Skywatcher Quattro f/4 imaging Newtonian

[ollypenrice]

Fast

Cheap

Works perfectly, straight out of the box.

Pick any two out of three. Fast and cheap wont work straight out of the box. Cheap and works straight out of the box won't be fast. Fast and works straight outta the box won't be cheap.

There's a reason why Orion Optics AGs cost >£3k.

I don't agree with 'fast and works straight out of the box.' I have NEVER seen this. The fastest that I have seen work straight out of the box is Takahashi FSQ106 with reducer (F3.6) and Tak FSQ85ED with reducer (F3.9.) I have seen an OS Stellare Veloce defeat every effort to get it to work at all and Tak Epsilons present 'interesting challenges' which certainly can be sorted. If Mike Sidonio gives up on an ASA corrected Newt and sends it back then what do I need to add? Nope, fast and straight from the box is something to dream about. Even the reduced FSQ106 at F3.6 will need constant, sub-by-sub refocusing if you are using a small pixel camera. Hyperstar? Look at the results. A few great ones and, quite honestly, a lot of very ordinary or poor ones.

The great thing about the 'straight from the box' test is that it is easy to conduct. This came straight from the box. Does it work? No. Fail. Even being more generous and realistic you can say, 'This came straight from the box and after three nights two experienced imagers had failed to take a picture with it...' That is worth noting. It can be set agianst, 'The same scope in the hands of this particular individual did give an excellet result.' Then it is for you to decide which scenario you'd expect to confront!

Olly

[ajohnson]

Thanks for the replies all.

I appreciate the sentiment about this looking like an ever escalating cycle of upgrades and while I will not add fuel to the Frac / Newt debate it is somewhat frustrating to be sat here with a very good 12" Newt that will take some great photos but is really teetering on the limits of what the NEQ6 mount will handle, but this is what my initial budget could cope with, and having had such a poor record of delivery for something more suitable / stable (within my budget).

The real frustration here is that a lot of dealers seem to be acting as mailboxes for OVL, few appear to keep stock of these OTAs so when you order one the shipment seems to come from OVL who seem to operate even less quality control than the dealer. So basically you get whatever tat is on the shelf delivered direct however it came off the line in China, maybe it can be argued for the money we should not expect more, and most of the time this argument may be OK.

I am enough or a realist to be prepared to tinker with whatever it is I eventually go for, I enjoy this almost as much as using the scope, it took me over a week to sort out the problems in my used 12" Newt and mount. But the problem is that I don't hold with this argument for new buy. Even allowing for the fact it's built to a price there are some basics that should be right, like clean optics and a focuser that works, I don't care if it's collimated because for what claims to be a "specialist" OTA I'm going to check it anyway, but the basic mechanics have to be there. Taking the above example, the Quattro may be more of a Fiat 500 than a Ferrari but when you get the keys you still expect to be able to drive it away!

[DrRobin]

Unfortunately, with Skywatcher that seems to be the way it is done. When I bought a 10" flex tube, I had to get three, the first two were damaged in transit from OVL to me and I had to send them back and wait each time for more stock. I did say that if the third came in damaged, I would ask them to ship it to the shop and I would pick it up there. The shops will get bigger shipments so less likely to arrive dented. My only problem is that the nearest shop is over 100 miles away, so mail order is the only real alternative.

I have had a few scopes and accessories shipped from both shops and second hand and everything else has arrived in perfect condition. Perhaps the shops check the kit better before shipping it out and if you buy second hand the previous owner has sorted out the bugs first.

Your analogy with cars, I know several people who had to take their new car back to have something fixed within days of picking it up. Granted the numbers are smaller, but it will still be there.

Robin

[ollypenrice]

I don't have a Fiat 500 but I do have a Panda, bought new seven years ago and boy, do I wish I could find an imaging rig that worked as well! Half as well would be ruddy marvellous!!

Olly

[JamesF]

I don't have a Fiat 500 but I do have a Panda, bought new seven years ago and boy, do I wish I could find an imaging rig that worked as well! Half as well would be ruddy marvellous!!

To be fair, a tripod never was going to handle very well around those narrow mountain roads...

James

[ajohnson]

Ah well my refund is being processed, oddly enough the place I bought the Quattro is no longer listing them for sale! It's a shame Skywatcher is sold this way and really annoying since my first one, a 130M, came in a single packet that was 3 layers of outer box, but the OTAs that turned up here were single layer, but the issue was less damage in transit as not working when it left the factory. I really do wish I'd kept quiet about the first one, while it was the wrong scope (a 10" opposed to an 8") at least it all worked, I just don't like being dishonest and have clearly been punished for it!

I know you get recalls with everything but the point is, manufacturing inadequacies aside be it a Fiat or Ferrari the dealer will check it out so that there is a good chance you will get it home rather than show you the packing crate and hand you a crow bar as it's dumped off the truck.

Hopefully somebody who has made of their Quattro will add a more a positive post here soon, for me the cash is back in the bank and I'm pondering my next move, which currently looks like mounting the ST80 on the piggyback stud on my 300 and guiding from there!

I may come back to a Quattro, but having seen them side by side I think I will pass on the 8" and go for the 10"

[Nojus]

Hi guys,

I'm planning to get astrophotography setup an would like to know your opinion if HEQ5 can handle 10" Sky-Watcher Quattro f4 Imaging Newtonian ?

Or I need to think about HEQ6?

Please advise. Thank you in advance.

[OJ87]

On 09/12/2012 at 11:14, nephilim said:

Having only recently become hooked on astronomy i've already been bitten by the imaging bug, I've just bought & i'm awaiting delivery of 'Making every photon count' but was after some opinions on the above scope (either the 8" or 10") with an EQ6 pro. Would this be a good way to start. The OTA's seem reasonably priced (I'd be looking at a 2nd hand mount) but are they any good & does anyone have any experience with either.Thanks.

Steve.

Hi Nephilim, 

I already have the EQ6R and waiting for Quattro 10 to come. I'm expecting it to come at the end of next week, I'll inform you as soon as I test it. Generally I read a lot of good stuff about this telescope, you can check YouTube , there are  some users reporting their experience with this scope, hope I helped you.

Best regards 

[The-MathMog]

22 hours ago, Nojus said:

Hi guys,

I'm planning to get astrophotography setup an would like to know your opinion if HEQ5 can handle 10" Sky-Watcher Quattro f4 Imaging Newtonian ?

Or I need to think about HEQ6?

Please advise. Thank you in advance.

The 10 inch Skywatcher Quattro, weighs 15.1 kilograms. And that is only the tube, so when you add tube-rings, camera, guide-scope etc, it would be quite a bit heavier.
The HEQ5 only has a payload of 11kg for imaging and 15kg for visual, so you would need a mount that is a lot beefier

The NEQ6 (guess that is the one you meant), has a payload 18kg for imaging, 25kg for visual. Even with that you'd get close to the limits, but with proper balancing and limiting the amount of extra gear, it would be possible.

An EQ6-R PRO would probably be a way better solution. But all this is of course only me looking at numbers. Things oftentimes works differently in practice, and people who've actually had their hands on these mounts/scope combinations would know a lot more than me

[Singlin]

I ended up getting the Mesu.

I found that the EQ6 was not reliable with the combined weight of the st 80 as a guide scope,Atik 383 and filter wheel, Moonlite 2.5" focuser with stepper motor.

[Nojus]

On ‎24‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 14:30, The-MathMog said:

The NEQ6 (guess that is the one you meant), has a payload 18kg for imaging, 25kg for visual. Even with that you'd get close to the limits, but with proper balancing and limiting the amount of extra gear, it would be possible.

yes,that's right,it is too much, finally I've landed on  8" Sky-Watcher Quattro f4 and put it on my HEQ5,wayting for weather now,will report the results... :)

[laser_jock99]

On 24/02/2019 at 13:30, The-MathMog said:

The NEQ6 (guess that is the one you meant), has a payload 18kg for imaging, 25kg for visual. Even with that you'd get close to the limits, but with proper balancing and limiting the amount of extra gear, it would be possible.
 

I image with up to a 35Kg payload (12" F4 Newt + Accessories) so it can carry more if operated carefully  but that is in an observatory environment with a correctly ballanced, permanent set up. I would not reccoment this loading for casual use.

Revelation Astro 12" F4 Newtonian on an EQ6

[Singlin]

Great pic Laser! 

Had a bit of a giggle seeing all those counter weights.

Don't use your counter weight arm for leveling your mount next time??