Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

licho52

Members
  • Posts

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

39 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It's geometry and there are 2 ways of dealing with it: EQ mount or rotator. This setup has none, so it's down to the small sensor and cropping.
  2. Celestron branded camera and dew shield/cable management suggests upscale electronic scope.
  3. The more straightforward approach is to upgrade to 10" or 12" RC with FF sensor if you're worried about narrower FoV. It'd have almost 2x(10) or 3x(12) the light gathering power plus extra resolution. Running 2 x 8" is more trouble than it's worth and you'd need 2 cameras.
  4. The half-weight for astrography rule-of-thumb is not terrible and it sort of accounts for blunders and inexperience of newbies but I'm imaging with EQ6-r at its 20kg rated weight without issues. Would it be better to have EQ8? Sure, but it's not a deal-breaker.
  5. The reviews will come from either people who have bought it already (they will love it and gush) or YouTuber Reviewers who get this stuff from Sharpstar to review (they will love it and gush). But yeah, it will be fun to watch them do flips trying to hide any glaring problems..
  6. Yeah I'd say EQ8/RC10 and AsiAir is just a mismatch.
  7. What you write makes no sense, what bet are you placing? Is it a business bet, are you investing in EAA device production? And why the unnecessary ad-hominem?
  8. People will pay that in a heartbeat if it gets them that AB IOTD. Being completely serious here. They already use 24" Planewaves, buy farms in Namibia etc etc. just to get that badge.
  9. I was reflecting on systems like SeeStar and I have a feeling that in 3 years they will be obsolete and end up in the attic or the recycling bin. Disposable toy that will often be bought for kids, like microscopes, and said kids, instead of becoming Ed Hubbles of our era, shall inevitably discard it after a session or two in order to immerse themselves in the worlds of Minecraft / TikTok. Nothing against this device, but it(along with other such gadgets) have DISPOSABLE written all over them. I think it will take still quite a few years before such systems truly deliver on their promise.
  10. Based on threads like this and on CN I come to a conclusion that SCT really do a disservice to reflectors and tend to put people off working with reflecting telescopes. I don't have any personal experience with SCT(I guess I am not losing much) but, based on the experience I do have, I know that a properly handled 10" Newtonian or Ritchey-Chretien would beat any 130mm refractor handily.
  11. Yes because mosaics are fundamentally and dramatically turning down the speed of your setup. On one hand people fall over themselves to get f/2 and whatever hyperultraspeed setups, on the other they casually mention doing mosaics with them, which are an absolute slog to capture, normalize and process. Mosaics are evil and should be avoided by anyone who has limited time/clear sky which is most people. To answer OP's question, it should work very well, I'd recommend drizzling 2x because you'll be undersampled.
  12. I have used both and Mini is significantly slower in platesolving and other operations, however if you just set it for capture then it doesn't make a lot of difference. It works very well overall.
  13. If you care about RGB and color reproduction then Redcat.
  14. I am really not sure about this idea, I'm either missing something or it doesn't work the way you think.
×
×
  • 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.