Solarscope 50 & Lunt 35 H-alpha comparison.

[NGC 1502]

Hi all. I have on loan for a few days my clubs Solarscope 50 H-alpha, to take it to a fete for outreach astronomy. The fete was on Saturday 16th June, and we had about 30% clear blue sky, and an intermittent flow of viewers of our local star, so I was happy with that. Sunday afternoon had long clear spells, so I thought I'd set up the Solarscope alongside my Lunt 35 H-a, to see how the views compared.

Now, given the huge difference in price of these two scopes, you could say that it's not a fair comparison. But I wanted to see if paying a lot more is worth it, and pass on my findings to others who may be thinking of a purchase, and wondering how much they need to spend.

Here are the two scopes set up.

I carefully viewed through each scope, using the same eyepieces, focusing and using the tuners to get the best views I could.

I was surprised to find that with prominences, I could discern no difference with detail and contrast. Both scopes gave excellent and satisfying results, a surprise to me that the Lunt performed so well in that respect.

However, with disc detail, the difference was obvious, the Solarscope showing much more detail with greater contrast. That's not to say that the disc detail was not there with the Lunt. In fact, I think that the Lunt 35 is quite good for that, it's just that the disc detail was so much better in the Solarscope.

A further difference was the comparatively huge 'sweet spot' (that's the area of good definition within the field of view) in the Solarscope. The Lunt's sweet spot is by comparison quite small. I have the smallest of the blocking filters, the B400, maybe one of the larger ones (like the B600) would give a larger sweet spot, but without trying one, I cannot be sure on that, perhaps someone can comment please ? In the Lunt's defence, it does have a larger sweet spot than the Coronado PST. Should you be interested, here is a link to my comparison of the Lunt 35 and the PST :-

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/66401-lunt-35-v-coronado-pst-shootout/

I think that the standard of engineering is good with the Lunt, but is superb with the Solarsope. Every part of the Solarscope is just so well made, the helical focuser is silky smooth with absolutely no play or backlash, even the two securing screws for the diagonal have zero play in the threads, the whole thing just oozes quality.

The Lunt is great value for money in comparison, and if your goal is to view solar prominences, then you would have to spend a fortune to do better.

There is no doubt that the Solarscope is the nicer scope, only you can decide if the much higher price tag is worth it. If you can afford it, I think it is.

Thanks for reading, comments & questions welcome, Ed.

[Mark at Beaufort]

Ed that is a very good report on the merits of these solar scopes. I also enjoyed your Lunt/PST report which I had not read before.

I have had a PST since 2005 and have just returned from San Francisco where I viewed the Annular eclipse and the Venus Transit - I took my PST with me.

Thanks again for an interesting report.

Mark

[Saleratus]

I enjoyed the report as I've always been interested in the differences between these scopes. Thanks!