Unistellar eVscope

[PeterW]

It seems that crowdfunding campaigns need to mega hype themselves to get the visibility and hence the numbers to make it worth it. News sites print all the hype they’re provided with without much critical review. Given that these are typically used to make first products, so the people running them aren’t seasoned manufacturing experts, you’re bound to have some issues. The fact that these EV scopes have succeeded in delivering something that works as promised is great. If I hadn’t already gone down my own EV route many years back and if the price was the lower value mentioned, I might be interested.

Peter

[John]

If I was going to go down the EV route, with the investment that is required, I would put together my own system from componants that I choose based on independant reports from the likes of Gavster, PeterW and other experienced exponants. There is loads of information on the web now from these early adopters and they are not trying sell anything, just share sucesses, failures and the pleasure that they have derived from the appoach. Great use of astro forums IMHO

 

 

[Stu]

I think the relevant point is that they are going after totally different audiences. We already have good knowledge of astronomy and what kit is available on the market. We also have the patience to put together a system that does what we want. In a way it is like buying separate components to build a top notch HiFi system vs buying a single unit which combines all the elements in one. I don't have the knowledge to do the former, so am more likely to do that latter.

I confess that the Stellina approach doesn't interest me at all as I may aswell just download better images on an iPad! The Unistellar method of looking in an eyepiece is a little more appealing but I still don't think it is for me (even if I could/wanted to afford it).

[Buzzard75]

A few comments on recent points. I'm not going to go back and quote everyone and address each individual.

Price:
I paid $1299, plus shipping and import fees. While the eVscope presented great value for the money at that price, I saw it as an opportunity to fund development of a project that aligned with my interests and had great potential for the future of amateur astronomy. That should be the main goal of a Kickstarter, not just to get a discount on something. However, who would want to fund something and not get anything in return, right? Had it been $3000+, I would have passed, so I completely understand where those people are coming from. As there wasn't anything else like it on the market at the time, they have to start somewhere though. Initial startup and development costs are always high. There will be more competitors to this sector of astronomical devices, they will continue development and fine tuning their processes. All of this equates to reduction in prices, increased capabilities and a wider variety of products available to consumers.

Tripod:
There's nothing wrong with the tripod. It's perfectly stable, albeit very tall. I probably wouldn't take it out in 10mph winds, but I wouldn't bother taking any of my other equipment out either. The legs of the tripod spread pretty far to give it a good stable base. As was mentioned, you don't HAVE to extend the legs out all the way and can leave it so it sits closer to the ground for more stability. I've actually done this myself a few times more because it was unnecessary for me to look through the eyepiece viewer than anything, but it did help with image integration. If the software detects too much vibration in the captured data, it will drop the frame rather than integrate it. This tells me that the software may be looking for eccentricity or HFD values or both.

Image Quality:
Some of the images on Unistellar's website are renderings. Some of the images on there though, including some in the Kickstarter campaign main page and updates and ones being posted on Twitter, are indeed directly from the scope. When I received my eVscope and tried to save an image, it was watermarked with beta all over the image. I don't know if that was just for the beta test or if it had always been like that during development. It's possible that is the reason why a lot of the images they posted were taken looking through the eyepiece rather than from the app. I honestly don't know. As for the actual quality of what they have posted. They are the developers. They have been working with this technology for years. I've only had mine for a few months now. They have had a lot more time to fine tune their device and for all I know they are using different processing algorithms for some of those images. In addition, I'm sure that some of the images they posted are from light accumulations totaling 15-20 minutes or possibly even more. Most of the images I posted were on the order of a few minutes. We all know how the SNR improves the more time you spend on something. I also fully admit that my focus and collimation may not have been perfect. Again, overtime, my instrument will also be fine tuned to provide the best image quality possible.

Light Pollution:
They have used the device in places like San Francisco and Las Vegas and provided images to that effect. Yes, they displayed some of the brightest objects in the night sky as those are obviously the most impressive and will show the most detail. Would you not do the same if you were taking a device like that to the public? The images I have shown are taken from my driveway in a suburban area. According to the latest data available on lightpollutionmap.info, I live in a Bortle 5/6 area. I suspect it's much worse than this though and probably closer to a 7. On an EXCEPTIONALLY good night, I can see the brightest stars in the constellations. I can't see the Milky Way at all, anywhere in the sky, straight up or on the horizon. I can detect some haze where M42 is and I can pick out individual stars in M45 with averted vision. I can barely detect M31 with averted vision. Under normal conditions, I can't see any of that. M45 is a fuzzy mess and M31 is nowhere to be found. I can see Polaris and the two stars on the end of the pot of the Little Dipper. The other Mag 4-5 stars are completely invisible. These are the conditions under which I've been capturing my data with the eVscope.

100x More Powerful:
This one definitely needs to be taken with a grain of salt or at least be understood a bit better. It is certainly a bold claim. Based on what I've read and been told, the origin of this claim was from some of the initial testing of the eVscope prototypes. It is said among the developers that a colleague told them they could see more with the eVscope than they could VISUALLY with their 1 meter scope. Now, 1 meter is pretty large and that statement was a bit anecdotal and had no scientific evidence to back it up. So, as any good scientist would do, they went to get the data. They determined the limiting magnitude of a star that was detectable by an eVscope under conditions in San Francisco. They then calculated the limiting magnitude that was VISUALLY detectable by an average observer under the same conditions with a similar sized scope. They converted those magnitudes to flux values to represent apparent brightness. They then used a flux ratio to determine that, in fact, the eVscope was very close to the 100x more powerful claim. People just need to understand that they are comparing a digital light accumulation and stacking process to a purely VISUAL one. I think that's the part that's lost on a lot of people and, without doing the research, unfortunately makes great fodder for debasing this product.

[PeterW]

...which now makes sense. Not some random claim, but not clearly explained.

Peter

[Buzzard75]

1 hour ago, PeterW said:

...which now makes sense. Not some random claim, but not clearly explained.

Peter

Agreed. I had to dig into the support documentation on the website to find the details when I was considering backing it a couple of years ago. They probably should have defined it up front. In any case, that's the logic behind the claim. And in case anyone else is curious, a difference of 5 magnitudes equates to a factor of 100 in terms of brightness. So a star that is mag 10 will appear 100 times brighter than a mag 15 star. I honestly haven't done any testing to confirm their calculations under my own conditions.

[John]

1 hour ago, Buzzard75 said:

Agreed. I had to dig into the support documentation on the website to find the details when I was considering backing it a couple of years ago. They probably should have defined it up front. In any case, that's the logic behind the claim. And in case anyone else is curious, a difference of 5 magnitudes equates to a factor of 100 in terms of brightness. So a star that is mag 10 will appear 100 times brighter than a mag 15 star. I honestly haven't done any testing to confirm their calculations under my own conditions.

I guess 100 times brighter is going to have more impact than saying something like "without EV = limit is mag 12-13 and with EV = limit is mag 14-15"

Maybe it's more than that but the impact of "100 times" is going to be much more to the inexperienced astronomer.

 

[tommyr]

I used the evscope last night for the first time at night. The scope sets up in about 5 minutes and is ready to go. When I "goto" an object the scope slews for less than a minute and places the object in the center of view then begins tracking it. The tracking is perfect. I'm still learning digital imaging (I never did it before) so I have to get used to making adjusts in gain, exposure time and brightness and contrast. 

When in "enhanced" mode the gain and exposure times can not be changed (as far as I know). Brightness and contrast can be changed however. Using the Bathinov mask my focus looked fine but when looking at the images sent to my email stars look slightly out of focus. Looks like I'll have to possibly tweak collimation the next night out. Or re-check with the Bathinov mask.

The scope senses vibrations. It was slightly windy last night so when in "enhanced" mode the scope will stop stacking until the vibration stops, usually after a second or 2. It then resumes.

I think the images are fairly decent. Are they high quality? No. But they were not meant to be considering the sensor used. The scope is for viewing after all, not photography.

Unistellar is working on making video tutorials and a better technical manual as well. Videos should be available sometime in January or February. On Youtube I believe.

To be able to bring a scope out and be seeing deep sky objects in less than 5 minutes is pretty neat. You all know that with most conventional scopes there is no way that is possible, even with better EAA equipment. I do want to dip into EAA with better cameras eventually with my Celestron Nexstar 5 but for now the eVscope whets my appetite just fine.

Tom

[HWStar]

I ordered back in 2018 and have not received my scope or backpack. The site is now encouraging new buyers to order now so they can get one of the 291 scopes that are left to deliver until June. I think they are displacing current campaign buyers for new buyers because of the price increase they can get--signaling that they are hard up for cash. . If you are one of the many that have not received your scope, plus contact the site and find out what's going on. I've seen this before on kickstarter and Indiegogo. Buyer beware....www.unistellaroptics.com

[cuivenion]

2 hours ago, HWStar said:

I ordered back in 2018 and have not received my scope or backpack. The site is now encouraging new buyers to order now so they can get one of the 291 scopes that are left to deliver until June. I think they are displacing current campaign buyers for new buyers because of the price increase they can get--signaling that they are hard up for cash. . If you are one of the many that have not received your scope, plus contact the site and find out what's going on. I've seen this before on kickstarter and Indiegogo. Buyer beware....www.unistellaroptics.com

Ouch, thats not good. When you say many people haven't received their scope how do you know thats the case? Not doubting you've had problems, just wondering what the backstory is here.

[saac]

On 13/01/2020 at 12:32, tommyr said:

To be able to bring a scope out and be seeing deep sky objects in less than 5 minutes is pretty neat. You all know that with most conventional scopes there is no way that is possible, even with better EAA equipment. I do want to dip into EAA with better cameras eventually with my Celestron Nexstar 5 but for now the eVscope whets my appetite just fine.

Tom

That is so cool - looking forward to more reports as you get more use and experience with it Tom. 

Jim 

Edited January 21, 2020 by saac

[Buzzard75]

2 hours ago, HWStar said:

I ordered back in 2018 and have not received my scope or backpack. The site is now encouraging new buyers to order now so they can get one of the 291 scopes that are left to deliver until June. I think they are displacing current campaign buyers for new buyers because of the price increase they can get--signaling that they are hard up for cash. . If you are one of the many that have not received your scope, plus contact the site and find out what's going on. I've seen this before on kickstarter and Indiegogo. Buyer beware....www.unistellaroptics.com

 

28 minutes ago, cuivenion said:

Ouch, thats not good. When you say many people haven't received their scope how do you know thats the case? Not doubting you've had problems, just wondering what the backstory is here.

I don't claim to speak on behalf of Unistellar, all I know is what they've communicated through emails and Kickstarter updates. They just started deliveries to EU and North America in December for their Kickstarter backers, which ended in 2017. That's their first obligation. I know they are having issues getting certification for countries outside of that, but they are working through it as they can. Indiegogo backers would come after Kickstarter backers as that was their second round of crowdfunding and they said as much on Kickstarter. Personal opinion, if they can't deliver to particular crowdfunding backers for some reason like country certification, I wouldn't expect them to just let product sit in their warehouse or wherever, they should move on to the next person on the list. As for how many spots they have left for June delivery, I can't speak to that or how that fits in with their production schedule or what that means for crowd funding fulfillment. I would imagine that as particular issues are resolved for country certification, the backers of their Kickstarter and Indiegogo campaigns will get priority over orders placed on their website. And if they can't get resolved for whatever reason, then they should be issuing a refund.

Again, to be clear, none of that is an official line from Unistellar.

[HWStar]

Hopefully, we'll see--pun intended...;0).

[SRS511]

I received my evscope this past week and tried it out.  The review is spot on.  I set it up right next to my 8 inch celstron and pointed them both at various deep sky objects.  This was from my suburban house not a very dark site but not terrible either.  A couple of thoughts: The evscope is like the old polariod SX70- it creates instant gratification.  In 15 minutes I had really good "Wow"  level images and appropriate responses from a few friends looking at Orion Nebula, Flame Nebula, CIgar Galaxy.  When I compared with the C-8 nothing visible except for orion.  Is the quality of the image great like an astrophotography image- no.  If that is what you want its not for you. However, It is super quick, easy to use  and creates good images.  Just like the old polariod- the pictures are not SLR quality but its instant gratification, really good, and tons of fun.  It also opens up many many more objects to look at and it is very portable.  Take it on a hike to a dark sky spot, or to a dinner party without a second thought.  It is pricey and I am glad I did the kickstarter, but overtime prices will come down, and image quality (mostly driven by software updates) will go up.  So far I am a satified customer. Now if only the clouds would go away- the forecast is bad for the next week!

[HWStar]

I just received my delivery date of sometime in May, plus the need to verify my shipping info.  Plus got another email under a different email address that offers new buyers financing payments for 4 to 5 months to guarantee delivery this summer. Total cost around $3,250 if financed. Only good for several more days.

Also, they discuss the problems they were having with manufacturing hardware, which is very difficult to get the same object made exactly for every scope that comes down the line. I know that casting or forming metal can be dicey simply because of the expansion/contraction problems of metal when hot and cold. I guess I'm glad I didn't get one of the first ones off the line, now.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

On 28/01/2020 at 19:07, SRS511 said:

I received my evscope this past week and tried it out.  The review is spot on.  I set it up right next to my 8 inch celstron and pointed them both at various deep sky objects.  This was from my suburban house not a very dark site but not terrible either.  A couple of thoughts: The evscope is like the old polariod SX70- it creates instant gratification.  In 15 minutes I had really good "Wow"  level images and appropriate responses from a few friends looking at Orion Nebula, Flame Nebula, CIgar Galaxy.  When I compared with the C-8 nothing visible except for orion.  Is the quality of the image great like an astrophotography image- no.  If that is what you want its not for you. However, It is super quick, easy to use  and creates good images.  Just like the old polariod- the pictures are not SLR quality but its instant gratification, really good, and tons of fun.  It also opens up many many more objects to look at and it is very portable.  Take it on a hike to a dark sky spot, or to a dinner party without a second thought.  It is pricey and I am glad I did the kickstarter, but overtime prices will come down, and image quality (mostly driven by software updates) will go up.  So far I am a satified customer. Now if only the clouds would go away- the forecast is bad for the next week!

I am glad you are happy with the scope, but I am puzzled by the suggestion that the Cigar Galaxy didn't show up in the C8. I have had a C8 for 24+ years and have frequently looked at the Cigar Galaxy from my suburban garden. It has such a good surface brightness that it always stands out boldly, with a lot of internal detail visible. It is in fact an easy target, even for my 10x42 birding binoculars, and striking when viewed with my 16x80s. Only if the skies are hazy do I struggle with the Cigar. I am also a bit worried about the assertion that software upgrades will necessarily make image quality better. Ultimately, the resolution of the camera and aperture limit what can be done. As an image processing professional, I know software can get more detail out of image data, but there are limits.

[Buzzard75]

2 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I am glad you are happy with the scope, but I am puzzled by the suggestion that the Cigar Galaxy didn't show up in the C8. I have had a C8 for 24+ years and have frequently looked at the Cigar Galaxy from my suburban garden. It has such a good surface brightness that it always stands out boldly, with a lot of internal detail visible. It is in fact an easy target, even for my 10x42 birding binoculars, and striking when viewed with my 16x80s. Only if the skies are hazy do I struggle with the Cigar. I am also a bit worried about the assertion that software upgrades will necessarily make image quality better. Ultimately, the resolution of the camera and aperture limit what can be done. As an image processing professional, I know software can get more detail out of image data, but there are limits.

I live in a suburban area as well. I have a 12" dob and I can't see any details at all in M81 or M82. I can barely even see their fuzzy spots. You can't really quantify anything by saying suburban. It really comes down to how much light pollution there is and it can vary greatly from one suburban area to another with how much local light pollution you have just visible from your own neighbors. I haven't tried the eVscope on these two objects yet, but now I will make it a point to at the next opportunity.

As for image quality, I think there are some improvements that can be made with the processing which would be handled with software. Right now, I don't believe it's calibrated using any dark frames at all. I've noticed in the image stacking that I tend to have a bit of glow from the left corners and bottom that isn't completely taken out in image stacking. I noticed the same glow when I put the cover on it at high gain and long exposure. An increase in exposure length would also help in image detail. Right now it's limited to just under four seconds. With a short focal length alt-az mount and decent tracking 10-15 seconds should be possible.

[RobertI]

On 28/01/2020 at 18:07, SRS511 said:

In 15 minutes I had really good "Wow"  level images and appropriate responses from a few friends looking at Orion Nebula, Flame Nebula, CIgar Galaxy.  

It’s great that the product works! It’s no mean feat to bring all that tech together and make it work for the consumer. Glad you’re happy. Can you capture some images next time you are out and post them for us to enjoy. 👍

[SRS511]

Here you go first night observation with evscope under a bright 40% moon, very short observations.  I am excited to see what happens with a darker sky.

Edited February 2, 2020 by SRS511

[Buzzard75]

I went out to take a couple of M81 and M82. Now, mind you this is under a 60% moon and I had 10mph variable winds gusting to 15. Not the best of conditions for this kind of stuff. I certainly wouldn't be bothering to image. I only bothered with a few minutes each. They would fair better under better circumstances and more time.

 

[John]

Is that how they appear when you viewed through the scope under those conditions ?

 

[Ibbo!]

10 mph thats a light to gentle breeze for outreach I would want something that would stand up to more than that, including the odd prod from a passing curious member of the public.

[Buzzard75]

27 minutes ago, John said:

Is that how they appear when you viewed through the scope under those conditions ?

 

They don't have the info overlay on them, but yes, that is the FOV in the eyepiece viewer. You get a slightly larger frame on your mobile device without the overlay.

11 minutes ago, Ibbo! said:

10 mph thats a light to gentle breeze for outreach I would want something that would stand up to more than that, including the odd prod from a passing curious member of the public.

I know 10 mph doesn't sound like a lot, but when you're fully exposed it's a lot stronger than you think it is and can induce a lot of vibration. If you're just doing visual observing, it's not so bad unless you're using something like a huge dob with a lot of flex in the system. If you're doing image stacking though, any wind stronger than a couple MPH and any vibration in the system is undesirable. What made these conditions particularly bad though is that the wind was variable and constantly changed directions. Fortunately, the software is smart enough to detect the vibration and just drop the frames. I know other live stacking programs, like SharpCap, have similar frame rejection, but I don't know how the algorithms compare.

[John]

10 minutes ago, Buzzard75 said:

They don't have the info overlay on them, but yes, that is the FOV in the eyepiece viewer. You get a slightly larger frame on your mobile device without the overlay.

 

What I was interest in was the appearance of the galaxies visually when viewed with the Evscope. Were they as bright and detailed visually or were they different from the images.

Thanks.

[Ibbo!]

40 minutes ago, Buzzard75 said:

I know 10 mph doesn't sound like a lot, but when you're fully exposed it's a lot stronger than you think it is and can induce a lot of vibration. If you're just doing visual observing, it's not so bad unless you're using something like a huge dob with a lot of flex in the system. If you're doing image stacking though, any wind stronger than a couple MPH and any vibration in the system is undesirable. What made these conditions particularly bad though is that the wind was variable and constantly changed directions. Fortunately, the software is smart enough to detect the vibration and just drop the frames. I know other live stacking programs, like SharpCap, have similar frame rejection, but I don't know how the algorithms compare.

I am an imager (mainly) and I image in a lot worse than that from back yard and in open fields Ok  my main mount is pretty good but the smaller mount copes well.

I have also done a lot of outreach and that kit has to stand up to quite a bit of abuse and in my opinion that tripod and mount is not up to the job unless it is fenced off.

In fact I did an outreach last night and the "stars" were a couple of 10" Skywatcher dobs and a couple of well mounted large binos.

The tall spindldy fracs did not fare well.