KP82

IMO you're on the right track to upgrade the mount first as that EQ5 Pro is the weakest link in your imaging setup. Something like an EQ6-R or CEM40 would be a good step up from what you've already got. As for the scope your 150PDS (750mm) has a good aperture, f ratio and focal length for your DSLR. 800 - 1000mm focal length is probably the max for a D7100 before OAG and a better quality mount are required (also seeing condition will start to become a limit). If you'd like to go widefield, there is a huge selection of 60 - 80mm ED refractors. The optical quality of these scopes are mostly about the same. So pick whatever is stock and can be easily serviced should anything go wrong.

Congrats. The WO FLT110 TEC version is a lovely scope. I just saw it on the UKABS Sold section. £2,000 for it plus the flattener was a bargain! If I ran into a second hand one in good condition (very rare), I wouldn't hesitate to buy it either.

I remember there was a thread on CN talking about this. Many test reports for refractors only cover 95% of the diameter from the centre of the lens. When that gets expanded to 100%, the performance figure drops quite a bit. Now I'm not sure how many vendors are testing for 95% and how many are doing 100%. In that thread AT was confirmed to only test 95% whereas Markus posted in that thread saying APM did 100%.

Oh no... coma all over the place. Have you tried to test the scope on its own? Maybe it's the flattener that's the culprit.

Thanks for sharing that info. No wonder why these two doublets are so popular. Any OEM details on the new 203mm f/7? Sharpstar have abandoned most of their old fracs product line in favour of the new EDPH line up with unknown ED glasses and unpredictable QA. Seems like a move for major cost cut. It's such a shame to see the relationship between APM and Sharpstar end like this. Otherwise I'd imagine there would be more 3 - 4" fast triplets from APM.

While SharpStar is considered one of the better telescope factories in China, I've noticed their QA has been slipping down recently. There are quite a few reports on pinched optics and excess amount of CA in their EDPH (mainly the 61) triplets. Long Perng and KUO seem to be more consistent with their quality. The 140 and 152 doublets along with the latest 203 f/7 triplet are not products of Sharpstar.

Only the ones with LZOS lenses from APM are considered premium refractors. Markus also sells some rebrands including 107/700, 140/980 and 152/1200. The 107 is a triplet whereas the latter two are doublets.

Thanks for sharing the info. That's a lot of premium mirror/dob makers. 😍 OOUK actually sell their dob base separately. So all their newts are simply sold as plain OTAs, but you can add a dob base or EQ mount during checkout.

There are many 4" f/7 triplets on the market, but most of them are FPL53 based rather than the new FPL55. The 55 is slightly worse than the 53 on the Abbe scale but is supposed to be easier to work with. So overall the results should be comparable to the 53 scopes. I'd use the reviews for the FPL53 version (easily found on the web) as a reference. The TS 107mm f/6.5 is basically the same scope as my APM 107/700. It's made by Sharpstar. I use mine mostly for visual (I use the 115 for imaging) and it works really well. And when I did image with it and a TSRED279 reducer (I didn't have the Riccardi at that time), the result was pretty good on par with what you'd expect from a well made Chinese FPL53 triplet although I detected a tiny bit of pinching in the optics (it was a very cold windy night). Not sure about the 100mm quad. As a brand TS Optics is quite well regarded. Their customer service are very helpful and respond quickly. I bought quite a few adaptors and eyepieces from them including asking them questions beforehand. They all went smoothly. However be aware of import tax and VAT if you're ordering scopes from them now.

If the OP is in the states, wouldn't Zambuto or Parallax Instruments be the more usual options for premium newtonian optics?

This is just the fan cooled version I believe rather than the TEC set point cooling version. If I were going to spend substantial amount of cash on a proper astro camera for DSO imaging, I'd strech a bit more and go for TEC cooled version. The 183C (the same sensor as ASI183MC I believe) has smaller pixel size, so you will end up oversampling if you try to image with your SCT unless you use binning. If you want an OSC, 294MC, 071MC or 2600MC would be a better choice IMHO.

Not sure if magic lantern can be used together with imaging software like APT and BYEOS.

I'm with you here. I actually enjoy reading many of the theory posts you've made here (seriously). They've helped me in learning about imaging. Please keep them coming.

Actually the video mode in the new Canons (presumably also applies to the other brands) is a disaster for planetary/lunar imaging. The resolution re-sampling algorithm (from native sensor to one of the standards like FHD and 4k) and video compression destroy most of the details. You want 1:1 video and for that only 550D and 60D are capable. Some other Canons can do a 5x liveview streaming that will mimic the 1:1 video (or getting close to).

I went for astro-modded DSLR when I started out 2 years ago. I had an old 600D lying around which probably wouldn't fetch much if I tried to sell it on ebay, so I decided to send it to astronomiser for the mod. The 18MP APS-C sized chip is very versatile for a wide range of focal length. However if I didn't already have the 600D, I'd probably opt for a 294MC pro (or 2600MC pro if I start out now). The QE and noise advantage are quite substantial especially for someone like myself who usually go for shorter integrations (6 or less hours) due to time limits. The lack of time is also why I wouldn't bother with mono.

Stay up late on weekends to do a bit of visuals if clear skies, but no imaging until at least late August.

Going through the handset should be fine, so there is no need to rush out to get the EQDIR cable (paying delivery just for the cable isn't worth it. You can wait until you've got other things to order and do them all in one go). I actually used the "going through the handset" option for quite some time when I first obtained my previous HEQ5. It came with the old V4 handset (only the latest V5 handset has the USB port) so I used the serial cable with the serial to usb adapter. Never had any issues with the setup for imaging until I eventually got the EQDIR cable.

double post, please delete.

The model in the review was of an earlier revision. The one I've got does allow me to add some tension to the altitude axis with the clutcher bolt (also easier to grip in the later revisions), but this is nothing like what you would find on an AZ5. So balancing is still important. The mini saddle is actually ok, but the opening is a bit tight so I have to slide my scope in. Actually RVO sells it with a bigger heavier duty saddle (they've probably realised about this issue), but it's such a waste for this tiny little mount so I swapped it with the smaller one that I had lying around and put the bigger one on my iexos100.

I've read a thread about these Hercules mounts on CN and I remember in one of the posts the user said he could source the belts separately. These mounts are all overrated in terms of their max payload capacity. Due to the minimal friction in the clutcher, they are quite sensitive to balancing and the slow motion could become jerky with a long moment arm. Even though the 4" and 6" models are able to take on more weight, I wouldn't use them with a long refractor or newt. Shorter but heavier cassegrains are probably the better intended targets for them.

I saw you mentioned RVO heavy duty Alt/AZ, so I thought I'd chip in. Don't be fooled by the spec. This mount while being pretty well built is not going to hold a payload of 10kg well. I've got one and my estimate is about 5 - 6kg max.

The TS, Tecnosky and Altair 130 f/7 are basically the same scope. If you can find a review for any one of them, it will be true for the others.

I've got the mark iv zoom. I bought it off someone here. It feels hefty and very well built. However I only use it in the 72EDF for terrestrial or when I'm travelling. Otherwise I stick to my fixed focal eyepieces. Most of my observations are done in the lower to medium range of mag and I can't stand the narrow fov of the zoom now that I'm used to 68deg or more fov from my other eyepieces.

How about the ability to use a range of different lenses (including real telescopes), guiding, plate solving & mount control. BTW smartphone interface is easy with Skysafari or VNC. 😁

$150 for this? Are you joking? I can build one myself with Pi + HQ Camera + C-mount lens for less than that. And it's a lot more versatile.