Any Skywatcher Quattro 8S opinions?

[Thalestris24]

Hi

I'm a newbie here I'm thinking of getting a Quattro 8S for DSO AP... The specs look good, I like the fast optics but appreciate the need for a coma corrector for best results. I'm also a wee old lady (well, not that wee, and not that old!) but I have to consider a scopes manageability. So all seems good on paper. However, it doesn't appear that many people have one i.e. they don't seem as popular as the equivalent 200pds. So I'm wondering if anyone has any experience of the Quattro and whether there may be some particularly 'bad' things about it.

Thanks in advance. 

[ollypenrice]

'Cheap and fast' means 'tricky and not plug and play.' Are you up for lots of fiddling and sorting? If not I'd go for a refractor!

Olly

[Thalestris24]

Hmm... yes I'm up for fiddling! Have you experience of the Quattro? I wouldn't call it 'cheap' but I'm a poor pensioner, lol. Um, I don't want a refractor! If there's a known problem with the Quattro I'd probably fall back on an Explorer 150pds. 

[RikM]

The most important question for deep sky AP is: 'what mount are intending to put it on?'

The known problems with the Quatro are the focuser, most people replace it with a heavier duty version. And the required accuracy of collimation and focus at f/4 to get good results. The build quality and thermal expansion of the steel tube version means it needs a fair bit of hands-on to keep it sweet. I don't have one (I use a 150P) but I have seen some very nice images from people get them to work and have seen quite a few people buy them and then get rid of them again without managing to post an image because of the hard work required.

[Thalestris24]

The most important question for deep sky AP is: 'what mount are intending to put it on?'

The known problems with the Quatro are the focuser, most people replace it with a heavier duty version. And the required accuracy of collimation and focus at f/4 to get good results. The build quality and thermal expansion of the steel tube version means it needs a fair bit of hands-on to keep it sweet. I don't have one (I use a 150P) but I have seen some very nice images from people get them to work and have seen quite a few people buy them and then get rid of them again without managing to post an image because of the hard work required.

RikM - I was thinking of an eq5 pro synscan goto.  Hmm... what you say does make it sound tricky and might explain why it doesn't seem to be as popular as the spec suggests it should be! Perhaps I will fall back on the 150pds after all. At least that one does seem to be quite widely used. Thanks for the advice.

[RikM]

The EQ5 would be on it's limit with the Quattro 8S. Much more comfortable with a 150P but as Olly said, an nice small, short focal length refractor like an ED80 would be much less hassle. They are quite pricey, but worth it.

[Thalestris24]

The EQ5 would be on it's limit with the Quattro 8S. Much more comfortable with a 150P but as Olly said, an nice small, short focal length refractor like an ED80 would be much less hassle. They are quite pricey, but worth it.

Well, anyway, as I said, I think I'll go for the 150pds. I might buy a Startravel 80 as well but I can't afford an APO.

Thanks again

[laser_jock99]

One of the budget fast 'astrograph' scopes I'm playing with at the moment is this GSO/Teleskop Service 6" F4 Newtonian.

http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4762_GSO-6--Imaging-Newtonian---6--f-4---2--Monorail-focuser.html

As Olly implies these are not plug-n-play scopes (I have had to uprate the springs in this little one to make it hold collimation better) but if you're prepared to do a bit of fiddling then the big payoff is much shortened exposure times.

A photo from last Friday- Rosette Nebula stack of 5 x 180s unguided.

A 300 second single sub of the North American Nebula (badly collimated!!)

I still haven't finished optimising this little scope- but for me at least half the fun is in re-engineering them!

[ollypenrice]

The ED80 refractor in FLO's 'scope only' deal is cheaper than the cheapest Quattro. It's a phenomenally productive little scope. Forgive me but I'm deeply suspicious of 'fast and cheap' as I said earlier. The Quattro is cheap, very cheap, for an 8 inch F4 instrument with photographic ambitions. Fast F ratios are great on paper but in practice they have to work, which is why good ones are so expensive - and even then they can be darned difficult. While the fast reflector owner is fiddling with their scope the slow refractor owner is more than likely to be collecting photons...

An 8 inch Newt on an HEQ5 is no more than 'possible.' It isn't 'reliable and productive.' A bit of wind would see it struggling.

Olly

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/22435624_WLMPTM#!i=2277139556&k=FGgG233

[Epicyclus Dave]

Hi there

Popping along to your local astro society or astro club will reveal an imager , who can give help with good dark sky areas/ club meeting sites & equipment needed for basic starting level & advanced levels.

I started in the late 1990s with a praktica 35mm film camera & a Helios 120 refractor , on a EQ3-2 , jings , it was wild even if someone sneezed nearby , nice moon shots but galaxies & nebula were unachievable without seagull shaped stars    .

Ive slowly upgraded to a NEQ-6 / SW- ED80 / heq5 finder guiding / modded Canon 500d / dew heaters / laptop / 26Kg AGM battery , it  certianly builds muscles up going to remote sites but i'm very impressed with what affordable modern astro equipment can do nowadays compared to 15 years ago .

So much astro stuff to choose from when browsing online , but if you think this is the hobbie of choice then get a skywatcher ED80 & HEQ-5 , the starting & continuing point of many happy imagers.

Dave.

[Epicyclus Dave]

Qyh5 finder guiding  (oops!)

[Thalestris24]

Ok, so I've ordered a Heq5 syntrek. No scope yet. I'm going to play with it with my 1100d mounted via an adapter. I've previously taken images of some objects just with the camera and 300mm zoom, keeping exposures to 1s. I was quite pleased with what I could image just like that! I'm somewhat envious of people with neq6's but there's no way I could manage one. However, I'm still leaning towards either a 150 or 200pds but won't make any decisions yet. I'm also going to join the Glasgow Astronomical Society

Thanks everyone for your advice

Louise

[laser_jock99]

Ok, so I've ordered a Heq5 syntrek. No scope yet. I'm going to play with it with my 1100d mounted via an adapter. I've previously taken images of some objects just with the camera and 300mm zoom, keeping exposures to 1s. I was quite pleased with what I could image just like that! I'm somewhat envious of people with neq6's but there's no way I could manage one. However, I'm still leaning towards either a 150 or 200pds but won't make any decisions yet. I'm also going to join the Glasgow Astronomical Society

Thanks everyone for your advice

Louise

Definitely worth seeing some of these scopes 'in the flesh' they are physically bigger than you might think. An EQ6 on it's tripod is very heavy- done my back a mischief moving these things, I always at least take off the counterweights now.........

If your scope is not manageable you will give up using it which would be a shame.

[Thalestris24]

Definitely worth seeing some of these scopes 'in the flesh' they are physically bigger than you might think. An EQ6 on it's tripod is very heavy- done my back a mischief moving these things, I always at least take off the counterweights now.........

If your scope is not manageable you will give up using it which would be a shame.

Yeah, I think I will struggle with just an Heq5 even without a scope - it's probably on my limit! But I can't go far anyway - I live in a second floor flat and don't have a car . All the AP I've done so far has been through open windows! Fortunately, I have a number of windows! If I get a scope I will either have to do likewise else lug it downstairs and outside. Again, fortunately, there are some hedged and sheltered areas just behind my flat that would be quite good for viewing from. Of course, then I'd need a powertank and a laptop too... I'll see how I get on with just the camera on the mount.

Cheers

Louise

[DrRobin]

Hi Louise,

I have a 8" in carbon fibre and haven't had any of the problems reported by others.  The only issue with the focuser is the length of travel is fairly short so if swapping between eyepiece and camera I sometimes need an extension tube.  I used to keep mine in a wooden box and lift it out on to an EQ6 every time I wanted to use and found that I need to collimate it once in a while, say every 3 months or so.

I bought mine second hand, when it arrived I checked the collimation, it was so close I didn't bother adjusting it and that was after been shipped up to me by Royal Mail.

I did buy the matching coma corrector, they aren't cheap (nearly £200), this is essential for a DSLR, but you can use a Baader or one of the coma correctors for a 200 PDS, they are a fair bit cheaper.  I just decided that I would buy the new matched Aplanatic corrector to be on safe side.

Overall what do I think?  For the money I paid, the build quality and finish is great, the focuser works fine (I motorised mine with a DIY kit) and it is fairly light.  Mine seems to stay in collimation as much as any other scope I have had, but get a laser and then make final adjustments on a star (real or artificial) just like any other scope.  The main advantage of the carbon tube is not the weight, although this helps when lifting it on and off, it is it's stability to thermal variation as carbon fibre expands and contracts much less.  It should also be stiffer than a metal tube, but I doubt there is much difference.

Olly is correct, these are [relatively] cheap in comparison to an astrograph from some manufacturers and it is like trying to compare a Mini with a Rolls Royce.  The big question is a Quattro any better than a PDS?  Apart from been F/4 as apposed to F/4.8 you get a shorter focal length (Quattro 800mm, PDS 1000mm) which gives you a shorter tube and a wider field.

After that I doubt there is much difference.  There are more 200 PDS out there as they are a bit cheaper and more main stream and a PDS can probably deliver just as good results. 

I like my Quattro 8", it is working just fine for me, but I haven't had any of the problems as reported by others and I haven't owned enough scopes to know how it compares with other makes.

Using a scope in doors and shooting through an open window is fine, but you will find air currents in the room give a distorted view.  House/flat builders frequently put radiators under the windows, just make sure it is switched off for a few hours before observing and the scope is in place to equalise.

I hope this helps.

Robin

[Thalestris24]

Hi Louise,

I have a 8" in carbon fibre and haven't had any of the problems reported by others.  The only issue with the focuser is the length of travel is fairly short so if swapping between eyepiece and camera I sometimes need an extension tube.  I used to keep mine in a wooden box and lift it out on to an EQ6 every time I wanted to use and found that I need to collimate it once in a while, say every 3 months or so.

I bought mine second hand, when it arrived I checked the collimation, it was so close I didn't bother adjusting it and that was after been shipped up to me by Royal Mail.

I did buy the matching coma corrector, they aren't cheap (nearly £200), this is essential for a DSLR, but you can use a Baader or one of the coma correctors for a 200 PDS, they are a fair bit cheaper.  I just decided that I would buy the new matched Aplanatic corrector to be on safe side.

Overall what do I think?  For the money I paid, the build quality and finish is great, the focuser works fine (I motorised mine with a DIY kit) and it is fairly light.  Mine seems to stay in collimation as much as any other scope I have had, but get a laser and then make final adjustments on a star (real or artificial) just like any other scope.  The main advantage of the carbon tube is not the weight, although this helps when lifting it on and off, it is it's stability to thermal variation as carbon fibre expands and contracts much less.  It should also be stiffer than a metal tube, but I doubt there is much difference.

Olly is correct, these are [relatively] cheap in comparison to an astrograph from some manufacturers and it is like trying to compare a Mini with a Rolls Royce.  The big question is a Quattro any better than a PDS?  Apart from been F/4 as apposed to F/4.8 you get a shorter focal length (Quattro 800mm, PDS 1000mm) which gives you a shorter tube and a wider field.

After that I doubt there is much difference.  There are more 200 PDS out there as they are a bit cheaper and more main stream and a PDS can probably deliver just as good results. 

I like my Quattro 8", it is working just fine for me, but I haven't had any of the problems as reported by others and I haven't owned enough scopes to know how it compares with other makes.

Using a scope in doors and shooting through an open window is fine, but you will find air currents in the room give a distorted view.  House/flat builders frequently put radiators under the windows, just make sure it is switched off for a few hours before observing and the scope is in place to equalise.

I hope this helps.

Robin

Thanks Robin - good to hear something +ve about the Quattro. I'll have to think about all the options. When/if I get a scope I'll probably keep it set it up in my bedroom which isn't heated (!) though I only have one electric radiator in my living room and it's against an inside wall. If I find I get distortions then I'll have to lug everything downstairs (and back up again!) - would keep me fit, if nothing else! But better views of the skies anyway. Of course, there's nothing stopping me from getting more than one scope/ota (apart from the cost). Anyways, I should get the Heq5 Syntrek early next week - looking forward to that - and hoping skies will clear! At some point I'll try and set up an autoguider alongside the camera.

I've been attending astronomy classes since September. They finish this week but I'll join the Glasgow Astro Society and hopefully start going to their monthly meetings from January. I'm sure their members will have their views on particular setups and maybe I'll even get the chance to try something before I buy.

Cheers

Louise

[DrRobin]

Hi Louise,

+ve, you sound like an engineer or at least someone with some electronics background?  I had an HEQ5 for a while and used it for my Quattro, it would easily cope with the load.  The carbon ones aren't much lighter than the steel tubes as it is the mirror that makes up most of the weight. 

Do you have a lift in your flat?  It would be easy to get everything outside?  If not you are going to have to take the mount off the tripod to get it up and down the stairs and then there is 10Kg of counter weights, you won't need these for a camera, but will for a scope.  You would also need to carry the scope down separately as well, lots of hassle if you have to make several journeys.  I would give it a try from inside apart from anything else you have got some shelter if it rains.

The bedroom sounds fine and it is easy to have the computer in there and a chair, even if it does have a restricted view.  The other advantage, you might be above some of the light pollution?

Robin

[Epicyclus Dave]

Great choice with the HEQ5 syntrek , just the  mount and camera & lenses will yield some nice pics.

Don't forget the stylish " staircase dominator" heq5 carry case  

Dave

[Thalestris24]

Hi Louise,

+ve, you sound like an engineer or at least someone with some electronics background?  I had an HEQ5 for a while and used it for my Quattro, it would easily cope with the load.  The carbon ones aren't much lighter than the steel tubes as it is the mirror that makes up most of the weight. 

Do you have a lift in your flat?  It would be easy to get everything outside?  If not you are going to have to take the mount off the tripod to get it up and down the stairs and then there is 10Kg of counter weights, you won't need these for a camera, but will for a scope.  You would also need to carry the scope down separately as well, lots of hassle if you have to make several journeys.  I would give it a try from inside apart from anything else you have got some shelter if it rains.

The bedroom sounds fine and it is easy to have the computer in there and a chair, even if it does have a restricted view.  The other advantage, you might be above some of the light pollution?

Robin

Hi again

Yep, I do have engineering, hardware and software experience - am a computer science graduate (from a few years ago, lol). Have done my share of soldering Currently studying physics.... No lift here, unfortunately, but the stairs are ok. Multiple journeys will be required.  Yeah, above most nearby direct light pollution but still a problem with city skyglow. I've bought a CLS clip filter to try out. It goes without saying that it's been cloudy since I got it the other day... sigh. When I get the mount and some clear skies I'll give it a go and post the results (if they're not too bad!). Hopefully I should get better results than my  previous 1 sec exposures.

Cheers

Louise

[Thalestris24]

Great choice with the HEQ5 syntrek , just the  mount and camera & lenses will yield some nice pics.

Don't forget the stylish " staircase dominator" heq5 carry case  

Dave

Thanks Dave - that'll do nicely!

[DrRobin]

Ah thought so, you can always spot a fellow engineer. Multiple journeys up and down the stairs will certainly keep you fit, the mount will be the heaviest item, somewhere around 12Kg, followed by the scope, the tripod and the weights.

Robin

[uhb1966]

Hello Thalestris, did you get the quattro, if yes what were the results?

[Thalestris24]

Hi

No I didn't!! Fortunately the folks here showed me the errors of my thinking at the time! As a beginner it probably wouldn't have been suitable for me. When there's already so much to learn the critical adjustments needed for an F4 reflector would have been an unwanted complication. Instead I bought a Startravel 80 initially then a 150pds. I actually might have been better off with a 130pds but not a lot in it.  I still consider myself a beginner but I'm learning all the time

Louise

[uhb1966]

Thanks!

[lensman57]

Hi

No I didn't!! Fortunately the folks here showed me the errors of my thinking at the time! As a beginner it probably wouldn't have been suitable for me. When there's already so much to learn the critical adjustments needed for an F4 reflector would have been an unwanted complication. Instead I bought a Startravel 80 initially then a 150pds. I actually might have been better off with a 130pds but not a lot in it.  I still consider myself a beginner but I'm learning all the time

Louise

Hi Louise,

It has now taken me over 6 months to get the beast working @ F3.6, far from perfect but it is now workable. Some are useable out of the box but this one had all sorts of issues. The adjustments needed to the get the rotation and the tilt of the secondary are minute as you get closer to collimation but if it starts working then it is a phton sucker. I am already giving it its second running tonight and I am hoping  that it will workout. Getting the focus right with this scope is also a right Royal Pain.

Regards,

A.G