 is my time to buy.

Good to hear this. TBH, my head and heart were/are leaning towards the Quark.

I've read that PST can have issues with lens. Lunt, do you get a mount and tripod?. Quark I have heard only great things, but would my 70mm travels cope be suitable?. My Hershel wedge works great with the 70mm travelscope.

I'm looking into Ha set up also. Can't decide on a PST, Lunt or Quark. Budget is open ended. YAY!!!!

Never seen bins with an RDF before. How accurate is it with the optics being below,but to either side?. Would that not put your target between the objective lens'?.

Hi Matt I am not really into AP but i have learned quite a bit over the yrs while here on SGL. There is no single answer to your question. Many factors come into play. The biggest factor is probably light pollution in your location. This is a very localized issue and you really have to play around with exposure times and ISO on your camera until you arrive at a happy medium. Your image is far from the worst i have seen. If you post this thread in the imaging section, you will get lots of great advice.

Congrats on the new scope. They are a thing of beauty.

What is the open mirror/lens part in your second last image?. I'm guessing it is to allow solar projection?. *edit* Sorry, i see it is part of the heat dump system.

"You have to use the Barlow lenses to get any effect. Using just the tube does not change the focal length of the telescope and will not provide any additional magnification". Thats what i was thinking. As i said, its been so long i just cant remember.

So you dont have to keep swapping the moon filter when changing EP's. I cant think of a reason why it wont work. I was going to suggest you put the moon filter on the end of the star diagonal in your scope but noticed you use a Dob, so no diagonal there.

Its been so long since ive used a barlow that i just cant remember how to do this. I have a 1.5x-2x Revelation barlow and i think all i had to do to make it 1.5x was to remove the lens from the barlow and then just insert an EP into the barlow as normal. In this way the barlow acts like an extension tube?.I dont remember ever having to screw the barlow lens glass onto an EP (like you would do with any filter).

Maybe i need to go reread the OP. I thought this was for images taken only with a smartphoe (no other optical aid or processing). "The only criteria is that the image must have been taken using a smartphone, with any processsing also done on the phone, no PCs, guiding or decent imaging mounts allowed". Surely attaching a smartphone to a scope which is mounted on a tripod is breaking the rules?..........unless the tripod/mount is an EQ1 ......then the rules are intact. LOL.

That's more like i'd expect.

Well yes it is if you only pointed the camera at Jupiter and "clicked". If you used a scope along with your smartphone.......then not so much.

Thats impressive for a smart phone image.

Layers?. Its how many people get great images of M42 without overcooking the Trap.

I agree the image is a tad over sharpened (im thinking this shows finer detail?). Fantastic image. The colours are lovely. The dust is lovely. Well done and thanks for posting.

Your scope should feel right at home and give good views with a wide range of eyepieces. By this i mean, you dont need to invest in expensive eyepieces. It will happily be able to use Plossl design eyepieces. Some are better than others but essentially they are all roughly about 30-40 quid. I personally find (as other do) an 8mm eyepiece is just about right for planets. 5mm is also good. If using 8mm, you may use a 2x barlow which gives you 4.5mm. This could be pushing the scope limit a bit......but not by much and it works (i have a similar spec scope). My point here is you really dont have to spend loads of cash on quality EP's....simply because the scope will be/is very "forgiving". I love the Vixen NPL range of eyepieces (EP's), but some people dont like them because of the small exit pupil (distance between eye and eyepiece needed to be able to comfortably see anything). P.S.~to enjoy viewing the planets (the inner ones anyway), you dont really need to use very high magnification such as 5-8mm. I find some of the best views i have seen come with 15-25mm. Obviously you wont see as much detail but its not ALWAYS about detail. I do like to sit and watch Jupiter and its moons from a widefield view and see the moons dance around the planet.

Loving this thread. It has inspired me to dabble in AP in 2017 without the use of an EQ mount.

Gina i really must laugh at myself. All the advice against concrete i am dishing out to you. I have recently contracted this company to lay a complete concrete drive at the front of the house and a full patio area along the back of the house. Its coloured poured concrete and then before it dries they stamp my desired design into it. http://www.allcrete.ie

If you dont ask, you will never know.

Local lumber yards should have it and be cheaper. I know its big business (these days), but bark mulch is basically a waste product of the lumber industry.

I'd certainly be going for play area "certified". Your main concern is safety.......not ornamental.

50mm depth is just under 2 inches. I think that would be sufficient enough to absorb the pressure from any fall from a standing height. I'm thinking for that to work effectively, you may need to dig out 2 inches of the grass and then lay it in place?. It would also contain the bark mulch within the pathway so it cant spread outwards. It may be fine to simply lay it on top of the existing grass.