scope comparison

[Rodd]

In case any one should be trying to decide on a new scope and question how images may appear from one to another--like I did and still do, I decided to post a comparison that I have by accident really--it was not planned.  But it surprised my.  The 2 scopes are a Takahashi TOA 130 and a C11EdgeHD--both operating around F7 (F7.7 for the TAK), and the C11 binned 2x2, so pixel scale virtually identical (1.11 for TAK and 1.14 for C11).  The images have been cropped to be the same FOV--which, naturally, was far bigger for the TOA--the single element of that scope that can't be beat by the C11 without resorting to a very large and expensive sensor.  Keep in mind that the subs for the C11 were 20 min while the subs for the TAK were 30 min.  The one thing that may or may not throw this comparison into the trash can is that the TAK subs were all collected during a bright Moon.

Image 1--TOA 130, image 2 C11Edge (over processed really--but I did this one over a year ago--I don't think it ruins the comparison).  Image 3 is a 50-50 combination of the two.  I know aperture rules, but TAK vs Celestron? premium APO  vs mass produced cass?  I do not know what my point is, or how this effects my thinking, other than I am even more unsure about what scope/camera system I really want in the end.  I think the combined image was upsampled to be bigger to better fill my computer screen--so full resolution may be a different scale.

[newbie alert]

All 3 are awesome..

 

[simmo39]

Wow x 3!

[Alien 13]

I prefer the Edge..

Alan

[Peter Drew]

I think the Edge "edged" it. Lovely images all three.   

[MarsG76]

Both Images are great.. but the combined one is definitely the winner.... using both to image seems like its the ideal for the best images???

Comparing the two I say that the SCT probably has the edge but the TAK has more nebulosity. I guess it depends on whether they were processed similarly, judging by the two, I think sharpening or unsharp mask might have been heavier on the SCT version.

 

[AKB]

I think that this is a hard comparison to make, given all the variables.

A lot of the difference could be put down to processing?  I took your first image (hope that's OK) and tweaked it a little with curves, local contrast enhancement, and a bit of de-saturation.

This seems much closer, but having said that, I do prefer your second image.

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, newbie alert said:

All 3 are awesome..

 

Thanks

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, simmo39 said:

Wow x 3!

Thanks simmo!

Rodd

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, Alien 13 said:

I prefer the Edge..

Alan

I think I do to--but not my processing.  I guess I have to shoot this one again!

Rodd

[Rodd]

5 hours ago, Peter Drew said:

I think the Edge "edged" it. Lovely images all three.   

By a length or two at least

Rodd

[Rodd]

4 hours ago, MarsG76 said:

Both Images are great.. but the combined one is definitely the winner.... using both to image seems like its the ideal for the best images???

Comparing the two I say that the SCT probably has the edge but the TAK has more nebulosity. I guess it depends on whether they were processed similarly, judging by the two, I think sharpening or unsharp mask might have been heavier on the SCT version.

 

Yes--too much sharpening and processing in general on the C11Edge--and those were only 20 minute subs too, so there's that.  I guess I was looking at this wrong--for a 5" scope to hold up against an 11" scope, I guess that is pretty good.

Rodd

[MarsG76]

1 minute ago, Rodd said:

Yes--too much sharpening and processing in general on the C11Edge--and those were only 20 minute subs too, so there's that.  I guess I was looking at this wrong--for a 5" scope to hold up against an 11" scope, I guess that is pretty good.

Rodd

Oh yeah, definitely good.

 

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, AKB said:

I think that this is a hard comparison to make, given all the variables.

A lot of the difference could be put down to processing?  I took your first image (hope that's OK) and tweaked it a little with curves, local contrast enhancement, and a bit of de-saturation.

This seems much closer, but having said that, I do prefer your second image.

It is much closer.  So--in the end, I guess it was all rather pointless.   I suppose if I do it again it should be with freshly processed data all around so teh processing is consistent.

Rodd

[AKB]

10 minutes ago, Rodd said:

So--in the end, I guess it was all rather pointless.  

...no, not at all.  I think your conclusion here is sound:

13 minutes ago, Rodd said:

for a 5" scope to hold up against an 11" scope, I guess that is pretty good.

 

[Rodd]

2 hours ago, AKB said:

...no, not at all.  I think your conclusion here is sound:

 

I suppose that is true. 

Rodd