PST 40 or Lunt 50, Help !!

[Pig]

Yes I saw that but I still think it is a little woolly and would not risk it for such a small outlay ? using the filter certainly does not affect the views.

Edited January 27, 2018 by Pig

[Alan White]

Paul, you may find FLO have a 1.25” filter of this type in the offers section at present, clearly at a reduced cost.

 

[LukeSkywatcher]

6 hours ago, Alan White said:

Paul, you may find FLO have a 1.25” filter of this type in the offers section at present, clearly at a reduced cost.

I've read the document about using one or not and I don't think I need one. No harm checking it out

Edited January 27, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[LukeSkywatcher]

I did a Google search asking if I needed to use a UVIR filter and was led to Teleskop Express in Germany. They talk about all the parts of the Quark and have a diagram showing UVIR filter in place. 

I got nervous about using one or not and aired on the side of caution. I bought the one in FLOs offers section. 

[Merlin66]

OK.

The UV-IR has no affect on the amount or intensity of the Ha transmitted through the Quark. 

It just reduces the energy loading on the Quark itself.

 

[Pig]

I think that is a wise choice Paul, if you feel the heat coming out of the rear of the scope without any attachments fitted it is quite surprising, even after a few seconds. I know a lot of diagonal mirrors are bonded to thier substraights and I do not see any point in subjecting them to any extremities if a form of protection is available ? a bit of a no brainier to be honest ?

Edited January 28, 2018 by Pig

[LukeSkywatcher]

15 hours ago, Pig said:

I think that is a wise choice Paul, if you feel the heat coming out of the rear of the scope without any attachments fitted it is quite surprising, even after a few seconds. I know a lot of diagonal mirrors are bonded to thier substraights and I do not see any point in subjecting them to any extremities if a form of protection is available ? a bit of a no brainier to be honest ?

My understanding (from what ive read online and here) is that most of the energy/heat when using a Quark is reflected back out the front of the telescope. With a Hershel wedge, it dumped out the back of the wedge. Ive touched my wedge after a couple of hours of use and there is next to no heat build up. 

I probably dont need the UVIR, but i'll never know because im not gonna use the Quark without it.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Here's the diagram from Telescope Express in Germany. Whilst it does explain each individual part and workings of the Quark, its non-specific about about refractor size (when to use a UVIR or not).

Reading the article posted earlier from the Daystar website, about refractor size etc.......it does leave you wondering. Its not quite clear about it.

Better safe than sorry.

Im now starting to wonder if my little 70mm refrac and Horizon 8115 tripod can handle the weight of an 8-24mm Hyperion zoom and a Quark. How much does the Quark weigh?. 

 

Edited January 28, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[Pig]

Paul here is mine in a 66mm

 

 

[Stu]

... and in a 60mm  

I can't find a weight for it anywhere, but they are not that heavy.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Thanks guys. Im sure my rig can handle it. If not, i will just swap out the 8-24mm for fixed FL EP's to get the best views.

Haha!!!!!!!!!

Dare i even introduce my 450D to the equation to image.

Edited January 29, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[LukeSkywatcher]

Well, my Quark finally made it home. Its bigger and heavier than I expected. I am not 100% happy with how it locks into my diagonal or how the zoom Ep locks into the Quark. The locking screws don't engage as much as I'd like and the diagonal can easily rotate. I probably have too much weight on the diagonal.  I'll have to use fixed length EPs to take some of the load off of the diagonal and/or maybe try a different diagonal. I wouldn't want the Quark to hit the ground. 

Edited January 30, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[LukeSkywatcher]

I've just read the lovely glossy catalogue that came with Quark. It clearly says that scopes of 80mm or less do not need a ERF filter as they have insufficient thermal load. My UVIR will be here on Thursday. I'll think about what to do with it. 

The catalogue also says that zoom Eps are not really to be used. That's a load off my mind and the diagonal. 

Edited January 30, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[Pig]

Paul the lower power the eyepiece the better I find, anywhere between 32 & 40mm. The eyepiece field stop doesn’t make too much difference ?

Edited January 30, 2018 by Pig

[LukeSkywatcher]

It's not that zooms can't be used. They just don't give the best views. There's a few more on the list. TVs are recommended as the best to use. I wonder why. Plossls of any brand are also fine

[Pig]

Paul it’s finding a zoom that is low power enough..... remember the Quark has a 4.2x Barlow built into it !! 

[LukeSkywatcher]

I've plenty of Eps to choose from. 

[Macavity]

11 hours ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

Well, my Quark finally made it home. Its bigger and heavier than I expected. I am not 100% happy with how it locks into my diagonal or how the zoom Ep locks into the Quark. The locking screws don't engage as much as I'd like and the diagonal can easily rotate. I probably have too much weight on the diagonal.  I'll have to use fixed length EPs to take some of the load off of the diagonal and/or maybe try a different diagonal. I wouldn't want the Quark to hit the ground. 

Is it not possible to place a Quark *inline* with the telescope
(perhaps after added extension tubes) and then introduce the
diagonal / eyepiece after it [the Quark]? Looking at a weighty 
(and expensive!) optical "edifice" at right angles to the scope
reminds me of past experiences of things hitting the deck...

In fact, rather like this...

Image of Sky Scout "dedicated Solar scope" (incorporating Quark)!

P.S. See also: 
http://astronomynow.com/reviews/daystar_quark/tablet/index.html
for a discussion of the possibilities...

Edited January 31, 2018 by Macavity

[LukeSkywatcher]

7 hours ago, Macavity said:

Is it not possible to place a Quark *inline* with the telescope
(perhaps after added extension tubes) and then introduce the
diagonal / eyepiece after it [the Quark]? Looking at a weighty 
(and expensive!) optical "edifice" at right angles to the scope
reminds me of past experiences of things hitting the deck...

In fact, rather like this...

Image of Sky Scout "dedicated Solar scope" (incorporating Quark)!

P.S. See also: 
http://astronomynow.com/reviews/daystar_quark/tablet/index.html
for a discussion of the possibilities...

Interesting thought and I'm sure it would all connect up but optically I'm not so sure about the mechanics of it. 

[Macavity]

1 hour ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

Interesting thought and I'm sure it would all connect up but optically I'm not so sure about the mechanics of it. 

To a first approximation, once you have a working setup optically (visually),
take a steel ruler or tape and measure the *optical path* as best you can.
It's never easy to "get the right adapters" (at first go?) but it is possible...

[LukeSkywatcher]

5 hours ago, Macavity said:

To a first approximation, once you have a working setup optically (visually),
take a steel ruler or tape and measure the *optical path* as best you can.
It's never easy to "get the right adapters" (at first go?) but it is possible...

I was thinking along those lines (focal point of light etc) as being the only possible reason why it may not work. Also, the Quark has an integrated 4.3x barlow. If the barlow is situated before the diagonal, im pretty sure the whole image wouldnt sit on the diagonal mirror and then in the EP?. Im not sure if the Quark scope above has the same 4.3x barlow. I saw it in the catalogue but didnt read the specs.

My UVIR filter arrived today. I had to laugh when i opened it. The description on FLO said something like: "Returned item. Had a rattle. Rattle fixed and filter is as new. Box is a bit tatty".

The box is perfect. The only thing different about it from a brand new one is that the previous owner had cut along the sticker with a very sharp razor, to open the box. In other words, it was sold at a reduced price because it had been opened.........very carefully.

No rattle either.  

Edited January 31, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[LukeSkywatcher]

I've sorted out the issue i was having with the diagonal rotating in the scope draw tube. Apart from removing the 8-24mm Hyperion zoom EP and replacing it with a 30mm fixed focal length Vixen NPL EP, to reduce weight...........i have also replaced the diagonal i initially tried (it came with my £2K 8se) and replaced it with the diagonal that came with the (£100) 70mm Travelscope. 

Everything is now locked down and ship shape. I havent even switched the Quark on yet lor looked through it. I wanted to get everything locked down and safe. I do want to stat imaging, so my next move will be to add my 450D to the Quark (replacing the EP), and see how it handles the weight. Its surprising how light a camera body is without a camera lens attached. I have the T ring and nose piece for the 450D.........just never used them. 

[Macavity]

1 hour ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

I was thinking along those lines (focal point of light etc) as being the only possible reason why it may not work. Also, the Quark has an integrated 4.3x barlow. If the barlow is situated before the diagonal, im pretty sure the whole image wouldnt sit on the diagonal mirror and then in the EP?. Im not sure if the Quark scope above has the same 4.3x barlow. 

And, of course, it's also "telecentric" too?  But came across this image:

The back-focus of a Canon lens is about 40mm (IIRC!) so maybe it is
a better clue than an "unknown" telescope? "I'm out" as they say on
Dragon's Den. lol. But I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Macavity

[LukeSkywatcher]

1 hour ago, Macavity said:

And, of course, it's also "telecentric" too?  But came across this image:

The back-focus of a Canon lens is about 40mm (IIRC!) so maybe it is
a better clue than an "unknown" telescope? "I'm out" as they say on
Dragon's Den. lol. But I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Thats even more clearer proof that the Quark can be situated before the diagonal. Ive solved my issue, but still interesting.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Quick question about the Quark:

When using it, if the image isnt as good as can be, you have to turn the knob left or right to get it up "to band". How long does this take to get up to heat?.