200p vs sw ed80

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Hello all

I have had a sw 200p for quite a few years now and find due to the size it is the last scope i go for. I was wondering if an ed80 would be any good for deep sky photography or will the 200p blind it with the aperture and lack of chromatic abrasions? If the 200p is better I have to by an eq6 to get good guiding which is a bit expensive lol. Any advice is welcome

Thank you

[andyo]

Hi I have both the ed80 and 200p and use an eq6 mount.Firstly the SWed80 is a great scope for deepsky imaging the stock focuser can be prone to slippage if the camera is heavy eg ccd and filter wheel but I upgraded to a baader steeltrack a few hundred quid more but worth the cash in my opinion.The 200p is also a great scope which is just about usable on the eq5 but the more accessories you add then the mount may struggle so really for imaging with the 200p I would go for the eq6.However for both these mounts and scopes you would be better off guiding.With the 200p your arcsecond/pixel would be smaller than the ed80 so the ed80 would give more sky per pixel so guiding not being as critical but for longer subs preferable

[lensman57]

Hello all

I have had a sw 200p for quite a few years now and find due to the size it is the last scope i go for. I was wondering if an ed80 would be any good for deep sky photography or will the 200p blind it with the aperture and lack of chromatic abrasions? If the 200p is better I have to by an eq6 to get good guiding which is a bit expensive lol. Any advice is welcome

Thank you

Hi,

Aperture has nothing to do with DSO imaging, Focal ratio has a lot to do with it though. ED 80 has very little if any CA, 200p will have severe coma from 35% of the center all the way to the edge unless you use a very small chip to mainly image the center portion. The image scale -FOV of the two scopes are quite different. 200p will require atleast an NEQ6 to be guided effectively mainly due to the large tube and weight, the mount has to overcome a lot of inertia to keep the scope moving smoothly.

Regards,

A.G

[baggywrinkle]

I have the SWED80 on an EQ5 and it is a good scope. I agree with the comment on slippage though.

Attached a couple of single shot images using a mod'd Canon 650D

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Hi,

Aperture has nothing to do with DSO imaging, Focal ratio has a lot to do with it though. ED 80 has very little if any CA, 200p will have severe coma from 35% of the center all the way to the edge unless you use a very small chip to mainly image the center portion. The image scale -FOV of the two scopes are quite different. 200p will require atleast an NEQ6 to be guided effectively mainly due to the large tube and weight, the mount has to overcome a lot of inertia to keep the scope moving smoothly.

Regards,

A.G

Hi,

Aperture has nothing to do with DSO imaging, Focal ratio has a lot to do with it though. ED 80 has very little if any CA, 200p will have severe coma from 35% of the center all the way to the edge unless you use a very small chip to mainly image the center portion. The image scale -FOV of the two scopes are quite different. 200p will require atleast an NEQ6 to be guided effectively mainly due to the large tube and weight, the mount has to overcome a lot of inertia to keep the scope moving smoothly.

Regards,

A.G

Thank you for all your replies I thought the greater area would collect more photons over the same amount of time? I have an st80 on my 200p and have done the st4 dual axis mod but the mount really does not like it! I'm intrigued about your statement how does that work out? I have noticed a lot of people using small fracs for dso imaging so would be interesting know reason aperture doesn't matter.

Baggywrinkle those images are great.

The 3rd reason I am considering an ed80 is because the mrs is fed up off the 200p in the house forgot to mention that

[lensman57]

Thank you for all your replies I thought the greater area would collect more photons over the same amount of time? I have an st80 on my 200p and have done the st4 dual axis mod but the mount really does not like it! I'm intrigued about your statement how does that work out? I have noticed a lot of people using small fracs for dso imaging so would be interesting know reason aperture doesn't matter.

Baggywrinkle those images are great.

The 3rd reason I am considering an ed80 is because the mrs is fed up off the 200p in the house forgot to mention that

Hi David ,

Please accept my sympathy with regards to your Mrs. As far as DSO imaging is concerned the focal ratio determines how bright the subject is viewed by the telescope or the chip not the aperture, a larger aperture in theory should provide better resolution , useful if you are in double stari maging camp. If 200p had a focal length of 500mm then it would have been F2.5, ultra fast , but at about the same focal length of the ED 80 with the 0.85 FF/FR. If two telescopes have the same F ratio then the image is equally bright for both of them. If one has a larger aperture then it will have a longer focal length and therefore a narrower field of view of the sky. Most DSO imaging in the UK is done by short FL or Apo telescopes. I believe that for deep imaging of the sky an SCT will be better a choice but from what I have read this is more popular in the US because of the dark skies and the ability to purchase Mega Box mounts, Paramount ME anyone please? If money was no object then a 12" HyperStar system at F2 would be very nice.

A.G

[tich]

Interesting thread I've just brought myself a Celestron ED80 so I hope to give it a first light sometime soon. The scope I have been imaging with for quite some time is a 200P thinking its 8" aperture would be better for collecting light especially on fainter objects but after reading this it doesn't seem to be the case. I'm looking forward to testing the ED80 but I don't know when that will be as I still need a FR unless it is possible to use one without.

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Thanks for that information A.G. Ill have to have a good read up on that.

Would be great to hear of your results tich as I'm still sat on the fence about what to do. The ed 80 is looking like a strong contender. How much is the ff and focal reducer? Is that a basic requirement for dso imaging with the scope?

Thanks

[ollypenrice]

I'd see it this way;

The ED80 would be easier. No collimation, no need for a coma corrector but you would need the flattener reducer. Once you hang a camera off a coma corrector off a Newt you start to get some leverage and this can pull things out of orthogonality. Also the shorter focal length of the ED80 would make guiding easier and its smaller size would further add to the ease, especially in the wind. If (maybe a biggish 'if') you got the Newt into perfect fettle than I suspect it would beat the ED80, or get very close. It would be faster, too.

The ED80 does have CA when used in imaging. It shows as a little blue bloat around bright blue stars. It is remarkably good for a cheap doublet, though.

The HEQ5 is marginal for the 200P in imaging. Not impossible, but marginal. An ED80 on a 5 is a piece of cake.

As for very fast optical systems, don't believe what they tell you on the tin. The only plug and play system below F4 that I've ever seen is the Takahashi FSQ series of ludicrously expensive refractors. Hyperstars and fast corrected Newts and all the rest can be real devils.

Olly

[tich]

I guess the thing I like about refractors is the plug & play nature of them no need to mess around collimating especially as my 200P has the extra diffraction spike showing on bight stars (see malc-c's thread) Don't get me wrong the 200P is a fine scope but for portability & setting up I think for me the ED80 is the way to go, plus I can still use the 200P for some manual star hopping while I'm imaging so all is not lost.

Apparently Skywatcher reducers are good value & work well bringing the F ratio down from F7.5 to F6.37 by what I've read, but without trying one myself I've yet to cross that hurdle as yet. As soon as the scope is ready I'll be giving it a first light but I will be upgrading the focuser eventually as the Celestrons are fitted with rack & pinion focusers which I'm not overly keen on.

I've just read Olly's reply as I were typing this message & I think he has summed everything up nicely.......

[andyo]

I guess the thing I like about refractors is the plug & play nature of them no need to mess around collimating especially as my 200P has the extra diffraction spike showing on bight stars (see malc-c's thread) Don't get me wrong the 200P is a fine scope but for portability & setting up I think for me the ED80 is the way to go, plus I can still use the 200P for some manual star hopping while I'm imaging so all is not lost.

Apparently Skywatcher reducers are good value & work well bringing the F ratio down from F7.5 to F6.37 by what I've read, but without trying one myself I've yet to cross that hurdle as yet. As soon as the scope is ready I'll be giving it a first light but I will be upgrading the focuser eventually as the Celestrons are fitted with rack & pinion focusers which I'm not overly keen on.

I've just read Olly's reply as I were typing this message & I think he has summed everything up nicely.......

Yes the skywatcher FR is just fine,they make them for the evostar ed range and the FR are tailor made for each scope in the range eg one for the ed80 another for the 100 etc so make sure you order the right one for your scope

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Thanks again for everyone's input is the celestron ed80 any better than the SW ed80?

160 quid for the FR looks reasonable. I'm looking to buy the ed80 second hand, how much (roughly) do they go for? Nothing on astro buy and sell at the moment, will have to keep my eye out

Cheers

[Uranium235]

Get the skywatcher black diamond 80ED, its got a better (!) focuser than the Celestron, and it looks better. Also, get the the matching 0.85x reducer/flattener as well to make the speed more bearable.

You dont really want to go down the road of reflectors, as you may spend just as much time tinkering as you will imaging. I prefer the ratio to be 0% tinkering: 100% imaging.

Having said that, keep the 200P as you will need something for galaxy season - which is where the 80ED falls down a bit (unless imaging galaxy clusters).

[lensman57]

Thanks again for everyone's input is the celestron ed80 any better than the SW ed80?

160 quid for the FR looks reasonable. I'm looking to buy the ed80 second hand, how much (roughly) do they go for? Nothing on astro buy and sell at the moment, will have to keep my eye out

Cheers

I bought mine second hand too, it is the older blue colour one. I paid £180.00 for it. I bought the SW electric focuser motor and it really helps with preventing the focuser from slipping and good focus on the stars, my fingers are really clumsy now.

A.G

[The_PSY3NTIST]

You dont really want to go down the road of reflectors, as you may spend just as much time tinkering as you will imaging. I prefer the ratio to be 0% tinkering: 100% imaging.

Having said that, keep the 200P as you will need something for galaxy season - which is where the 80ED falls down a bit (unless imaging galaxy clusters).

That's a good price! I might even be able to get a straight swap with someone. The 200p seems to be doing about £190 on astro buy and sell.

Why does it struggle with galaxies? The whole point of the exercise is to have less telescopes in the house and smaller ones where possible. I need an all rounder and don't want to get rid of the 200p if the ed80 isn't up to galaxies. Galaxies are the main objects I'd like to have a go at imaging.

Thanks

[ollypenrice]

That's a good price! I might even be able to get a straight swap with someone. The 200p seems to be doing about £190 on astro buy and sell.

Why does it struggle with galaxies? The whole point of the exercise is to have less telescopes in the house and smaller ones where possible. I need an all rounder and don't want to get rid of the 200p if the ed80 isn't up to galaxies. Galaxies are the main objects I'd like to have a go at imaging.

Thanks

All rounders don't exist. Either your scope has a long focal length, or a medium, or a short. It can't have all of them. You can image a few galaxies at short FL (M31, M33) a few more at medium FL (M106, M101 plus quite a few others which will be small on the chip.) But if you want to image lots of galaxies and have them cover half the chip you are looking at 2.5 metres of FL or more and at a mount that can track at that kind of scale. That would not, for me, include the NEQ6, though dedicated souls do manage it occasionally. I image galaxies using Yves' setup and that is a big setup. I think it's best to be realistic and accept that galaxy targets in close up are soon out of reach in affordable kit. Here's the man about to let me play with his nice big scope!

Olly

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Haha ok ill stick to andromeda tbh I didn't realise all the galaxies were so small. There's a few to go at I guess. So the general consensus is ed80. Thank you so much for the guidance... Ill get the ball rolling... My mrs will over the moon when the 200p has gone lol

Thanks

[tich]

The Celestron's aren't made any more as far as I know but I don't think they look that bad.

If it does the job then I'll be happy.

But I won't be getting rid of the 200P

[Uranium235]

That's a good price! I might even be able to get a straight swap with someone. The 200p seems to be doing about £190 on astro buy and sell.

Why does it struggle with galaxies? The whole point of the exercise is to have less telescopes in the house and smaller ones where possible. I need an all rounder and don't want to get rid of the 200p if the ed80 isn't up to galaxies. Galaxies are the main objects I'd like to have a go at imaging.

Thanks

Olly is indeed correct in regard to the question of galaxies. There are only so many galaxies you can image with a small frac, after M31 and M33 they get smaller... a lot smaller. So you need something with a good bit of FL to it.

My ideal setup would probably be an 80/480 for nebulae and other stuff within the Milky Way (excluding PNs), and an 8" RC (f8) for small stuff and anything beyond our local group. Yes, i know an RC is in essence a reflector - but its a lot more rigid than a newtonian, and the focuser is in a more sensible place.

[ollypenrice]

Olly is indeed correct in regard to the question of galaxies. There are only so many galaxies you can image with a small frac, after M31 and M33 they get smaller... a lot smaller. So you need something with a good bit of FL to it.

My ideal setup would probably be an 80/480 for nebulae and other stuff within the Milky Way (excluding PNs), and an 8" RC (f8) for small stuff and anything beyond our local group. Yes, i know an RC is in essence a reflector - but its a lot more rigid than a newtonian, and the focuser is in a more sensible place.

But with two parabolic mirrors it might not be dead easy to collimate...

Olly

[The_PSY3NTIST]

Think my mind is made up. As much as I love my 200p I think it's got to go. Was my first scope too which makes me want to keep it. I recon I'll get out more with the ed80 plus I can stick it on my slt mount if I go anywhere. Thanks to everyone for your advice and suggestions, once again this community proves to be an invaluable source of information on my astro journey

Thanks

[kirkster501]

I use my ED80 with 0.85 FF/FR for wide field galaxies and nebula and my RC8 for individual galaxies/PN/GC. Both scopes are great. The stock focuser of the ED80 can be fixed simply enough without spending a fortune on it. That said, my ED80 will be changed for a Borg or a Tak later this year all being well.

Steve

[baggywrinkle]

Interesting thread I've just brought myself a Celestron ED80 so I hope to give it a first light sometime soon. The scope I have been imaging with for quite some time is a 200P thinking its 8" aperture would be better for collecting light especially on fainter objects but after reading this it doesn't seem to be the case. I'm looking forward to testing the ED80 but I don't know when that will be as I still need a FR unless it is possible to use one without.

Those shots I did were without a focal reducer. I have one for the Celestron 6SE and I have been told I could use it on the ED80 in a post somewhere. As Yes I have not done so.

[Quatermass]

I was feeling the same and got an ed80 with focal reducer used it loved but sold it and went back to my 200p. Great if you have an Atik camera but with my canon 350d and being used for wide field shots it got little use prefer my 200p. Wish I had got a HEQ5 instead.

cloud cloud go away come again another day

[tich]

Those shots I did were without a focal reducer. I have one for the Celestron 6SE and I have been told I could use it on the ED80 in a post somewhere. As Yes I have not done so.

That's interesting to know so I may get to do a first light using it the next clear night we get. I'll still get a reducer & upgrade the focuser on my C80ED later as I've already ordered the focuser adapter for it, the problem is I have to buy things in dribs & drabs but I'm getting there.

Cracking images you done by the way.