Viktiste

Thanks Adam. Newtonian+DSLR is not what I am looking for, I already have that. This is what James at FLO answered regarding filter size. "You can get away with the 1.25" filters if they are mounted very close to the camera - you'd need the camera mounted next to the filterwheel. It's not a problem, but should you want to rearrange things and move the filters to a different part of the system you may find the 1.25" aren't enough" Since 1.25" = 31.75mm I assume the 1.25" refers to the diameter of the mounting ring, not the actual filter size, otherwise there would be practically no difference. I have decided to go for the 31mm unmounted filters. Correct,, I wrongly quoted the price for the 100 ED in the OP.

Thanks for the great inputs all. So this is what have decided on: - Esprit 80 ED with field flattener. - ASI16000mm pro kit (including EFW8, 1.25" LRGB & Ha/SII/OIII Filters) - HEQ5 pro belt mod kit - And a sheet of baader solar filter, since clear nights with no work the next morning are pretty rare I realize now (I have read the threads on the zwo forum and here) that a few people are unhappy about the ZWO EFW, but I think I will take my chances on that. The belt mod has been on my wants list ever since I was first aware of it, mostly because of the noise the HEQ5pro makes, but it will be better for guiding too. I was tempted to throw in the ZWO OAG too, just because I think that looks like a pretty smooth setup, but decided against it. So hopefully I end up with a setup I can enjoy for years to come.

Thanks Pompay. But on FLO's website it says "you can use 1.25" filters without vignetting up to f/5 or 31mm filters up to f/2" So from that I guess the 1.25" is what i should select?

I don't have a budget as such but I am reluctant to spend silly amounts of money on this hobby (which is obviously totally possible to do). I have landed on the ASI1600MM+filterwheel. I have re-considered and think I will fork out for the Espirit and the belt mod for my HEQ5 . Thanks for the inputs Olly and Vlaiv, much appreciated. Regarding filters+filter wheel, there is an option to choose between 8 x 1.25" or 7x36mm. What should I choose here? I assume I will need a flattener too?

Thanks Vlaiv. So many things to consider Just to clarify - I don't already have the ASI1600. What camera to buy is also what I need to decide. So do you think going for the Evostar 80ED + 0.85 reducer/flattener + ASI1600 (=1.54"/px) will be a mistake considering my HEQ5 mount? Not quite sure which scope (in the similar price range as the Evostar) to pick to get in the 2"/px ballpark.

That was my thinking, to be able to 'zoom in' on smaller objects. But yes you are of course right, arcsec per pixels will determine that. So assuming the Evostar 80ED and a 0.85 reducer, then: ASI1600mm will give 1.54"/pixel ASI183 will give 0.97"/pixel The ASI 1600mm has a 4/3" sensor, the ASI 183 has a 1" sensor. Im I correct in saying the smaller sensor gives better pixel resolution and smaller FOV and the larger sensor gives lower pixel resolution and larger FOV? I have a 'feeling' the 1600mm is the better camera, but struggle to convince myself why. The price difference between these cameras is not that big so I can go for either one.

Yes, I did. £1 059 is the right price, so not 3 times more expensive, but still... I am biased towards saving some money and go for the Evostar.

I have decided to pull the trigger on a 80mm refractor and a dedicated cooled astro camera. For photographing nebula's and galaxies. The OTA options I consider are the SW Esprit 80 ED (at £1 599) or the SW Evostar 80 ED (at £ 399). Will the performance of the triplet be that much better than the doublet that the three times higher price is justified? For camera I am trying to choose between the ZWO ASI 183MM pro or the ASI 1600MM pro. Is there any reason (other than price) to prefer one over the other with either scope above? I will also be buying a filter-wheel. Equipment I already have are a HEQ5 Pro, a ZWO ASI 120MC-S (for guiding), a SW 200P (which is too heavy/cumbersome for AP), Canon 500D and a DYI MyfocuserPro. I have plugged these scope/camera combinations into astronomy tools and are aware of the FOV's they give. I think I prefer the smaller FOV. Resolution ranges from 0.97"/pixel to 2.30 "/pixel for these combinations (with a 0.85x reducer/flattener), so I guess that is ok? I am struggling to make the decision's, any thoughts?

Ok - some more stupid questions about this... For reasons I completely cannot understand the common standard (and the HEQ5) design is such that you have to turn the the scope horizontal to see through the polar scope. Why the he*k is that? I understand that I am only positioning the mount, but it would be convenient to be able to use the finder scope in this process...??? When my Dec axis is in the horizontal position the polar scope clock circle is not with 0 hrs up, and so placing Polaris in it is a completely eyeballing exercise? Or is there something I don't understand here?

No I have not done that - yet. But I will do. Another thing i found is that there are no physical surfaces to place a level on (unless you take the head off the tripod - which I don't want to do every time). And the built in level seems a bit inaccurate...

Ok, Thanks for the explanation guys. I got it. I guess the divisions and lack of labels in PolarFinder got me confused. I was planning to set up and properly polar align tonight, but then the clouds came sneaking across the sky...

OK, thanks. So the circle in the polar scope is just like a regular 12 hour clock?

Hi. After hours of googeling I still have not found a straight answer to this: After powering up my mount (HEQ5 synscan) up and setting location, date, time etc. the handset tells me "polaris position in polar scope " is e..g. 08:22. I have downloaded PolarFinder and for the same location/time it shows polaris like this. So how exactly does 08:22 correspond to that position on the polar scope view?