nfotis

Logically, the three cameras you mention should offer similar performance. Looking forward to your results, N.F.

For the Skymax 127, a solar filter like the Baader Astrosolar is the best bet (you can buy a similar filter for bigger models like the Skymax 180 etc). I have read good words about the Baader continuum filter, I haven't tried it myself. There are also specialist filters, like Hydrogen-alpha (Daystar and Lunt are the bigger players), and Calcium-K/H lines of the spectrum (we are speaking about 1400+ EUR prices apiece, if we are speaking about filters for refractors, and the whole package can reach 5-digit prices) N.F.

Received mine, direct from the SVBONY site, in a package deal with their 0.8x reducer/flattener. Quite impressive-looking (and quite a bit larger than I expected, compared to a 400mm/5.6L lens). Too cloudy/rainy, unfortunately. I may be able to test it tomorrow on some land targets. N.F.

And how you will control the filter wheel without a computer? The USB connection carries power *and* commands together. N.F.

If you have a ZWO cooled camera with USB 2.0 outputs (most cooled cameras do), you feed the filter wheel from the camera USB hub (and the focuser) N.F.

For large diameter scopes like the C9.25, solar film filters are probably the best solution. Light, cheap and more than good enough. Baader and Astrozap offer various models and diameters suitable. Their respective designs are a bit different, you decide what's best for your needs: https://www.highpointscientific.com/astrozap-baader-solar-filter-for-9-25-quot-sct-and-259-mm-269-mm-telescopes-az1005 https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/baader-solar-filter-for-9.25-sct-telescopes.html (note: the Baader filter needs a bit of assembly, the Astrozap is more ready-to-run as far as I know) N.F.

I suppose that using a guide scope with my Skymax 180 or C9.25 would be a losing proposition... N.F.

that seems to preclude buying filters from different vendors, though 😞 N.F.

Anyone else who got experience with both the EQ6-R and the iOptron mounts recently? I am thinking about an upgrade from my HEQ5 mount (bought used)... N.F.

If I remember correctly, this was done in order to use short fork arms on the mount. On German equatorial mounts, that's not necessary. So, many people remove the iron lump from their Meade fork-mounted scopes before mounting the tubes on the new mounts. N.F.

The remark about cheaper lenses holds, because a lens destined for a cropped sensor (EF-S mount on Canon) can be built with smaller lens elements, hence cheaper. On telescopes, you just get a larger magnification from the same tube (like getting a 1.6x Barlow, without losing optical speed) N.F.

This link should help comparing the framing of a cropped (APS-C) sensor like a Canon 60D and a full frame sensor like the Canon 6D (both using the same scope): https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/?fov[]=310||90||1|1|0&fov[]=310||88||1|1|0&messier=31 In general, cropped sensors mean cheaper cameras and a more tight framing. N.F.

Welcome here, Another idea would be an ED doublet refractor, like the SVBONY 80ED and 102ED. These could be do both observation and astrophotography (within limits, of course), if you add a reducer/flattener. Personally, I started with a Maksutov scope (Skymax 127, then a Skymax 180), due to the huge light pollution, which forced me to focus on the Moon and planets - and these require a long focal length, in which Maks and other catadioptric designs excel (Schmidt-Cassegrain, Classic Cassegrain). These need a German equatorial mount in order to enjoy long observation, IMHO, though. N.F.

Good day, for planetary observation, focal length is the main consideration. Designs such as SCT, Maksutov and Classic Cassegrain have a clear advantage. Maybe you want a 3x Barlow in order to gain enough magnification. Check with astronomy tools "Field of view calculator" (I used a generic 8" Dobsonian as a base and tried various eypieces and Barlow combinations) https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ Select Jupiter as an example case, and experiment with various Barlow-EP combinations to see which offers a good enough magnification (I guess that a zoom EP like the SVBONY 7-21mm and a 3x Barlow would be a flexible combination) N.F.

Another option would be to buy used. I bought my HEQ5 mount used, for 550 EUR, a bit over a year ago here in Athens (which is not renowned for a large second hand astronomy market). And I guess that you could find good deals from people in your area wishing to upgrade to a better mount. N.F.

Very nice picture. If I manage to shoot such a first image of M31, I will be really happy! N.F.

For me, the HEQ5 mount (which I bought used) is the minimum for astrophotography. Trying with smaller mounts eventually will be not enough. There are lighter and capable mounts, like the iOptron CEM26, but these aren't cheap. N.F.

Hello there, I suppose that the same holds with an ED doublet like the SVBONY 102ED/7 I ordered? Or is it OK to shoot LRGB with this scope? N.F.

Hello there, The HEQ5 Pro mount is a little agrarian, but it does the job, as long as you don't overload it. I have pushed it up to a C9.25, with 2x Barlow and a plantary camera (ASI462), and it works (a Skymax 180 is a bit better in handling). A Skymax 127 was very pleasant with it. With a refractor, you could approach 10 kg or so of total load (including guider etc) before starting to overload it, I suppose (large catadioptric scopes and reflectors are more sensitive to wind loads). Of course, a larger mount like the EQ6-R would be even more pleasant (if you can carry it). Cheers, N.F.

Quite a monster. If I win the Lotto, I will keep it in mind... N.F.

I suppose that the Starizona reducer-corrector is a quite different animal, but it's quite pricey from what I remember. Better to get a refractor instead, which is quite faster (if you don't want to go the Hyperstar route). N.F.

It's my understanding that the FLO version isn't exactly the same (2.5" R&P focuser, while the SVBONY seems to have a 2" focuser, different glass), hence its higher price. Because I don't have any refractor scope (my Canon telephoto lenses are different beasts), I cannot make a very informed comparison. N.F.

Well, I succumbed on the temptation and ordered one via the SVBONY site, along with the 0.8 reducer/flattener, which promises to make it a quite good combination: https://www.svbony.com/sv503-ed-telescope-sv193-focal-reducer-flattener/#F9359D-W9152D As I don't have any DSO camera at the moment (only a planetary camera, and some dSLRs), I will be rather limited in my camera tests. N.F.

May I also point out that there's the IMX464 sensor available? (double the pixels of the IMX462, same technology) Currently, only Player One provides a planetary camera with this sensor, it may be useful to know though. N.F.

Well, a f/15 scope like my Skymax 180 doesn't need a 5mm eyepiece (the lowest I have gone is a 7-21mm zoom EP, and it was quite pleasant, because even the Moon wasn't excessively bright). Your mileage may vary, of course, but the longer focal distance in scopes means you don't have to push much in the eyepiece front. Since I am more of a photographer than observer, though, I claim no expertise on this matter. For planetary, my ideal suggestions are: C9.25, Classic Cassegrain 8", Skymax 180 Or a step down: C8, CC6, Skymax 150 N.F.