Powermate or Explore Scientific focal extender

[martindale]

Is there any justification in spending £202 on a Televue 5x Powermate when I can buy a Explore Scientific 5x Barlow / Focal Extender for £99 ?

They are both Four-lens Telecentric Barlows (I'm led to believe) and Explore Scientific seem to get pretty good reviews.

I plan to use it solely for planetary imaging.

Has anyone, any thoughts on either ?

[richyrich_one]

This might explain the difference.

https://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk/taxonomy/term/279/products

[jambouk]

5x by any manufacturer is really pushing things to beyond the max.

if you are potentially considering spendin £200 on a Powermate, why not just get a second hand scope which has a much longer native focal length than the one you are using? 

It would be worth spending 20 minutes doing a good online search for your scope and 5x and your camera and seeig what results others have achieved.

James

[Craney]

Hi Martin,

I have a 2x PM (2")  and the ES 5x (1.25").   I am not the most seasoned of observers / imagers but using both on an 8" SCT with a ZWO 120mc to image Jupiter then I find the PM gives the best results. ie. the easiest to focus and resolve.  I find the ES almost has too much power and the image I am trying to capture is just not steady enough or has the contrast and detail to get reliable captures.   I do not use filters in the light path which could help eliminate edge fuzziness, ..I think I  read somewhere.

But PM's are expensive. The fact that not many come up for sale probably suggests people like them.

 

Sean.

 

 

[martindale]

Thanks all for the info

James I'd love to buy yet another telescope but, I daren't.

I've decided to go for the ES, having read a few reviews, at half the price of a TV, it's got to be worth a go.

If I ever get that rare combination of time and a clear sky, I'll post some images.

 

 

[Craney]

Here you go Martin,  dug some pictures out from last week.   I have cropped them to be the same size.

The left one is the ES 5X.

The right one is the PM 2X.

More or less the same processing was applied. I think the ES one had less frames in the stack.  I'm not the best photographer, and both shots were taken through the branches of a tree !!   The PM was a brighter image and so will have had a greater frame rate. (fps)  in the capture.

 

[martindale]

Hi Craney, 

Thanks for the comparison, and as you say the PM does produce the better image.

If money was no object eh!!

I'll do more research before I commit.