Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

10 inch Skywatcher quarto or 8 inch RC


Dave1964
 Share

Recommended Posts

Evening all :)

I am looking into getting another scope for imagaging dso and planets.

Having read reveiws on both I am completely undecided what to go for.

So I was wondering what you folks views on the two are from either using or experiencing use of them

Such as any issues and pros etc.

Any advice be most helpful

Many thanks

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Quattro is best considered as a kit. Many posts on here suggest that it often needs a lot of sorting out before it is ready to image, but once sorted it can be good. Just be aware of that.

The RC will also need careful collimation and a bit of homework, along with some good colimation tools.

They take totally different images because of their vastly different focal lengths, one short and one long. What are your targets?

And if you go for the RC, do you have a mount capable of delivering the tracking accuracy needed at long focal lengths?

If you are new to deep sky AP you have not chosen easy telescopes to start with.

Olly 

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/22435624_WLMPTM#!i=2266922474&k=Sc3kgzc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi A G,

The weight of the carbon fibre Quattro appears to be 14.4kg with my 2 inch legs that will just be approaching the top end payload of 15kg. I am not sure if that's accurate for the Quattro though as I find it hard to find actual weight of scopes unboxed. I haven't found the weight of the 8 inch CF as of yet :).

However the RC is 9.8kg both kind of pushing the mount towards or a little over its limits.

I had hoped CF would be a lot lighter than metal and surprised at how heavy they are :)

Also the focusers appear to be bit better quality which helps a lot :)

What weight of scopes are acceptable before pushing them to the top end of the mounts limits without straining the mount? Ie if you have 15ks should you limit yourself to say 12kg?

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Olly,

Yes I have to agree on the Quattro there does seem to be a lot of work before use.

I haven't done collimation as of yet so I don't really know what is involved. The GSO RC is initially a slow scope, but with focal reducers added f7 or f6 will help.

With the Quattro it does look really large compared to the RC. I am also looking at build qualify and any known issues too.

Yes to having a good mount for tracking as the Ioptron is more than happy.

Targets mainly both DSO and planets.

Now wondering perhaps back to the drawing board and a rethink on those scopes.

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just checked out the weight of the GSO 10inch F5 CF Newt and that one is 12,3 Kg With tube rings.

So the Quatro 250 CF will most likely be around the same weight. It's the 10inch primary Mirror that makes up most of the weight.

And check out this post. It's an old topic on this forum, but gives an impressive first light demo, including CCD inspector results of this Scope!

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/119760-skywatcher-quattro-10cf-first-light/

Edited by GuillermoBarrancos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi A G,

The weight of the carbon fibre Quattro appears to be 14.4kg with my 2 inch legs that will just be approaching the top end payload of 15kg. I am not sure if that's accurate for the Quattro though as I find it hard to find actual weight of scopes unboxed. I haven't found the weight of the 8 inch CF as of yet :).

However the RC is 9.8kg both kind of pushing the mount towards or a little over its limits.

I had hoped CF would be a lot lighter than metal and surprised at how heavy they are :)

Also the focusers appear to be bit better quality which helps a lot :)

What weight of scopes are acceptable before pushing them to the top end of the mounts limits without straining the mount? Ie if you have 15ks should you limit yourself to say 12kg?

Dave :)

Hi Dave,

Olly has pointed out the obvious shortcomings of these scopes as delivered, they both need quite a bit of work get the best out of them particularly the SW 250 Quattro, there are also some threads of folks  having difficulty sorting out the 8" 10" RC. The RC will probably require a mount such as the SW AZEQ6 as aminimum and that is probably true of the Quattro. It is not so much the weight of the scopes but the bulk and also as Olly mentioned even the Quattro will be at 1000mm of FL, this takes some guiding,RC is at nearly 1620mm without reduction so you need to do a bit of research before making a decision. 

Regards,

A.G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't comment on the RC scopes but do have three F4 imaging Newts (6, 8 & 12 inch). I'd tend to agree with Olly regarding making them work properly. Collimation itself is easy but making them hold collimation reliably in use is the challenge. A certain amount of mechanical fettling and modification might be required- so only buy one if you don't mind stripping it down and rebuilding it properly.

That said - optically the F4 Newts are more than acceptable (budget for a good coma corrector like the Baader MPCC III) and you could/should end up with fast, capable instrument.

If you're really nuts and have already nailed down any collimation/focus issues then the next phase is coma corrector/focal reducer. Now a 10" F2.9 scope really is fast!

Or- cut to the chase and buy a ready made one http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p5227_TS-Boren-Simon-10--f-2-8-PowerNewton-Astrograph.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a Quattro 10" steel on my NEQ6 and it handled very well. I've since replaced it with a TS10" carbon newt it would have been the quattro 10CF but they changed the focuser and that put me off. The TS came with Baader steeltrack as standard and I love it. Collimating of these newts is very easy once you get the hang of it and it holds collimation quite well. I've heard tales of woe about RC collimating mainly due to poor design of the mirror cells which gets worse on the bigger ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When talk of mount compatibility turns to a discussion of weight I'm always nervous because weight is no more than half the issue. A short OTA exerts a low moment against the mount, a long one exerts a high. Some mounts don't like long moments. The spring loaded drives of the iEQ45 are particularly bad at handling long moments. The EQ6 is particularly good.

And as I said earlier, longer focal length (or more accurately small numbers of arcseconds per pixel) require very accurate tracking and this tends to be the realm of the expensive mounts. People do get the NEQ6 to work at 2 metres but that wouldn't be plug and play in most cases. I have two NEQ sixes and I feel they are plain sailing up to about a metre. I don't ask them to do deep sky beyond that.

Wanting to do planetary and DS with one scope does complicate the problem! I don't do planetary imaging so can't comment. I might be looking at a C9.25 Edge with reducer if I thought I had a mount accurate enough.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Many thanks for the feedback it's much appreciated :).

It certainly isn't easy decision deciding on a potential upgrade or not, which is what I do like about a site like this :). It would be just as good to find a site with the scope weights too. Perhaps I am probably trying to explore to much at once. I am more than happy with the ioptron as it is a really great mount ;).

I should probably put this in a new thread but from what I have experienced from crayford focusers don't do scopes justice. Things like slipping not holding the wieght of the eps or camera.

So do you guys accept them they way they are or upgrade them at a later stage?

I have a sneaky suspicion that focusers are not a new issue.

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can upgrade the focuser on most scopes at a later date, but I would only bother if it is a real issue to you. In many cases the supplied focuser can be sorted out with a bit of tinkering- but some people prefer to replace them especially when working with heavy imaging gear.

Be aware also that even in the 'budget' end of imaging scopes focuser build quality differs somewhat. The standard GSO Crayford seems to be more stable than the Skywatcher variant. Indeed you can even buy these to upgrade your Skywatcher tube! http://www.telescopehouse.com/acatalog/info_SNT30_A.html

Skywatcher Quattro Crayford

en_telescope_caty01332282923.jpg

The massive 3" focuser featured on the GSO 12" F4

gsn2541f4_oaz.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dislike Crayfords for imaging in scopes with the camera at the bottom of the tube. The good ones work, my own minimum standard being the Baader Steeltrack. However, give me a rack and pinion any day. The cheap Crayfords thrown onto many of the budget scopes just don't work. Fixing them is OK but you only know you need to fix them when they start to slip and then your session is spoiled.

Focus is, along with guiding, the most critical part of capture. Once you have used good rack and pinions (which are expensive) you will see what the fuss is about and why people do pay out for them. Feathertoch are the best I've used, though Takahashi do a good job.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree-bad  Crayfords and refractors don't mix- especially when aiming at the zenith! I had dismantle the Crayford on my Equinox 120 and hone the acting surface properly flat to make it hold at high elevations - you shouldn't have to do that on a £1400 scope.

Crayfords work fine on Newtonians as the load is usually at right angles to the downward pull of gravity (assuming the tube is rotated to sensible position!). On a Newtonian scope all the Crayford has do is stay on the axis of it's collimated position with the imaging load attached. If the Crayford (or any other focuser for that matter) is a bit wobbly- then you have no chance. Here build quality is paramount.

The other factor which means Crayfords are less troublesome on Newtonians compared to refractors is that the focus travel is a lot less. Typically on a Newtonian you will be racked most of the way inwards to get focus- so the bending moment is less and you have more chance of staying orthogonal to the optical axis.

You can easily test your focuser- rack it fully out and firmly hold the tube mount end. If you can wobble the eyepiece end then it's not stable enough for imaging and needs adjustment or replacing. 

Edited by laser_jock99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evening all,

Sorry for the Delay in replying . Many apologies I got the payload of the Ioptron incorrect it's 27lb and can easily go beyond 32lb without any strain. So that is great news as it can handle both scopes easily.

I have to admit I was really disappointed with the Crayford on there refractor to say the least. But reassuring to know I wasn't alone on that issue :).

I have chosen my new scope and waiting for its shipment in a few weeks, so exciting:).

On a very light note on those bitterly cold nights what about this idea?

Many thanks

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evening all,

Sorry for the Delay in replying . Many apologies I got the payload of the Ioptron incorrect it's 27lb and can easily go beyond 32lb without any strain. So that is great news as it can handle both scopes easily.

I have to admit I was really disappointed with the Crayford on there refractor to say the least. But reassuring to know I wasn't alone on that issue :).

I have chosen my new scope and waiting for its shipment in a few weeks, so exciting:).

On a very light note on those bitterly cold nights what about this idea?

Many thanks

Dave :)

I like the idea.. I wonder how long the battery lasts?.. hmm could I hook my 22Ah Tracer up to it.. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi spa@ce_d,

I went For the 8" F8 RC DELUXE ASTROGRAPH CARBON FIBRE version in the end. Due the build qualify and over all finish of the product. Yes I know I have to tackle collimation but I enjoy things like that. It's still portable and not to heavy to carry about too.

Dave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi spa@ce_d,

I went For the 8" F8 RC DELUXE ASTROGRAPH CARBON FIBRE version in the end. Due the build qualify and over all finish of the product. Yes I know I have to tackle collimation but I enjoy things like that. It's still portable and not to heavy to carry about too.

Dave :)

Good luck with new scope- should arrive in time for Galaxy Season!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • 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.