60mm vs 127mm solar white light

[Rustysplit]

Quick question, which I hope I already know the answer to.

If I go up to a 127mm "frac for white light solar observing, will I get an appreciable higher level of detail than the 60mm I currently use. The 60mm is 910 focal length, the 127 would be 1200mm.

Just trying to ascertain if the expense will be justified or not.

[Merlin66]

Alan,

when you get up to around the 100mm/ 120mm aperture, the general seeing conditions during the day tend to be the limitation.

>100mm will start to show the surface granulations etc.

[Luke]

I use a Herschel wedge and when conditions are decent then I can get more detail closer in with my 120mm than with my pretty sharp 66mm. Under good conditions the level of detail with the 120 blows my mind. I think a tough choice would be whether to get a slightly more portable 100mm or a 120mm+ scope that might edge it on good days. For visual I'd be a bit torn, for imaging I'd take the 120. I find my 120 a fair bit more cumbersome to take out than my 100, so for visual the 100 often goes out for the shorter sessions. Hope the thoughts help.

[Rustysplit]

Cheers Merlin66,

Will it be a noticeable step up from the 60mm? I can JUST start to see abit of edge granulation and bright areas on the limb with it.

[Rustysplit]

Thanks Luke.

I need to decide in the next few minutes.........

[Luke]

Just me, but for visual I'd probably take my F9 100mm over my F7.5 120. The extra weight of the 120 all in all is not worth carrying out every time for me for sometimes beating a 100. That's just me, I am much more into convenience now over best view than I used to be. I am about to get an 85mm frac that I will probably use a lot for planets, it won't give the best views, but I think I will use it tons! Some people wouldn't bother with an 85. Sorry, probably not much help!

Edit: and I would take the 100 over my 66, the improvement to me is worth it often enough for the extra size and weight.

[Rustysplit]

All good points Luke, thanks. The 120 is f9.8 @ 1200fl, so hoping for a decent image size. I know what you mean about convenience though, my old Prinz is just so easy to grab and chuck out. But I feel the need for more detail than the old girl can deliver. I think my mind is made up.

[Stu]

I use my 76mm most often with the Herschel wedge. Granulation is there, though needs good seeing. I just find it far more convenient than taking the 106 out which needs a heavier mount and takes longer to setup.

I wonder whether something in the 90 to 100mm range may be better?

Stu

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luke]

I'd been using an 80mm (Celestron Onyx) as my grab and go white lighter, and was a bit shocked when I realised that my 66mm Revelation gave a better view! It's that bit sharper. And it's lighter and smaller, so I feel a bit of a fool for not trying it earlier, all that carting the 80 with me everywhere! D'oh!

[Rustysplit]

Ah bother! I missed out on the set up I was after. You may well be right Stu, 100mm could be a good compromise. I probably will keep the Prinz Luke, it is such a nice old thing, I will find it hard to let it go.

[jetstream]

My 90mm Stellarvue turned out to be excellent for white light,granulation no problem as well as faculae and plage.i'm thinking of a bigger refractor,but I'm kind of scared to get rid of this one because its working so well on solar.

[Stu]

My 90mm Stellarvue turned out to be excellent for white light,granulation no problem as well as faculae and plage.i'm thinking of a bigger refractor,but I'm kind of scared to get rid of this one because its working so well on solar.

I don't think bigger is necessarily better Gerry. I reckon your 90mm might just be an excellent compromise to make the most of the seeing conditions. My 76 is very nearly as good as the 106.

Stu

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rustysplit]

This is all good stuff chaps. Just the sort of feedback I am after. Don't feel so bad missing out on the 127mm now.

[Steve Ward]

100mm seems to be the sweetspot for me , the Tal 100RS just does it so well for both visual and imaging ... 

[Rustysplit]

Thanks Steve. You said as much in my other thread. TBH. a Tal and az4 or eq3 will work out cheaper and more mobile. I guess I knew the 127mm was a case of want over need, or I would have hit the button in time.

That really is the great thing about this forum, shared experience. You can't put a price on it

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I most often use my 80mm APM triplet for white light. Granulation and faculae are picked up readily. I have used my C8 in the past but it does not show any more detail I find.

[Rustysplit]

Thanks Michael, the evidence against too large an aperture is stacking up. That is good as it will be easier/cheaper to mount.

[Moonshane]

I mainly use my 6" f11 dob for solar and sometimes my 6" f5. there's a noticeable difference between these scopes in depth of field for some reason with the 6" f11 giving a more stable view. occasionally I forget that I have left in (the 6" f11) my 60mm aperture mask (made it for fun - 60mm f27!!) and in all honesty, the main differences are that eye placement is a lot more difficult and there's a noticeable decrease in brightness. the actual detail visible is not much less with 60mm although there is a slight difference of course.

[Rustysplit]

Cheers Shane, that is very interesting. I would have expected a noticeable difference Shows what I know

[Moonshane]

^{to be fair I didn't do a detailed comparison as after I realised that it was the reason for the dim views and difficult eye placement I took it out. Next time out, I'll have a proper check and report back. There was not a massive difference though.}

[Rustysplit]

Just had another go with the Prinz 550. Not at all bad. I could see very good detail in the sunspots, and a hint of the granulation around the edges. But the overall image was really nice, filling the ep with an 18mm Radian,50x. Here she is in her Solar guise....

[John]

I don't do much solar viewing but I was motivated to get my Vixen ED102 out and do some white light viewing with my Kendrick solar filter today. The scope rides on an AZ-4 mount.

The Baader zoom gave me 28x - 83x which seemed a very useful range and I was very pleased to see so much activity on the Sun. Lots of sunspots both large and small and the larger ones showing intricate structure and quite extensive pre-numbra. There was a complex web of bright faculae (hope thats the right term !) interweaving between one group of sunspots. I could just see the granulation effect on the visible surface as well.

Very nice indeed - I must do it more often 

102mm seems to show plenty of detail to my solar-inexperienced eyes.

[Rustysplit]

Ah, sounds like you could see a bit more than me John. I could not see the faculae clearly. Only in a very small patch right near the limb. Perhaps I should keep an eye out for a used 100ed then?

[John]

I guess the additional aperture must make a difference Alan although I'm no expert at solar viewing. The filter will fit the ED120 so I might pop that out and see if more detail is available. Here is my little Vixen in white light solar mode:

[Stu]

Just had another go with the Prinz 550. Not at all bad. I could see very good detail in the sunspots, and a hint of the granulation around the edges. But the overall image was really nice, filling the ep with an 18mm Radian,50x. Here she is in her Solar guise....

Lovely looking setup Alan, bet that is nice to use.

I haven't had a session on the sun for a little while so am struggling to remember the detail visible in each scope.

With the 76, I think faculae are quite clear towards the limb, and the granulation vines and goes with seeing conditions.

To be honest, from memory the 106 is not dramatically different, but in better seeing I am sure it would deliver more detail. I don't recall ever seeing faculae in the centre of the disk, I think you need the contrast of the limb darkening to show this up but perhaps it is my seeing conditions locally with all the Heathrow 'traffic' overhead...?

Cheers,

Stu

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk