Jump to content



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

572 Excellent

1 Follower

About Kitsunegari

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You cannot avoid taxes. The governments do not give a "F" about our lives or hobbies; they just want their cut so they can continue eatting $500.00 plates of potatoes and beef.. The taxes excuse is pretty lame if that is what is going to stop you from enjoying your life with a new toy that you want. Here in the united states, we cannot even order products from baader planetarium.com, i think thats more unfair than taxes.
  2. and one more of "false calcium filter" timelapse showing a flare. I And my real calcium filter showing a flare. You get what you pay for
  3. The difference is in the "Flocculus", or the white marshmellow stuff you are able to image.. The first image shows my real calcium filter with less than 1 angstrom of bandwidth, compared to my false calcium filter with more 10 angstroms of bandwidth. Both are useful for different studies. Real calcium filter image False calcium filter image The real money shot is on a full disc however. True calcium filter will show the flocculs across every inch of the sun, no matter where you point it at. The baader planetarium filter is a terr
  4. Just attach a focal reducer on your camera if the seeing is not up to your standards.. The images look fine. Your scope was probably just too hot from being in the house and moving it out to the cold.
  5. That quark clearly is going to be way better than your lunt 80. The newton rings are pretty-much standard on all equipment nowadays, so dont fret over it. Just get a camera tilt adapter. Or downgrade to a CCD based sensor. place that quark in a a 127mm objective telescope and you will forget lunt even existed on day one. Save up for a baader planetarium 200mm D-erf filter paired with a 200mm coma free SCT and again, the tiny 80mm objective will be a relic from the past. based on this one picture, you are one of the chosen few that was provided an outstandi
  6. I agree, the second one in the most recent post is the most uniform. The issue is not with processing, it could realistically just be your focuser. Try using extension tubes and not the actual focus wheel on the scope. This will sort out any slack in the focuser if there is any, could be that simple.
  7. if this is an SF-50 etalon, I think you may need to focus attention to how it is mounted. It appears that it may not be "Squared" to the objective , (It should be flush mounted) There is some extreme banding which should not be there. This brand of etalons are supposed to be completely uniform across the entire field. If you are certain it is mounted properly, you may want to examine the blocking filter for oxidation and degradation. The images are great, but there is something up with the tune. of this setup, It would be in your great interes
  8. There are some filters on ebay sold by A_p_o_l_l_o which produce a "pseudo-double stack" at the eyepiece(1.5 angstrom). Apollo stripped ~9 angstroms off the usual mass produced blocking filter offered by lunt and coronado, Which is a huge amount of bandwidth. the difference between a second etalon is the additional stripping of 12 more angstroms before the eyepiece (depending on if you are shipped a good etalon). Apollo's filter is very close to getting a true double stack(thus the pseudo-prefexi). He developed that filter with Andover optical corp and its made in the USA.
  9. That first picture is wicked, the second one is a little off with contrast but still good. Alot of people have adopted the "stretch the histogram" . I never could get a usable image with that method.
  10. Little fluffy clouds. (terrible imaging conditions due to prescription forest burning) and this nasty one i actually like the pink, this is what George Washington's horse riding coat looked like. (YES, GEORGE WASHINGTON WORE A PINK COAT!!!)
  11. One more very important piece of information to always cling onto. Your ability to take pictures does not reflect the performance of the scope. Your visual ability has nothing to do with the performance of the scope. Like all things in life, there is always going to be someone with better skills and that is very important to understand in the world of solar observation. Your eyes cannot tell how bad an h-alpha scope performs, like a camera will immediately let you know there is something wrong. . (some people may have some unique ability like colorblind
  12. Maybe we can get some more people to offer some intellectual arguments about this, because realistically im going to also be buying a quark. The lunt scopes are certainly well worth every penny, and i have literally owned 7 of them looking for a "unicorn" both lunt and coronado are known for slipping out some government equipment to the public and the last 20 years really have provoked the fact that 10% of people that buy an h-alpha etalon get one that is superior to all others in the world. Then comes the quark, same deal. You are going to get a schoo
  13. If i was you, i would not bother at all with either of the 50mm or 60mm lunt scopes. Get a daystar quark and attach it on your 115mm triplet. Daystar seems to have sorted out most of the problems with the quark, and it really is not much more expensive. Just save you pennies for an extra month. (im about to sell my 50mm etalon because it just is not fun anymore for me after switching up to 127mm.) Just my two cents. Nothing beats high magnfication visual h-alpha, and with a full disk system you are just gonna be begging for more power almost immediately.
  14. How did the chameleon get damaged, did The cable bend too much at the input?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.