licho52

Get a 533MM to take your imagining to another level.  The RC6 is an great scope but it's a bit slow and if you're going to collect faint objects or narrowband it really pays to get all the sensitivity you can.

Yes it's a small sensor but you can pick up a set of cheap filters for it since you only need 1.25". 

Deconvolution is critical for RC scopes, only then will you see the detail the telescope is able to deliver.  The difference is not small.  Of course that means purchasing PI with BX if you haven't yet and their cost is more than the scope... 

On 11/01/2024 at 02:20, BlueAstra said:

That might limit the trailing on a single sub, but what about the relative trailing in a stack of subs over an hour or so?

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.

Celestron branded camera and dew shield/cable management suggests upscale electronic scope.

Go with Noctua if you use long FL.

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.

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.

On 04/08/2023 at 00:01, Vash said:

Very good spot, the devil is always in the details! 

I eagerly await reviews! 

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..

Yeah I'd say EQ8/RC10 and AsiAir is just a mismatch.

53 minutes ago, LDW1 said:

We shall see whether your expert opinion as well as others, bears fruit or is just wishful thinking, like with other ....... ingenious gear that works for a lot less $'s ! I know where I'm placing my bet, lol.

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?

On 22/05/2023 at 16:14, SamAndrew said:

Have done a little research, hard to find specific numbers, but if a cube sat is ~ $50k to build and another $50K to launch currently, I think you would already find buyers if something came to market. Assuming Starship is a success, and the cost to low earth orbit comes down 50~100 fold, along with the other admin costs, and then the economies of scale if someone starts mass producing the satellites, I could envision a small orbital observatory costing $10K.

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. 

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.

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 hours ago, scotty38 said:

What about doing some mosaics, won't cost anything but time and yes I know someone will mention clear nights 🙂 🙂

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.

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.

If you care about RGB and color reproduction then Redcat.

On 12/05/2023 at 16:12, SamAndrew said:

Interesting use case that I've been thinking about, rather than considering it as a guide chip on your main imaging scope, think of it as an imaging chip added to your guide scope (admittedely a bit expensive for a guide camera!)

This way you can image widefield thorugh your guide scope assuming it's good enough to cover the asp-c chip. Something like a zenithstar 61 or similar, probably not the evoguide 50ED.

 

I am really not sure about this idea, I'm either missing something or it doesn't work the way you think.

The image seems very low-res?  The stars are huge. What scope was it taken with?

Perhaps they tweaked the optics in the latter batches but the first wave of FMA180 was poor to say the least.

7 hours ago, Ags said:

Thanks, the stars look very promising in that picture.

They are decent, and I didn't have suitable bahtinov mask for it at that time so the focus was approximate and so was the backfocus.  I wish I had more opportunities to use it / fiddle with.

It's vastly superior to FMA180 which has HORRID chromatic aberration.

Another one here:

I haven't put it into much use as I prefer long FLs but here's an example of a picture I took with it last year.  It was done with an APS-C camera so the field is quite wide.

I think it's worth doing and I have done with some star fields in the galaxy disk like Cas.  It's a very clean Ha signal without the O-window, especially with light pollution and/or moon.   First I'd look in classifieds where 1.25 Ha filters may pop up for a much friendlier price.

I did the ghetto dumbell thing for a while but these were smaller and easier to store and transport.  The 2 weights basically covered the weight of a Redcat+Asiair with 2600MC and a zwo filter drawer.

14 minutes ago, CHR15 said:

@AstroNebulee  @Elp I was thinking of getting this https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-1kg-counterweight-shaft-for-star-adventurer.html

Would this be a good place to start or will the shaft be too short?

I have it and it works, however I bought 2 so I have 2 counterweights for my setup.

That Quattro 150P is an absolute sleeper telescope, flying under the radar yet so compact, light, fast and versatile.

Very promising result, I bet it's a beast in narrowband too.