Skywatcher Evostar 72ED help

[Simon Dunsmore]

Hi, 

I'm considering getting a Skywatcher Evostar 72ED for deep sky imaging. I'm new to astrophotography although I have been using a 200pds on an EQ5 for visual for some time. I plan to use the 72ED with my Canon 1000d. I've read loads of reviews on the scope and I'm a little confused. 

I'd really appreciate some help with the following:

1. Do I need to add a 2inch adapter to take my cannon? 

2. Will I be able achieve focus or do I need another adapter 

3.is there a dedicated or recommend field flatner for the 72ED and if so how will this effect the set up. 

In short, before I buy the scope I need to calculate what else I'll need to make it work 

Finally, with a budget of around £250 is there a good alternative. Ive considered the Skywatcher 102, but was concerned about chromatic aberration. 

Thanks for your help 

Kind regards 

Simon 

Edited August 11, 2019 by Simon Dunsmore
Error

[Limerick John]

Hi Simon

 

I was in the exact same situation about 10 years ago when I first got into astrophotography. I bought a WO Megrez 72mm from Ian King which looks very similar in specifactions to the Skywatcher 72ED. I needed to get an 2"extender to achieve focus with my Canon 450D. Ian recommended trying the Skywatcher non reducing field flattener. It is sold under a few different brands now and works with scopes form F5.5 to F6

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/ovl-field-flattener.html

It worked really well and also solved the extender problem so only one purchase required. I have had some decent results using this set up (see below). It is only half the price of a dedicated field flattener. Your Canon camera T adapter screws into the field flattener directly. I am looking to get a dedicated field flattener / reducer for my new Zenithstar 103 though as it is at F6.9

Stick with 72ED over the 102 achromat for astrophotography. You won't notice the aperture difference and your images will be much better

Megrez 72 with Skywatcher field flattener and Canon 450D in place on top of my CGE 11 combo.

[Anthonyexmouth]

I'd be more inclined to look for a used SW ED80, unless its a portable/travel setup you're looking for

[-Joe_]

1 hour ago, Simon Dunsmore said:

Hi, 

I'm considering getting a Skywatcher Evostar 72ED for deep sky imaging. I'm new to astrophotography although I have been using a 200pds on an EQ5 for visual for some time. I plan to use the 72ED with my Canon 1000d. I've read loads of reviews on the scope and I'm a little confused. 

I'd really appreciate some help with the following:

1. Do I need to add a 2inch adapter to take my cannon? 

2. Will I be able achieve focus or do I need another adapter 

3.is there a dedicated or recommend field flatner for the 72ED and if so how will this effect the set up. 

In short, before I buy the scope I need to calculate what else I'll need to make it work 

Finally, with a budget of around £250 is there a good alternative. Ive considered the Skywatcher 102, but was concerned about chromatic aberration. 

Thanks for your help 

Kind regards 

Simon 

I started on a 72ed a few months ago. To answer your questions:

1. Yes you will need some form of adapter - can’t advise the correct one as I used a cmos.

2. You will probably need some form of extension tube to allow the camera to sit far enough back that it can focus in the range of the focusser

3. There is a skywatcher reducer/flattener, and also the OVL flattener. The skywatcher fits directly. Both will then mean you have to put the camera sensor as specified distance (backfocus) from the flattener. This is 55mm for the skywatcher, not sure for the OVL. You use the various extension tubes to get the required distance.

I think for the OVL you might also need an adapter to convert the thread from the 72ed to whatever the the OVL is.

Flattener:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/ovl-field-flattener.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/skywatcher-85x-reducerflattener-for-evostar-72ed-pro.html

 

Hope this helps...

 

 

[Simon Dunsmore]

Hi Guys, 

Thank you for your advice. After reading other threads on her about the 102 I think I'll definitely steer clear of the scope for imaging. 

So, it looks like there is a bit more saving required. Any thoughts on a scope that is more or less good to go out of the box and falls within the same budget. I can't seem to find anything that comes close to this one. 

Can I ask one more question, if the 72ed is a good imaging scope, why does it require so much modification? Sorry, still trying to get my head around this imaging game 

Thanks again 

Simon 

[-Joe_]

I think pretty much any scope requires all this adding ... 

A minimum setup for you might be:

--

72ED

2" nosepiece 

Extension tube

Canon adapter

Camera

--

I don't actually know if you'd need an extension tube (I've read somewhere that the canon has 46mm from chip to front  - perhaps someone can confirm), but they are cheapish.. 

With a flattener it looks like:

--

72ED

x0.85 flattener

Canon adapter (looks like this is the correct size to get the 55mm backfocus - https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/skywatcher-dslr-m48-ring-adapter.html)

Camera

--

I've spent ages trying to work this all out over the last few months and hear what you are saying about why dont they just come with everything. I think there are just too many ways they can be used, and once you have one set you wont need it again for the next scope, and the one after that... 
 

Of course - i'm still new to this, so i may be wrong somewhere or everywhere... ;o)

 

[Simon Dunsmore]

Hey Joe, 

Thanks I really appreciate your help.  I'll let you know how I get on. 

Kind regards 

Simon 

[Danjc]

There is a  SWED 80 just popped up in the for sale section, within your budget !

 

[Simon Dunsmore]

Noooo... Missed it!

[6footgeek]

Hey Simon, I have a 72ed on my heq5.

I use the following combo. 72ed -> OVL field flattened and a canon t-ring adapter. Works great for me. Pic included!

my understanding is that you can swap the OVL for a 2 inch nosepiece to achieve focus but I wanted the flattener anyway so it was the logical choice for me 😊

[Simon Dunsmore]

Hi, 

Looks like a great set up. I was just wondering what visual observation was like through this. AP is definitely the way I want to head but also would like to use it for wide field with EP. 

Thanks 

Simon 

[6footgeek]

12 minutes ago, Simon Dunsmore said:

Hi, 

Looks like a great set up. I was just wondering what visual observation was like through this. AP is definitely the way I want to head but also would like to use it for wide field with EP. 

Thanks 

Simon 

Hmm you know I have never used it for visual - I have a 150p for that. You would (I assume, I’ve never had a refractor for visual) also need a diagonal for visual, but then I believe you wouldn’t require the 2 inch nosepiece for focus as you would have the EP.. but, all roads lead back to Rome and you would need all the other stuff for AP.

I think the main reasons that this scope is recommended for imaging is that at 72mm and 420mm it’s very forgiving, with a lovely wide field with a dslr. So it’s great to get started with. Another reason is that it’s a nice price point, and the 3rd reason being it’s a great scope to grab and go. I for instance keep mine fully built upstairs and just carry it down in its entirety when we get a clear night!

[Simon Dunsmore]

Sounds ideal. 

I have a SW200PDS which is a great scope but not so good for wide field + you need an arctic lorry to move it definitely not a grab and go.

This is why I was torn between ED72 and the ST120. Quality of optics over aperture??? Not much in the price £40.

Im thinking that if I get into the AP side of things and then can afford to upgrade my mount, the ED would make a great guide scope. 

I need to find a decent diagonal for it and I have my sight on a 32mm panaview wide angle EP to go with it??? £££££££

Thanks for your help 

[6footgeek]

The star travel 120? As far as I can see it’s not a doublet and doesn’t have the coatings on the glass of the 72ed. 

The 72ed comes with a lovely travel case. Additionally the st120 comes with eyepieces / diaganols. But the biggest difference beyond that is that the 72ed has a much better focuser on it.

 

that being said I think people do image with it, it just depends on what you want. I personally would go with the 72ed for the glass and focuser, but if you wanted to get rid of the 200pds and have a single rig, maybe the quality of glass could be lessened in favour of that setup.

 

if you had the money then you could just get the 120ed ds-Pro and get the best of both

[Simon Dunsmore]

Hi, 

So, I finally made a choice and ordered the ED72. I think it looks like a good investment for future AP. 

Im nt planning on buying the necessary adapters for AP (hopefully some heavy hints at Christmas will take care of that!) 

For now I'm looking for some suggestions on EPs I have about £100. Looking for wide field. It would be great if I could get two for that amount. I have a lovely explore scientific 26mm 68 degree so looking for something to compliment that. 

Thanks for your help 

Simon 

[stelaras1]

Hi Simon,

 

i'm exactly at the same position as you and more likely i will also get one

hope that you received and liked it!

[freiform]

Hi,

I have a Lacerta 72/432 and am using it with a canon 1000Da, but I must say that the camera irritates me more than it probably should. Sensitivity in live view makes me dread focusing, and imaging in moderate temperatures is just too noisy.

I don't want to capture the thread, so just ignore this if it's not appropriate, and I can open another thread. If it's ok, what would be a fitting cooled camera to go with such a scope?

I am considering a fast and sensitive mono cam. I would be satisfied w/o colour for a time and could gradually add filters and a wheel. Bug given my mediocre small town skies, and relatively small Vixen GP mount, I guess this could be a reasonable approach.i have been looking into the 1600, 183 Pro, or 174, but I really don't see the forrest because of the trees. Considering pixel size, all should be a match for my scope, for the 1600's sensors, I read about issues with micro lensing, altough I do not know if it would be an issue. So between the three above, it's about FOV, with the 183 more difficult to handle due to the small pixels?

In the end, if I pay a bit less without loosing too much performance, that would be fine with me.

Any ideas? I do not prefer ZWO, so other brands are also welcome. Given that they all share the same handful of sensors, I wonder what the differences are?

I am happy to start a new thread if this is not fitting here, but thought I might just as well try with the right people already here

 

Thank you

Sven

 

 

[Simon Dunsmore]

I'm interested in this too, so no problem 

[freiform]

Ah, I suppose I will open a seperate thread. Hiding here, the question probably will not get a lot attention

[6footgeek]

Hi @freiform sorry for late reply on this. I really can’t help with those questions. I’m stuck in limbo on this myself. Torn between the 183 and 1600 monos  for me I think the 183 makes more sense. But, really need to invest in reading more about them! Best of luck