So I bought a Quark...

[BGazing]

I pulled a trigger on a Quark after reading a ton of positive and negative reviews. I already own two telescopes and could not sneak another past my family members unnoticed, and the idea of travelling light with essentially two scopes was appealing.  A pleasant surprise was that I did not have to buy a UV/IR cut filter, Neodymium took care of that.

Quark proved quite addictive, even though the Sun is fairly quiet now. I had several days with fair mornings and used them to the max (seeing in the city is pants in the afternoon), clocked easily 10+ hours over the course of four days already.

The first light coincided with testing of AzGTI. On UNI 18 it carries Tak 100 DF without problems, though fine focusing induces vibrations which die relatively quickly. Tracking is essential with Quark in Tak because the magnifications are large and FOV small.

Eyepieces used 40mm Celestron plossl, 32mm Baader plossl and 25mm Vixen NPL. Neodymium as ERF filter.

Did not take long to warm up, but I was probably somewhat overwhelmed by the novelty of both Quark and AZGti. Used Berlebach tripod for better stability. 

Quark brings focal ratios to f/24 for Borg and f/31 for Tak, and when viewing I thought that keeping it to 1mm exit pupil was the best for viewing, so NPL in Borg and Baader in Tak. That might change if i stop down Borg to up the f/level as I plan to. I have tried 40mm Plossl but I gain nothing, although it brings Tak magnification down to 77x. Perhaps a NPL 40 would be more comfortable, I doubt it. I will try stepping down Borg to 62 to see whether a longer focal ratio may improve contrast, but honestly I have not played with the Quark/Borg combo that much yet.

I was fiddling with the tuning, a lot. Not sure whether it is also f/dependent so one has to have two settings for two scopes. Daystar says that tuning is to offset focuser slop, but I am not entirely convinced. Tak and FTF focusers are not that shabby. Initial impressions were that the zero point is not bad, but-3 probably better. After four days of use I changed my mind and now -4 or perhaps -5 feel better in Tak, have not used Borg after the initial testing. Perhaps someone has some clever pointers how to estimate the best setting because between changing seeing and thermals it is fairly hard to be sure what is 'right'. I do not have camera so cannot resort to that (and heavy camera may indeed induce a slop not present when doing visual).

During one session I have not unscrewed the 2inch barrel so the 1.25 nose was not flush in my BBHS 1.25 clamp. That small tilt induced picture error and since then the 2 inch nose is removed.

I can see some contrast non-uniformity, but so far nothing dramatic.

I have mostly viewed in Tak and the close-ups of the proms (no other activity) are amazing. Eruptive prominences, QRFs, you name it, even those ring-like. Spiculae...and all of it changing relatively quickly. Eruptive prominence basically disappeared while my wife and I were viewing it. Wife was actually so impressed that she came to the idea to bring the scope to some charity event and raise money for the charity cause by offering view at the prominences. It was a complete hit, people were amazed (literally no one has ever peeked through a scope before, let alone H-alpha) and we raised a tidy sum. 

Other bits...solar observing hood (R-Sky, I think they are still on sale) proved to be invaluable and Baader plossl side-eyeguard is perfect for solar. I also like NPL quite a bit, nifty and light.

All in all this has proved to be a very very interesting inquisition. I am travelling light this summer (Borg only) and am hoping that Quark will diversify my viewing time and make me (at least a bit) more sociable in the evenings. Bring on some active regions!

 

Edited April 21, 2019 by BGazing

[BGazing]

Two of the  obligatory shots with a handheld phone. As always, they do not do justice.

[xtreemchaos]

there very respectable shots with a phone well done and welcome to the quarkers club leave all sanity at the door ? . charl. 

[Stu]

Quarks are excellent devices if you get a good and reliable one. I had good experiences with mine, hope you have similar. Nice pics. I know how far off the actual view they are, so the views must have been excellent!

[Paz]

1 hour ago, BGazing said:

I pulled a trigger on a Quark after reading a ton of positive and negative reviews. I already own two telescopes and could not sneak another past my family members unnoticed...

I think we all know exactly what you are talking about here, a quark is much more discreet than another scope! They ought to push this in the marketing.

[Sunshine]

You guys are gonna get me in some hell with my wife, after spending a tidy sum on my Starmaster dob and a Star Adventurer months later, you guys are tempting me by waving a Quark under my nose with reports like this lol. This hobby is insatiable....please help me!.

Edited April 21, 2019 by Sunshine

[BGazing]

15 hours ago, Sunshine said:

You guys are gonna get me in some hell with my wife, after spending a tidy sum on my Starmaster dob and a Star Adventurer months later, you guys are tempting me by waving a Quark under my nose with reports like this lol. This hobby is insatiable....please help me!.

Well I can help by telling you that, when it comes to astro views, my wife was so far impressed by three things only -  Moon, Saturn and proms in Quark. So chances are yours will like an occasional peek, too. Truth be told my wife never ever asks how much my toys cost...and I never ask how much her purses and shoes cost. Mutually assured financial destruction of sorts. 

Edited April 22, 2019 by BGazing

[Sunshine]

8 minutes ago, BGazing said:

Mutually assured financial destruction of sorts.

This had me in stitches, brilliant!

[BGazing]

Holidays in Italy, mostly cities, but a short country stopover in Piedmont and I got to use it, some great views. Back home it's raining non stop, just in time for the new Moon 

[BGazing]

One year on. Unfortunately this time no pretty pics to post from rolling Italian hills, as we are under some sort of quarantine for almost two months.

One year is a fair bit of time to asses performance of an astro purchase. In sum, Quark has delivered. I reckon it is my most used bit of kit overall, during warmer months I am clocking easily 10 hours per month of Ha, mostly with my Tak, but occasionally also with Borg (those days when you know seeing will be torrid but there are big proms on NSO).

It took some time to figure out the kinks, find the best setting (-5 and -4 CCW look the best), establish the 'protocol' (start with 32mm plossl and go up or down if the seeing permits). There was a smudge on the Etalon bit when it was delivered, cleaned with Baader fluid and suddenly there was no mushiness in part of the view. 

I usually observe in the mornings from the balcony and the time it takes Quark to warm up is perfect for getting my tea.

There is some contrast non-uniformity. When panning over you can see 'bars' of mica (darker and brighter) over the surface, but it disappears when you stop. Other than that, there are no visible 'sweet spots' once that greasy smudge was cleaned (looked like someone's fingerprint to be honest. I cannot see Doppler effect by going CW.

Neodymium worked the whole time as my UV IR cut filter, Quark never drifted off band during observation.

In sum, warmly recommended to those who want to get into Ha-alpha and do not have storage space or money for a dedicated scope, but do have a refractor already.

Next stop, trying it with the binoviewers.

A recent shot made (again) with my phone (April 16).

 

 

[nfotis]

I am tempted by the Quark, because here in Athens the light pollution is really bad.

Adding a 400mm refractor should be a good combination with it for full solar disk images (with the 4.2x Barlow embedded).

N.F.

 

 

[Anne S]

My husband bought us a quark plus Altair Ascent 80mm f7 refractor about 6 weeks ago. It's been giving us excellent views  of the recent solar activity. I took the images below with a Hypercam 174m cmos camera. It's certainty the best ting for solar at present given that any activity is on the small side. My Lunt50 just can't compete.

[Freddie]

8 hours ago, nfotis said:

I am tempted by the Quark, because here in Athens the light pollution is really bad.

Adding a 400mm refractor should be a good combination with it for full solar disk images (with the 4.2x Barlow embedded).

N.F.

 

 

I don’t think light pollution will be an issue with solar imaging !!!!!!

[SpaceForce]

Wow... very good pics. 😮 Amazing.

[nfotis]

9 minutes ago, Freddie said:

I don’t think light pollution will be an issue with solar imaging !!!!!!

 

I guess so. And usually the Sun is visible most days here.

I just have to go in stages, first a small Mak, then a mount, then learn the ropes of camera shooting with the Mak and an dSLR, then a dedicated camera, then a 400mm refractor, then the Quark (the pain of my credit card will be less intense...)

 

Cheers,

N.F.

 

[Alma]

The problems with Quarks appear to be a lack of consistency in QC.  Mine (the chromosphere version bought new from a reputable UK dealer) was a dud and pretty much unusable.  Sent it back under warranty and now it seems to be languishing in a long, protracted claim system.   
Eventually replaced it with a Lunt LS50 Tha  which I’m very happy with.  
 

[BGazing]

Fantastic prominence this morning...phone shot does not do it justice.