SW 80ED vs Equinox 80

[Imd]

I am struggling in making up my mind between

Skywatcher Evostar 80ED DS-Pro Outfit or Skywatcher Evostar 80ED DS-Pro OTA

Vs
Skywatcher Equinox 80 APO PRO OTA

If I add the cost of a focal reducer to the 80ED Pro the cost is very similar to the Equinox.

I know that the lenses are the same but the Equinox has a more solid build with retractable due shield and faster FL.

The scope would mostly be used for astrophotography using a Canon 1100D but every now and then for visual use. For visual use a mostly use Hyperion 17mm and 10mm + AC730 2 x Barlow. I use an NEQ6 mount.


The things that concern me are

o The equinox may suffer from more CA due to shorter FL.

o The 80ED Pro may be better suited to occasion visual use due to longer FL

o Although the Equinox is supposed to be better suited to astrophotography it uses an L shaped bracket which might create balancing issues.

Do you think my concerns are valid, and do you have any further advice that might tip the scales in favour of one over the other?

Thanks for looking

Ian

[moriniboy]

Looks like the Equinox is faster as standard f6.25 vs f7.5 (with reducer f6.37)

I have an Equinox but don't do AP, all I know is that the build quality is very good and given the choice again I would make the same decision.

[Zakalwe]

The ED80 focuser is a lot poorer than the Equinox though, isn't it? The Equinox is built like a tank, but could do with rings (the Williams Optics CNC rings are a perfect match. Cost £75 + a dovetail). I can't see a standard ED80 being sturdier, to be honest, though it does include rings.

The matched Equinox field flattener (cost £70) works very well with the scope as well. There is a combined field flattener/focal reducer available for the ED80 (cost £160 ish) which would bring the ED80 down to f6.4. That puts it similiar speed to the Equinox.

The foot on the Equinox can be reversed to help with getting balance. It's an OK solution rather, but rings are a lot better.

[nmoushon]

I'm bias towards the Equinox because I have one. Just to disclaimer that at the start.

But your correct the build is better on the equinox. The new ones have the FPL-53 glass...not sure what the evostar has. The CA, because its an APO scope, is very well corrected...for a doublet that is. Visually I could not detect any CA even on bright stars and planets. For AP with my 450D its hard to tell if is CA or if its because of the fact I was using a dslr in pretty heavy LP areas. I've moved to a bit darker area and have a CCD now. With only a couple hours of data collected with the CCD I ca say the first results look very good. I shot M45 with 15min subs and the CA was very well corrected for being a doublet. I'm sure if we compared it to a triplet you'd notice better CA. But for a doublet I think its one of the best out there.

In regards to the reducer the one that fits on the evostar will not work on the equinox because of the FL being shorter. I know the TV2008 one works and is the most commonly use one for the equinox. I was able to pick up a second hand .76x reducer/FF that doesn't have any markings on it and the sell wasn't sure what brand it is either. We both are guessing it some copy. But even with that large amount of reduction I still have very good correction with my equinox. That reducer makes my scope a fast f/4.75 @ 380mm! Thats fast for a doublet.

The smaller foot on the equinox can cause some small balancing issues. But when I used it with just my dslr it was JUST slightly out of balance and even with that I was constantly getting 2min unguided subs on my HEQ5. So I would make that a deciding factor. Especially if you are going to guiding with it. Now that I switched to a heavy CCD then I had to get a plate to get proper balance.

Again I'm bias toward my lovely scope so maybe someone with experience on both will pop on. Hope this helps.

[paulastro]

I think I'm right in saying the Evostar is in an over-size tube (same as 100mm), so is much more bulky than the Equinox version.  I'm aslo pretty sure that the optics are the same.  I've had an old gold version (champagne colour) of the ED120 and I think it was just as good as the modern equivalents I have owned and used.

[ollypenrice]

The optics cannot possibly be the same. The focal lengths are quite different and so, therefore are the lenses which create the focal length. The Equinox is faster and, according to an owner's post recently, can be further reduced with a FF/FR. There will always be some blue bloat with a doublet pushed down to this kind of F ratio but he said it was still OK for imaging.

Olly

[nmoushon]

Here are my best shots taken with my Equinox and dslr: http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/177259-8hrs-m31-m42/ Compared to a nice triplet they could be better. BUT for using a doublet I think the star color is good (not great but that more than likely my fault with processing) and very minimal bloat around only the brightest stars.

I'm not going to show you my M45 (taken with CCD) as its was taken with the moon out, very very poor seeing and a bit out of focus. I'll try again this weekend weather permitting. Its been -20F here the past week so I'm not about to go outside in that lol.

[Imd]

Thanks everybody for your support.

The possible bloating does bother me if we push the FL down so much and so the ED80 with a reducer may have an advantage as its more flexible. But nmoushon's comments are reassuring. Thank you.

It seems a bit odd that SW have skimped a bit on the luxury Equinox scope by adding the L-bracket rather than rings and a dovetail but perhaps this is for a good reason. I'm interested in anyone had much experience using the L-brackets. I already use a finder guider and using the L bracket may not just lead to balancing problems but also perhaps lead to some flexure? 

I'm not a perfectionist but I like to keep things relatively easy for myself, I find it hard enough already.

Do you think L-brackets could be as good as rings as long as the scope has a rotatable tube?

[nmoushon]

I've never used rings but I've also never had a problem with be L-bracket in regards to flexure. Then only down side is how short it is and isn't the easiest to balance.

[Imd]

Thanks for sharing those nice pics nmoushon, our replies must have passed each other in the ether. I haven't stacked beyond a total of an hour exposure yet but I am increasing my light exposures to 5mins and hopefully higher soon. The bloating does not appear to be such an issue at 2 mins exposure.

Sorry another question for everyone, does the bloating increase when going from say 2 min exposure to 5 or 10 mins ?

I think I started well with my questions but as I get more answers I think of more questions please bear with me.

I do use a finder guider which might slightly increase the balance issue. Perhaps as Zakalwe has already suggested I could start with the L bracket and move to some WO rings later if required.

What would really help steer me is a used one for sale of either but they are like rocking horse poo, I think this category of scope gets a lot of use.

[nmoushon]

I used a finderguider too with out a problem. The weight is very minimal and is more towards the center so has even less effect. Plus with guiding the little bit out of balance isn't going to hinder you from getting 10min subs. Thats the mack I tried with a dslr. The noise and the lack of cool kept be to 5min subs max when I shot with dslr.

Not sure if bloat increases or not with exposure lengths. My first attempt with a CCD was under very poor conditions so not a very good test. Hopefully this weekend I can get out. I havent been out for over a month now. I've been having guiding issues.

[Imd]

Thanks for your support everyone. Both scopes are still in the running but I now reckon that the Equinox has the edge. 

Cheers

Ian

[bodtwo]

Very interested in the equinox myself, do let us know which way you go.

[Imd]

I finally bought an Equinox 80.

The scope feels really good quality. It came with William Optics rings and I have added a long dovetail bar for better balancing. Although, when a finder is attached, its still difficult to get a really good balance. As I have the rings anyway, I have never got around to testing balancing with the L-bracket

The night sky has not been kind. I have tried twice to get out only to find the clouds creep over once I am setup.  

I managed to get the Leo trio 21x180 secs, 8 flats, 5 darks.

Also the cone nebula. 3x300 secs 8 flats no darks. The battery ran out on the camera and then the clouds rolled in again. Its so frustrating  

 

Here is a link in case the thumbnails don't provide proper access

http://sdrv.ms/1eiBOwd

Both images were stacked in deep sky stacker and the processed in PSS. The shots were taken from my back garden with the CLS filter to block out unwanted LP.

When I try again, I will need to add more exposure time for the trio and a lot more images for stacking the cone. Also in the corners particularly with the cone neb its probably obvious that the stars are not round.  I have since ordered the flattener.

There is a bit of bloating going on and I wonder if this is due to the additional exposure time or perhaps its just that the targets have particularly bright stars. 

The cone has some vignetting and I was tempted to cut it out but the stars are amazing and so I couldn't taken them out. I will just have to try harder with the flats. I can't wait to get more images of the cone its much better target than I had imagined.

Thanks everybody

Ian

[mcinek82]

Actually thumbnails work and the link does not. Regardless of that - great work, thnak You for sharing beautiful portions of the sky. Clear skies!

[m37]

If you need more weight away from the focuser end to achieve balance, tesco et all do exercise strap on leg weight things which I wrapped around the end of my scope to counter a dslr , filter wheel and oag. Increases overall weight but balances perfectly. Also the Velcro straps they attach with are very wide and very sturdy. This kind of thing...

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/360893315009?limghlpsr=true&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=108&device=t&adtype=pla&crdt=0&ff3=1&ff11=ICEP3.0.0&ff12=67&ff13=80&ff14=108&ff19=0

The pink is quite fetching.