Quark First Impressions - Joy and Dismay

[Luke]

That does look wobbly, Aaron. Whether it would affect the view, I have no idea. I am waiting to hear back from SCS Astro, though I did send them new photos last night and I think I got a better few shots today which I will also send to SCS Astro. I think I am photo'd out now and sick of looking at the filter, you folks probably are too

My Quark's filter I think is different to your one, it's more indents and possibly a few sharp folds. I haven't had any luck with showing the folds, but I think I got about as good a photo below as I am going to get of the main issues while we have overcast skies over the UK. The new gear curse is fully here!

The big thing for me is that without question the view is badly affected, whatever the exact cause of  the impaired view is. It clearly needs to be replaced or refunded.

The impaired view is so obvious, I think, to any half experienced solar observer that I am struggling to figure out how this made it past QC if Daystar did check it? I am using the very eyepieces they recommend (Tele Vue Plossls).

There is an obvious bright spot that should not be there (my best guess is this is caused by one of the dimples, but regardless of cause, it simply should not be there). This I can see easily straight off, but it sticks out like a sore thumb if you pan the view. There were at least two very bad fold or line-like darkenings in the view. I wonder if this is caused by possible little folds that I think may be around one of the dimples (though I have had no luck with photographing this) or perhaps it is from hairs/scratches that are definitely on the inside of the Quark.

There look to be at least four bits of hair/scratches/something inside the Quark.

I also had a kind of mottled shadow in a wide view, as I panned over the disc I could more clearly see this shadowy pattern moving over the disc. Maybe the messy mark is causing that one.

I would say try and have a good look through the Quark and pan slowly around. The defects with mine are obvious right off so I am puzzled why QA didn't pick up on this, but slow panning really exposes them.

I hope I can stay a Quark owner, I will have to see what Daystar says. I know I will be very disappointed if I do not have a Quark for my hols. I have done everything to be ready my side. I have bought a UV/IR cut, new scopes with the Quark partly in mind, Tele Vue Plossls, solar finders, 0.5 reducer, ...

The technology itself - wow!

[Joseki]

Thanks for taking the time to post those photos, it's very useful to have something to compare against (I guess Daystar aren't going to ).  I don't know if you've seen the thread on solar chat but there's someone else there having issues with a batch 3 Quark filter.

[Joves]

It is quite wobbly, Luke. And mine is also displaying the same mottled shadow across the view, particularly seen when slowly panning slowly across the suns disk. I'm thinking it must be due to the general warping of the filter. It's not an offensive mottling, but a little distracting when you know it is there. It is more obvious when tuned toward the blue and the image is at it's brightest.

On a much more positive note, aside from the obvious lack of QC in sending out filters in the state that yours and mine seem to be in (which isn't a minor issue, mind you... I can only assume Daystar must have been very keen to keep up with what was perhaps higher demand than first anticipated, so figured it important to keep up with production runs for high volumes of orders and overlooked some fairly sloppy quality) is that the general device and technology behind it is outstanding. The view I was seeing today blew my mind... And I was viewing the sun THROUGH CLOUD! The detail was quite amazing. Certainly a lot more prominent than in the PST. Spicules, plage, filaments, prominences... Yes, the proms are outstanding, even in the chromosphere version... all leapt out of the eyepiece in detail that I was hoping for, but didn't really expect to achieve. The disk had quite a distict "furry" look to it, much akin to what I have only ever seen in images, albeit obviously not in as much detail, which is something I wasn't even entirely sure was possible when viewing the sun visually. And, as I say, this was whilst viewing the sun through a not-so-thin layer of cloud. I cannot wait to try it again tomorrow under what are expected to be clear blue skies.

I must also add that viewing the sun in Ha through the TV76 is an absolute joy. The extra aperture/resolution over the PST is almost incomparable. I'm really looking forward to seeing what difference there is between this view and that which will be seen through 110mm... If it is a similar step up again, I just might fall off my chair.

As for the defects in the filter on mine again, whilst somewhat disappointing, I don't think it would prevent me from happily using this model if I'm unable to get it sorted. I take a little comfort in thinking of what the Quark is ultimately allowing me to achieve in "relatively inexpensive fashion"... When compared to a dedicated 80-120mm double stacked solar scope, that is! The Quark isn't cheap ($1000 is $1000) but I'm trying to keep things in context and reminding myself that Daystar have tried to provide a product to the market on the cheaper end of the price scale and have, I believe, really succeeded in doing so.

That said, I wouldn't be happy to simply live with your filter in the state it is in. Hope you get some good news advising that it will be replaced and that they will allow you to keep playing with your current one in the meantime.

Aaron

[Luke]

Great post, Aaron. I haven't even looked through my 100 and 120mm scopes with it yet, and I already think the Quark is a game changer. Right now, if you said to me double stacked SolarMax 60 or Quark, it's a no brainer for me with the compatible refractors I already have, having seen what the Quark can do.

That's just me, the SolarMax is going nowhere, I hope, it has other advantages. Like yesterday morning before work, it looked like I was clouded out. Then all of a sudden, a little opening. I was out with the single stack and imaged it before the Quark would have warmed up...

But that first view with the Quark and 85mm scope? I'll never forget it, even with the disappointing defects. Welcome to the Land of Gorgeous Spicules and what seemed to be, More Satisfying Proms      (a bit like throwing more aperture at galaxies in Leo). At a push, I would give up the quick convenient views. I am longing to see those spicules so clearly again

But I just have to see what Daystar says. It's not like I don't always rush out with my Solar Max 60, and I love full disc imaging, which the SM60 is great for

I have my fingers crossed. I really would love to have a Quark for my hols and to see many more people get into solar with Daystar's exciting new product.

[Joves]

Nice one, Luke.

The thing I found today, once initially heated, was that the wait between tunings really didn't bother me at all. I actually quite liked watching the image change subtly before my very eye after adjusting the knob. If the device was unusable during these getting on-band periods, it would be a completely different story, but the view is perfectly fine whilst it adjusts to the new setting. For some reason, I think some people are imagining the latter to be true and that you have to wait for the temperature to adjust before you can resume viewing, which isn't the case at all. The biggest challenge I faced was distinguishing between the indicator light being green and/or orange/green in the light of the sun.

Do I recall you saying you do have a battery pack for yours yet? The one I got works brilliantly and makes it so convenient, almost as if the device doesn't need to be powered at all. Plus, it slots nice and comfortably between the scope and the Telepod mount, so it's as though it isn't even there. Very happy with this little trooper!!

[Sarah]

As Luke has said, those brief views through the 85mm scope were impressive. I am still amazed at the sight I had of the spicules the other day. And I don't know whether it was even tuned at its optimum. I was more than happy with the surface details, filaments, and proms visible. The visual defects obviously need addressing, but hopefully this will be resolved. I just can't forget those spicules though and at the moment can only imagine what might be possible with even more aperture!

Sarah

[Luke]

Wohoo, SCS Astro has been on the case throughout, and I won't be left Quark-less     That's a relief. A BIG thanks to SCS Astro

Nice one, Luke.

The thing I found today, once initially heated, was that the wait between tunings really didn't bother me at all. I actually quite liked watching the image change subtly before my very eye after adjusting the knob. If the device was unusable during these getting on-band periods, it would be a completely different story, but the view is perfectly fine whilst it adjusts to the new setting. For some reason, I think some people are imagining the latter to be true and that you have to wait for the temperature to adjust before you can resume viewing, which isn't the case at all. The biggest challenge I faced was distinguishing between the indicator light being green and/or orange/green in the light of the sun.

Do I recall you saying you do have a battery pack for yours yet? The one I got works brilliantly and makes it so convenient, almost as if the device doesn't need to be powered at all. Plus, it slots nice and comfortably between the scope and the Telepod mount, so it's as though it isn't even there. Very happy with this little trooper!!

Good point, Aaron, on the warming up. I did indeed continue to enjoy the view while the Quark progressed to the next tuning, and going in one direction of tuning, I felt I could see the view getting worse, so I switched to the opposite direction. And the view I felt was pretty good over a few different settings.

I do indeed have a battery pack. Gosh, I have everything possible for the Quark, and I had already read the manual 10 times before it arrived A battery pack works well, it didn't really feel like much of a downside at all. There was actually a cloud passing over while I was waiting for it to warm up, and with my big scopes, I would tend to think they need a little while to adjust to the outside temp anyway. And I have a bit more setting up to do with the bigger scopes, e.g. get the tracking/goto going, hook in the video camera, get the focus point roughly there based on where it normally is to be found, line up the scope on the Sun using the solar finder, ...

Imaging-wise, I have only done a brief focus test, which came out better than I was expecting, with a usable image for me, but not one to judge the Quark by. The tuning was probably off, my focus may have been off, the seeing was poor, etc. I mainly just wanted to see if I could get focus with my 60mm scope and 0.5 reducer and if imaging was viable with my non-tracking mount. The answer is, yes So I intend to image on hols with the Quark

I am sure Daystar will sort out the issue and now I know I won't be Quark-less, I am very happy, that was my main worry

[Solar_observer]

Glad you got it sorted Luke,I don't even dare want to look through a quark just in case it blows away my lunt 50 ( I think from what I've read via all you quark users, that the views are outstanding)

I will be just happy to get my 50 :-)

[cyborg421]

Hi Luke,

I've just had a look at my filter. Mine is unblemished.

Which should be a reference point for you when dealing with SCS/Daystar.

Simon

[Joseki]

My Quark arrived on the same day as the Evostar 120.  It's almost entirely been overcast since then but the first views were very nice.  Proms, active regions, filaments and (I think) spicules all very clear - but this is my first Ha view (other than a glance through my neighbours Ha scope) so I can't make an expert assessment, nor did I try it in a smaller frac I have.  I've just ordered Jamey Jenkins' book "the sun and how to observe it" which will at least give me something to do while it rains.

[Luke]

Skem, 50mm sounds to me like a very interesting size for a solar scope. I imagine you will be thrilled with it! For imaging (if it works fine for that), I often can't get my 60mm up to full power. So I feel like a lot of the time, a 50mm would probably be getting similar captures for me. And as a grab and go, 50mm sounds nice and light and tiny, and I know I would find a 50mm solar scope fulfilling, as I have very much enjoyed some views in PST's.

One only? Then yes, Quark all day long for me, as I have some scopes already to use with it. In my 60mm scope it is treading on the toes of my SolarMax 60 more than I was expecting, as my little test shows I can do undriven imaging with it. That is getting the Sun in four tiles rather than one, but it is do-able. Thanks to the Quark we will now be able to take just one little compact scope on hols, to cover h-alpha, white light, regular astronomy, and who knows, maybe even birding.

I have been meaning to learn a little more about our feathered friends and I caught a bird the other day silhouetted against the Sun in a capture, sitting on a branch while I was waiting for the Sun to clear the tree. What  a lucky capture it was! I was focused on the Sun but refocused on the bird just in time. I could see the bird's fluff standing on end. I think it was thinking, the Sun is awesome!

[kerrylewis]

Hello Luke and everyone, I've been following this thread with interest. The QC issues aside, I've always wondered why some sort of specialist filter attached to an existing scope is not preferable to buying a complete new scope for solar only. Previously it has always seemed that the filter set ups we're too expensive and, talking to a Lunt chap at the London Astrofest, I understood that the high cost was due to to the size of the elements involved, which can be smaller in a purpose built solar scope. However, the Quark seems to have that sorted and, if they can crack the QC issue, they must be on to a winner. Certainly, if I can use my existing refractors then I would be interested.

[Moonshane]

it's an amazing bit of kit and I hope you get your qc issues sorted. I must confess to being a little surprised at the slightly 'heath robinson' appearance of the fixings. looks like washers and bolts holding on the various aspects??

[DrRobin]

Mrs DrRobin has just reminded me of another no:

No way Hosay.

Following Luke's advice I have just bought a WO Zenithstar 80mm from ABS and with a ASI120MM USB3.0 on it's way there is not any chance of any sun or planets for sometime to come. Mind it will help keep these new additions hidden, if you know what I mean.

Robin

[Luke]

Thanks, Shane. I am sure SCS Astro will look after me, I am so happy I won't have to be Quark-less (I had visions of things taking a while going to the US, being inspected, waiting for a new batch, being tested again, coming back again, and Summer ending!) and I am sure Daystar are a very reputable company. My Quark isn't right, but these things happen and I guess people like me were keen to get hold of them. I really do not want a refund, this is an amazing product as far as I am concerned, a game changer

The poor Quark. That is probably the least flattering angle I have been snapping of it! It's security allen bolts, that as far as I know have been added for this third batch. Maybe a few Quark users were taking things apart in the earlier run Quarks? Some of those solar folks do like to tinker :grin: I'm too clumsy for that stuff!

I think the worst bit visually is where the eyepiece/camera goes, so it would normally be out of view. My overall impression of the build and look of the Quark is positive. It feels solid and looks smart enough to me. Not quite Tele Vue build, but then, as much as I love Tele Vue, the price ain't Tele Vue either

it's an amazing bit of kit and I hope you get your qc issues sorted. I must confess to being a little surprised at the slightly 'heath robinson' appearance of the fixings. looks like washers and bolts holding on the various aspects??

[Luke]

Hi Kerry,

It makes sense to me too to use an existing scope! I already have some very nice refractors, all of them with good focusers. They give superb views in white light. I would really like to use them, and benefit from their decent focusers, for H-alpha too!

I have been thinking about a CaK solar scope too. Now, although there is a CaK "module" (that you use instead of a diagonal) that Lunt do that lets you use an existing refractor, my understanding is that it won't fit all refractors/focuser setups. So where do I end up going the dedicated scope route? Taking three scopes to work for solar lunch? One for white light, one for CaK, one for H-a? Three scopes on my holiday?

The last few days I have been taking my tiny Tele Vue 60 and Quark in to work, leaving the Solar Max at home. One scope instead of two, for white light and h-alpha, and now and again, Moon. The TV-60 is much more compact than the Solar Max 60.

I have been using a Herschel wedge for solar white light for a while. I think I have used my Lunt 1.25 wedge in five refractors. I like that flexibility to match the scope to the needs of the time.

What the Quark might lack in flexibility in terms of having a 4.3x integrated Barlow, it for me more than makes up by being flexible in which scope you can use it with.

All that said, I do like how quickly I can get my SM60 outside and up and running to view or image with. So I imagine I will be holding onto it, although there is a temptation to slightly downsize it to the Lunt 50, seeing as we now have the Quark with plenty of aperture options. A nice problem to think about!
 

[Joves]

Hello Luke and everyone, I've been following this thread with interest. The QC issues aside, I've always wondered why some sort of specialist filter attached to an existing scope is not preferable to buying a complete new scope for solar only. Previously it has always seemed that the filter set ups we're too expensive and, talking to a Lunt chap at the London Astrofest, I understood that the high cost was due to to the size of the elements involved, which can be smaller in a purpose built solar scope. However, the Quark seems to have that sorted and, if they can crack the QC issue, they must be on to a winner. Certainly, if I can use my existing refractors then I would be interested.

Looking at your current refractors, Kerry, absolutely you'd be able to use them. I reckon your Skywatcher ED100 would make an absolute cracking solar scope with a Quark! For what was, only a month ago, basically the price of a PST, you could effectively be looking through a solar setup with 3x the aperture (something that would have cost you about AU$6500 to replicate if you went down the double stacked Lunt 100mm route). Tempting you much??

I'm sure your Zenithstar 66 would be no slouch either.

Just a thought!

Aaron

[Pig]

Some excellent experiences so far with the Quark  Sorry to hear about the little defects on the filters and I am sure they will sort that out for everyone concerned.

I am yet to compare a Quark to my Lunt, However, from the descriptions of the views I have read so far they do not sound as if they will out perform my Lunt, so I will hold off for the foreseeable future.

Mind you as time goes by familiarity and experience will set in and this may change.

[Joves]

Let's see, Shaun. I'm planning on giving the Quark a go tomorrow in my Orion 110mm ED APO, so I look forward to hopefully coming back to inform it has blown your Lunt out of the water!!

Kidding, of course, but will certainly let you know how it has gone.

[Pig]

It will be great to find out Aaron  anything that takes the technology forward and helps lower the cost of Solar observing has to be a good thing.

Do you have a Lunt 60mm + to compare with the quark ?

[Joves]

Nope, I don't have anything to compare it to other than the PST, Shaun. Hence the confirmation that I was kidding about blowing a 60mm Lunt out of the water

I'm keen to see how the 110mm with Quark compares to the 76mm with Quark (which completely eats the PST... Without Quark ... alive).

I'dlove to be able to do a side by side comparison with a Lunt 60. I've been so close to buying one for quite awhile. I was even tempted to buy a 100mm Lunt and add the double stack internal module. Was going to be a ridiculously large investment though, considering my most amateurish enthusiasm for solar observing (and by observing, I mean it... I'm purely visual).

Come on Luke and Sarah... Where is your Lunt 60 vs Televue 60 + Quark shoot out?!?! You've had the thing for a whole couple of days now!!!

[Luke]

Come on Luke and Sarah... Where is your Lunt 60 vs Televue 60 + Quark shoot out?!?! You've had the thing for a whole couple of days now!!!

The Quark vs SolarMax 60 shootout is still on, especially now I know I won't be left Quark-less (Thanks again, SCS Astro!)

I've been clouded out yesterday and today.

Actually, that is not quite true. There was a slither of a gap this morning, so I rushed out with, not the Quark, but the SolarMax 60, to try and grab one minute at prime focus. The slither opened up a bit, and before I knew it, I had almost a complete h-alpha imaging session, and even 20 seconds at the eyepiece!

That kind of sums up why I want both a Quark and a regular h-alpha scope   Shaun is already half way there   I mean, I don't think he's got a very nice 80mm + scope, has he? :evil:

The TV85 and Quark was in a different league on spicules, that I do know! No direct comparison, but I am used to what spicules look like in the SM60, and they don't look like THAT!

[DrRobin]

Lunt 60 single stack, check.

Double stack, check.

Quark, check.

Battery fixed, check.

Everything ready for a side by side test. Oh hang on no sun, hasn't been any since I took delivery of the thing. Is there sun forecast for tomorrow afternoon, well yes there is actually? So who knows maybe Quark first proper light.

I can't really see me selling my Lunt 60 double stack anytime soon, it is such a good performer and the Quark will have to go some to improve on it for full disc or mosaics, but I am hoping to be able to forget about using barlows and use the Quark for close ups.

Robin

[Pig]

If I get to look through one and it is better I will get definitely buy one Luke   the sun is captivating as it is, if I could improve it without having to spend a small fortune I will definitely buy one for the Equinox.

I would still keep the dual set up of course  having the almost instant capability to switch between Ha and white suits me down to the ground.

I cant wait to find out Robin, all seems primed and ready to fire

[Luke]

I got a little bit of time to play with the Quark this morning, before heading out for the day. I did not have enough time to do the proper 60mm shootout between Quark and SolarMax, that will have to wait, but they did have a bit of handbags at dawn...

Due to lack of time, the Quark may not have been on the best tuning, but it was probably not far off.

ROUND 1 - SolarMax 60 Double Stack (DS) vs Tele Vue 60 + Quark

Contrast clearly better in the SolarMax DS, with the huge filament dominating the disc darker than with the Quark, and the Plage also pleasingly a bit brighter than in the Quark.

Spicules far better with the Quark. A clear 'halo' of spicules in the Quark, like a crown on the Sun King. Spicules barely there with the SM60 DS, it was more like spikey hair (still a nice feature).

Fine disc details: about even. I need to check this again at higher powers, but there was nothing I could see in one setup viewing at full disc that was not also visible in the other.

Proms: Slightly brighter in the SolarMax, level of detail similar, sharpness of proms at edge of view better with the Quark.

Other: Illumination more even in Quark, no obvious sweet spot with Quark. With the SM60, proms look better more central - they are still okay at the edge, but I tend to bring them in closer to the centre if I want a really good view.

The winner? Too close to call for me. It must be said, the Quark is doing very well considering it cost about a third of the price (ignoring the refractor, UV/IR cut and Plossls).

ROUND 2 - SolarMax 60 Single Stack (SS) vs Tele Vue 60 + Quark

Contrast: this is a toughie, I need more checks. If not focusing too much on anything, the contrast seemed similar to me. However, the Quark won on fine detail, which to me helped me focus better on it. Also, I need to check if the Quark is on the best tuning. I'll call this one a draw pending a rematch.

Spicules: The SM60 SS ran the Quark much closer than the double stack, but the Quark still won for me for nicer spicules.

Proms: Brighter in the SolarMax SS. However, again, Quark proms sharper near the edge of view. Of course, when you are viewing full disc, the proms are towards the edge of view. So prom sharpness to the edge was a very pleasing feature of the Quark.

Quark + ED120 First light

The moment I have been dreaming about for the past year - the Sun through large aperture, wohoo! I only had a few minutes before having to pack away. Two things struck me. One, I was seeing a rather small chunk of Sun with the 32mm Plossl. Two, I wish I had tried to image with the 120 and Quark, because the view was very steady   (I had earlier nabbed a few captures with the trusty SolarMax 60 SS, thinking best to grab something quick, there would not be time to play around with the tuning).

The extra aperture did not disappoint me. The spicules looked even better than in the 85mm scope the other day, but not mindbogglingly better. There was just so much detail to see everywhere you looked, but I had no time to compare to the view in the 60. One little detail did jump out at me in particular. There was a very small looping prom. I could see it so clearly and sharply defined. Little proms like these, I just don't see much of in the SM60, I really wish I could have directly checked this one. I will keep an eye out for this next time. The proms I found were not as bright as I was expecting. I suppose because of the image scale. They were bright enough, I just think that mentally, I was expecting very bright proms in the 120.