Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_inspirational_skies_winners.thumb.jpg.94f78e21c195e385c5621d89ea0b51b9.jpg

FLO

Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED DS-Pro

Recommended Posts

We have good news for everyone waiting for a Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED DS-Pro 🙂 

They have arrived in the UK and will be with dealers "imminently". (Possibly even tomorrow or Friday). 

We have been assured we will receive enough to clear all existing backorders and there will be a small number remaining for new orders. 

 

sky-watcher_evostar_72ed_apo_1.jpg

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, got an email to confirm shipping....just after I got an email from Atik to say they had received my Horizon for repair! 😫😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have learned the Evostar 72ED’s 0.85x reducer is the 0.85x reducer for Evostar 80ED, with a thread adapter. They are the same. So if someone already owns the reducer for 80ED then they need only our FLO 2” nosepiece adapter to use it with the 72ED. 

HTH

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FLO said:

We have learned the Evostar 72ED’s 0.85x reducer is the 0.85x reducer for Evostar 80ED, with a thread adapter. They are the same. So if someone already owns the reducer for 80ED then they need only our FLO 2” nosepiece adapter to use it with the 72ED. 

If you have just received a 0.85x reducer for 72ED (purchased from FLO) and already own a reducer for 80ED, we will happily arrange a free collection and refund. 

HTH

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it wouldn't be the first time I had bought something twice! 😀 Thought it was odd it wasn't threaded specifically for the ED72! 😀  What's more worrying is I never even looked at the reducer and noticed that it was printed with ED80 on the side!! The adapter fits very well though and the whole thing fits nicely. Now you mention it the instructions in the box are for the ED80 as it shows the retention ring, etc on the drawtube which seemed off, but makes sense. Tried it out with my 2" nose-piece and that works well. Will see how it all fits up when I get the Horizon back from Atik. The nosepiece might actually be favourable if you need to adjust the position of the camera as, without a retention ring on the drawtube, the adapter will only screw up tight into one orientation. I want to use the adapter as it is more "robust" but will have to see if that works when the filter wheel/camera is all in place and whether I can orient them the way I want. 

Interesting then that the reducer/flattener doesn't have to be finely tuned to the scope? Does it have any affect on the distance from reducer to sensor or will that still be the standard 56mm (ish)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, FLO said:

We have learned the Evostar 72ED’s 0.85x reducer is the 0.85x reducer for Evostar 80ED, with a thread adapter. They are the same. So if someone already owns the reducer for 80ED then they need only our FLO 2” nosepiece adapter to use it with the 72ED. 

HTH

Thanks for confirming, Steve.  

Just one thing I'm worried about is the inward focus distance if using this with the nosepiece and thumbscrew fitting.  At the moment I achieve focus with 14mm between the metal back and the FR mating surface.  If the nosepiece collar is 3mm, say, and the connector is 12mm (this is the measured length) then I'm not sure this is going to work.  Below pic is mine last night in focus.  I'm happy to test this if it helps as I think it is going to be really close.

On the other hand I could have my sums wrong and be talking total rubbish, which wouldn't be the first time!

20180826_110250.thumb.jpg.abddfe40785e72801d26e9111dca6227.jpg

 

Edited by RayD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Marky1973 said:

Well, it wouldn't be the first time I had bought something twice! 😀 Thought it was odd it wasn't threaded specifically for the ED72! 😀  What's more worrying is I never even looked at the reducer and noticed that it was printed with ED80 on the side!! The adapter fits very well though and the whole thing fits nicely. Now you mention it the instructions in the box are for the ED80 as it shows the retention ring, etc on the drawtube which seemed off, but makes sense. Tried it out with my 2" nose-piece and that works well. Will see how it all fits up when I get the Horizon back from Atik. The nosepiece might actually be favourable if you need to adjust the position of the camera as, without a retention ring on the drawtube, the adapter will only screw up tight into one orientation. I want to use the adapter as it is more "robust" but will have to see if that works when the filter wheel/camera is all in place and whether I can orient them the way I want. 

Interesting then that the reducer/flattener doesn't have to be finely tuned to the scope? Does it have any affect on the distance from reducer to sensor or will that still be the standard 56mm (ish)?

Hi Mark.  I notice you mention you tried this with a nosepiece.  Did this achieve focus ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RayD said:

Hi Mark.  I notice you mention you tried this with a nosepiece.  Did this achieve focus ok?

Hi Ray

Not tried yet - I was just playing around when it turned up. Sadly (very very frustratingly) I damaged my Horizon just before the reducer arrived so I don't have the camera to test it out at the moment! 😀 I haven't tried it with a DSLR either....sorry! If we get some clear weather I can try it out, but not looking great at the moment! Very wet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marky1973 said:

Hi Ray

Not tried yet - I was just playing around when it turned up. Sadly (very very frustratingly) I damaged my Horizon just before the reducer arrived so I don't have the camera to test it out at the moment! 😀 I haven't tried it with a DSLR either....sorry! If we get some clear weather I can try it out, but not looking great at the moment! Very wet!

Ok no problem, thanks, Mark. Sorry to hear about the Horizon, hopefully nothing too serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do I. Trapped a cable and think the power socket now has a loose connection....fingers crossed it is that easy....only had it a couple of weeks so didn't want to try opening myself.....still beating myself up for being so stupid and careless....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Marky1973 said:

So do I. Trapped a cable and think the power socket now has a loose connection....fingers crossed it is that easy....only had it a couple of weeks so didn't want to try opening myself.....still beating myself up for being so stupid and careless....

Fingers crossed.  

Happens to us all I'm sure, Mark.  I hadn't even mounted my Mesu200 and it fell over (fortunately on a carpeted floor) and damaged a servo.  I had to drive it to Mesu in Holland and Lucas replaced the motor for me.  Expensive mistake that one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RayD said:

Fingers crossed.  

Happens to us all I'm sure, Mark.  I hadn't even mounted my Mesu200 and it fell over (fortunately on a carpeted floor) and damaged a servo.  I had to drive it to Mesu in Holland and Lucas replaced the motor for me.  Expensive mistake that one!

😮😮😮

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an ED72 since June, and with 1.25'' like the Baader Zoom when the set up is 20 or 24mm is not possible to achive focus. I have no other 1.25'' pieces as I keep my eyepieces to 3 ES 100º ones (20mm, 9mm and 5,5mm), with all off them being 2'' I achieve focus without problem, but as said when you increase the distance adding the 2'' to 1.25'' adapter from the diagonal in order to use 1.25'' pieces is not possible to get in focus at lower magnification.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Susaron said:

I have an ED72 since June, and with 1.25'' like the Baader Zoom when the set up is 20 or 24mm is not possible to achive focus. I have no other 1.25'' pieces as I keep my eyepieces to 3 ES 100º ones (20mm, 9mm and 5,5mm), with all off them being 2'' I achieve focus without problem, but as said when you increase the distance adding the 2'' to 1.25'' adapter from the diagonal in order to use 1.25'' pieces is not possible to get in focus at lower magnification.

Cheers.

That’s a shame. How short of infocus are you? Would getting a low profile 1.25” adaptor help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Susaron said:

I have an ED72 since June, and with 1.25'' like the Baader Zoom when the set up is 20 or 24mm is not possible to achive focus. I have no other 1.25'' pieces as I keep my eyepieces to 3 ES 100º ones (20mm, 9mm and 5,5mm), with all off them being 2'' I achieve focus without problem, but as said when you increase the distance adding the 2'' to 1.25'' adapter from the diagonal in order to use 1.25'' pieces is not possible to get in focus at lower magnification.

Cheers.

Yes I can see your problem if you are using 1 1/4" low power eyepieces.  All mine above 11mm are 2", but even at 11mm I only have around 4.6mm inward travel left with the adaptor in the diagonal.

I would say that SW probably intend for this to be use with 2" eyepieces, especially at low powers, and is why it is only supplied with a 2" thumbscrew adaptor on the draw tube (this is only an assumption).

It is all very close as you can see @Stu.  I believe there are some low profile diagonals out there, so perhaps placing the reducer in the draw tube adaptor and then a low profile 1 1/4" adaptor in that may do the trick?  I certainly welcome your thoughts.

20180827_115323.thumb.jpg.183f10ec11dcb04ebe6a0cf41e0ec0a7.jpg

Edited by RayD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still need to test the scope for photo, but it would be interesting to know if there will be any other focuser which could suit the ED72, in particular I am thinking on a low profile Moonlite, the 38mm drawtube one could be a solution to the lack of in-focus problem.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

All the SkyWatcher Panorama eyepieces reach focus with a SkyWatcher 2" diagonal. The 23mm 2" and the 15mm/7mm 1.25" with the 2"->1.25" adapter. The 1.25" eyepieces at the limit. But my SW 2"->1.25" adapter seems thinner than yours, Ray.

Anyway, I'm more interested about imaging with this scope and the "dedicated" flattener for 80ED disappoints me. The stars towards the edges don't look round, unfortunately. I used an M48 -> Canon EF adapter, screwed directly on the flattener.

I just came back from holiday yesterday and yesterday I received the flattener too. I will try to add a few more mm to the backfocus, but with the mono camera not soon. I don't have 48mm spacers/extenders to try this for the Canon DSLR.

This is a stack of 12x60s with a Canon 550D. Some darks, no flats, sorry, flattened in APP, STF in Pix. However, you can see the star shapes at the corners :(

 

M31-F357-12min-stretch.thumb.jpg.8acce840668ed0a39f988165c40940b3.jpg

M31-F357-12min-stretch-corners.thumb.jpg.0531e9ba9e3130f55adccf55f22b2d1c.jpg

Edited by moise212

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @moise212 very useful information. 

I think the spacing for the SW corrector is going to be different anyway as it is optimised for the 80ED meaning the 55mm is @ 600mm FL (f7.5).  With the 72 being 420mm FL (f5.8) I would have thought this will need some fettling, with the shorter FL needing more spacing (I think I'm right here but could equally be wrong and it needs less as my tiny brain finds it all very confusing).  The difference in spacing could be a fair bit.  As such I doubt very much that the standard 11mm T-ring is going to work perfectly with this corrector on the 72ED without additional spacing.

I am still waiting for some clear skies here to carry out any meaningful testing, but for me at the moment it seems the OVL FF works a little better, but it isn't a reducer.  However, at f5.8 I personally don't think the reducer element is essential as it is pretty quick anyway.

These are all just my thoughts and opinions of course, and I could be way off the mark and am happy to be corrected, but I am still actively trying to test and provide updated reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RayD said:

Thanks @moise212 very useful information. 

I think the spacing for the SW corrector is going to be different anyway as it is optimised for the 80ED meaning the 55mm is @ 600mm FL (f7.5).  With the 72 being 420mm FL (f5.8) I would have thought this will need some fettling, with the shorter FL needing more spacing (I think I'm right here but could equally be wrong and it needs less as my tiny brain finds it all very confusing).  The difference in spacing could be a fair bit.  As such I doubt very much that the standard 11mm T-ring is going to work perfectly with this corrector on the 72ED without additional spacing.

I am still waiting for some clear skies here to carry out any meaningful testing, but for me at the moment it seems the OVL FF works a little better, but it isn't a reducer.  However, at f5.8 I personally don't think the reducer element is essential as it is pretty quick anyway.

These are all just my thoughts and opinions of course, and I could be way off the mark and am happy to be corrected, but I am still actively trying to test and provide updated reviews.

I've the OVL flattener too, but I couldn't figure out the spacing yet for it. I added a few delring spacers on the M42 thread and some between the glass and the _something_ -> M42 adapter and it seems better. I will remove the spacers at some point and replace them with a 7.5mm M42 extender, but I'm not so excited about the 420mm FL. I really wanted the ~360mm FL.

The big issue is that I don't know the proper working distance of this combo, I don't know which length the M48 extender should be and I don't want to buy that many to sort out the spacing. Good thing is that I know somebody who might have a set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting to know. Will follow this with interest and start experimenting when I get my camera back....was hoping the 56mm would still apply....but should have known it wouldn't be that easy! 😀😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marky1973 said:

This is interesting to know. Will follow this with interest and start experimenting when I get my camera back....was hoping the 56mm would still apply....but should have known it wouldn't be that easy! 😀😀

Should be 55mm - 44mm + 11mm (the adapter). I hope you can shed some light with the Atik before I buy all the M48 extenders :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm increasingly disappointed by SkyWatcher lately with their strategy. The 150ED seems to have a lot of issues, the flattener for the 72ED was supposed to be a dedicated one and I waited since February to receive a flattener for actually an 80ED. Should I knew that by that time... Oh well, I hope at least we can figure out the spacing.

I wonder if @FLO has more priority to get an answer from SW about the correct distance for the 72ED + flattener.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, moise212 said:

Should be 55mm - 44mm + 11mm (the adapter). I hope you can shed some light with the Atik before I buy all the M48 extenders :D

Well, I got an E for A-Level maths so don't hold your breath! 😀😀😀

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, moise212 said:

I'm increasingly disappointed by SkyWatcher lately with their strategy. The 150ED seems to have a lot of issues, the flattener for the 72ED was supposed to be a dedicated one and I waited since February to receive a flattener for actually an 80ED. Should I knew that by that time... Oh well, I hope at least we can figure out the spacing.

I wonder if @FLO has more priority to get an answer from SW about the correct distance for the 72ED + flattener.

I have a feeling they were in the dark with this as much as we were, and were also expecting a dedicated corrector.  I'm sure they are trying to find out as much as possible, and also keeping an eye on our testing as it is all a bit of an unknown at the minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.