Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

What x3 barlow do you use for imaging.

spaceboy

By spaceboy
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
Posted

Hi All

With all hopes of getting a 12" dob now gone I plan to make a long put off purchase this weekend in the thought that some retail therapy will help drowned my sorrows. I'm in need of a 3x barlow for webcam imaging and I was sure there will be a few members who already have experience with x3 barlows and can offer me some hands on advice in the hope it will save me any further disappointments.

While I don't want to go mad I do want to try and get some good images of planets when the skies permit so I'm looking for a x3 barlow of good quality but not one that's going to break the bank as the weather is never the best and when it is there's usually some other factor restricting how much magnification can be used.

I currently have a :

2x TV Barlow which I'm happy with both visually and for imaging but lacks the magnification on trickier planets. Haven't found much gain in using extension.

2.5x TV Powermate which again is great for both and has proved successful stacking on the 2x barlow. Down side is it's all or nothing with the PM as you cant use extensions. (as far as I'm aware)

:and will be mainly used in an Explorer 200P.

I have a "short list" for a 3x barlow but if there are any others to consider I would be grateful for the suggestions.

3x GSO Barlow (ED glass Fully Multi coated) http://www.365astronomy.com/gso-3x-barlow-2element-barlow-with-ed-glass-p-23.html?zenid=456d1fb33264070208443fbfc9a78455

3x TV Barlow ( uses only multi-coated high-index optical glass) http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=115-188

Another member has already commented on the quality of the GSO but I'd only asked about the GSO in particular. I would now like an idea of what members would go for if they had the pick of the mix.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

I have the 3x Tele Vue barlow, but as it happens I don't use it that much. If the seeing will stand it I use my 2.5x Revelation/GSO barlow with an extension tube that gives me somewhere around the 3.4x or 3.5x mark. There's nothing wrong with it as a barlow though it's quite long and you'd probably not want to hang any great weight off the end of it, but usually I find the seeing is good enough to go better or not good enough to use it at all.

I bought mine second hand so it was a fair bit cheaper than new, but I also think the GSO barlows represent pretty good value for money. I have no complaints about either the 2x or 2.5x GSO/Revelation barlows I have.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Jules

I have an Antares x3 barlow Japan (not Canada) but have read the shorty type barlows suffer vingetting more so over standard barlows. Not having a standard x3 barlow to compare side by side to the Antares I have had to go with the reasons stated for such adverse effects in shorty barlows. The 3x TV barlow looks huge in comparison to the Antares and TV usually get it right so it suggested to me the Antares is a shorty barlow. As the chip tends to see what the eye doesn't and seeing conditions rarely being up to using such high magnification I figured I would be better off just getting a standard barlow to avoid wasting my time capturing worthless AVI's.

Again if anyone has comments on this I would like to hear them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tich

tich

Posted
Posted

I brought mine off eBay it's only a cheap one but I have to say its pretty good.

Just a video I did using it. Although the stacked barlows in it aren't as good as I've still much to learn....

I know there are better ones & I'll probably upgrade in the future, but I was quite happy with the results using one like this gave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted

I recently picked up a used Antares x3 barlow from a well respected planet imager on here, he says its a good un, but not tried it yet, not sure if i will

Hi Guys, its a case of diminshing returns. Yes a Televue will be better. Any Barlow where the bucks are spent more on it, will likely have better performance. Better colour correction, sharpness. vignetting ect. But i will say mass produced lenses are all pretty reasonable nowdays from what ive seen. And certainly i dont think a Televue will be say 4 times better than the Antares, ( either from canada or japan ) Not in the slightest.

The gap is much closer than that. Dont get me wrong i also want the best, i have a 2x ultima. A 5x TV powermate. But i got the Antares when i didnt have a lot of dosh. ( i had and liked a 5x Antares in the past ) since winning hotshots ( bbc sky at night mag ) they was going to send me a 2x Celestron Excel. But having the 2x Celestron Ultima already. It made more sense to me, to sell the Antares. And pay a bit on top of the hotshot prize, and get a 3x Excel.

I do expect the Excel to be better. But likely quite subtle, sharpness and colour correction improvements. Such is the quality of many cheap mass produced lenses these days i belive. The proof is in the pudding and heres a example of just how good, these cheap lenses are at the bottom see if you disagree.

For those that want to experiment with powers, and try imaging perhaps for the 1st time. It makes more sense to buy cheaper lenses first. If the bug bites, and you like a particular power. And have a nice telescope to really push your imaging in quality. Then a upgrade might be wanted. And you can sell on. As your setup and skill might really start to show these subtle differences, between high price, and low price lenses

But untill that actually is the case. Theres so many things that need to be perfected. Dont think for one moment a Televue lens will turn anyone into Damien peach. without all the other perfections Being mastered first. Then and only then. slight improvements might actually start to matter. And are worth the 4 times higher price. for a slight improvement generally.

I would rate the Antares 3x Excellent for the price. There are likely others, like the Tal for example. And many more.

Jupiter recently in daylight

7832149080_1bb9355c04_o.png

7649929340_93a604f3de_o.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted

I've heard Astro Engineering Barlows are good for imaging & I'm hoping to order a 4X soon as I've seen good results online.

Nice images Neil....

Yes unless you get feedback, theres really no way of knowing.There may well be some poorer ones out there. I had no feedback on the Antares but from past experiance. And Antares reputation for good solid budget performance. It was a case of suck it and see.

The 5x i had in the past may well have been the Japanease lenses. And likely the better of the lenses. But clearly the canadian ones are not at all shabby. Ive heard good and bad results from the AE if i remember correctly ( dont hold me to that ) Just thought i remember reading conflicting views. Its certianly one model i would have tried myself. But there is a slight risk i guess with any budget types. What confuses the question is imaging versus veiwing. As vignetting is a big problem visually. Probably not as relevant for imaging. where sharpness and colour correction are the main virtues we want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted

Antares 3X Twist Lock :-) not tried yet but planets here i come

I wonder if the twist lock types are made at the same factory ? I would have thought so ? but the one i purchased really was the low end of barlow pricing for Antares. Did it matter ? I would say it didnt seem to matter in the slightest. I cant speak of its visual use. I only used it with a camera attached. Tal have a good solid rep i belive. its another i would try if in the market for another budget 3x

The Celestron xcel 3x barlow. will be interesting to try. I now have it. and will post images as soon as i get them. It says china on the barlow housing. Though i wouldnt really say £99 is budget in my book. Thats televue prices right there. I would expect these to be chinas answer to the likes of the 2x ultima from japan ?

Ive read nothing but glowing reports from users of ex cel eyepeices. I expect these lenses to be top notch. As Celestron china is really based on value for money. As such £ 99 is quite a expensive item in my book. I could have got the Televue 3x. But thought i would like to try this, based on the feedback ive read about the new ex cel range of eyepieces. I wonder how close china is getting to the legendary Ultima 2x. If they are made in china ? it says china on the barlow ? one would expect not close enough. But then look how far china has come. They now make the legendary SCTs. And we havent seen any complaints about those from what ive seen. Its a interesting question. Ill report more when i know more

post-2700-0-80458500-1346079936_thumb.pn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks again for the replies guys.

Neil what are your views on the shorty / standard barlow debate. I read negative feedback for the shorty type due to one of the lens needing to have more curvature over standard barlow lens. I will try to find the article I read if this would be of any worth to the thread ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

dont know if this helps, my antares x3 is canadian and a tad over 41/2 " long.........god knows if and when i get to try it

Not had chance to get down the obsy yet and check the length of my Antares 3x but it's a tad smaller than my 2x TV and the 3x TV in pictures looks way bigger than the 2x so I'm guessing the Antares is a shorty type barlow ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted

Not had chance to get down the obsy yet and check the length of my Antares 3x but it's a tad smaller than my 2x TV and the 3x TV in pictures looks way bigger than the 2x so I'm guessing the Antares is a shorty type barlow ???

Thanks, to be honest i dont much about the designs, short versus long barrel. but it would suggest lower focal length, And as you more curve on the lens, i would tend to go with the longer barrel types. But my ultima 2x is short. and this 3x ex cel is too so im not sure. The Antares 3x was longer

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spaceboy

spaceboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Would it maybe be worth me swapping out the 2.5x powermate for a x3 TV barlow ?? Or would the PM be good to use with a DSLR for lunar imaging ??? I wish I could find out for my self but it appears clear skies are few and far between and those spells of clear skies I'm straight out with my grab & go not my laptop and webcam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
neil phillips

neil phillips

Posted
Posted

That black Antares looks like the 5x i had. it was excellent. Not sure if you can get them anymore ?

I would stay with the 2.5x powermate. I think the powermates are better than the TV barlows. I had the 3x TV it was ok but thought the powermate was better. ( as well as my Celestron 2x ultima ) But hard to compare 3x and 5x. So just a impression. I wouldnt sell the 2.5 powermate nice kit to keep that one.

If the Celestron ultima 2x is anything to go by, barrel length ( meaning FL ) may only matter if the design is poor. But as mentioned this is all guess work from me. I would prefer longer barrels.

But with good designs it doesnt seem to matter much from what ive seen.

The TV 3X is a longer barrel type. But my ultima is top class. ( i thought it was better than the TV ) So go figure ?

when i get a chance to use the Ex cel 3x ill post something up about it. i have a feeling its going to kick butt, if the word about Ex cel eyepiece lenses are anything to go by

And its short barrel as mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 6 years later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.