PST 40 DS vs Lunt 60

[tico]

Hello,

 

I would like to consult you the following subject: I would like to start in the solar observation H alpha, and I ´ve not very clear which telescope I can be better, if the PST 40 DS or the Lunt 60 B1200, I would use it for visual observation.
I currently do not have a refractor telescope, so I do not wanna ask for the Daystar chromosphere model.
Is there a difference between the two models?
Any clear advantage over each other?
Thank you very much .
Cheers,

Tico

[Floater]

Tico. How many times are you going to ask the question? 

Don’t get tied up with overthinking. Make a choice. Have fun. 🙂

[tico]

Yes, the truth is that I give many (too many) turns to things, I think I suffer "paralysis by analysis" ..., I have not just decided ... and the truth is that I do not have any test option ..., sorry if you felt offended.
Cheers,
Tico.

[catburglar]

Tico

If you’re struggling to decide, you probably don’t need another option, but here goes....

I sat on the fence about getting a solar scope for a couple of years...a few weeks ago I bit the bullet and bought a Daystar Solar scout SS-60DS....At about half the price of a PST-DS- It seems like a good buy. 

Had a few short sessions with it and I’m pretty impressed- although I don’t have anything to directly compare it with.

It’s quick to set up, simple to use and the view seems pretty good- I’ve been able to see good details in prominences along with solar granulation (there’s not a lot of activity on the disk at present).

 

 

[Floater]

1 hour ago, tico said:

Yes, the truth is that I give many (too many) turns to things, I think I suffer "paralysis by analysis" ..., I have not just decided ... and the truth is that I do not have any test option ..., sorry if you felt offended.
Cheers,
Tico.

Absolutely no offence. 👍

I understand only too well the drive to do all the homework and make the best decision. And part of the fun is researching and comparing. But, yes, constant analysis means paralysis and you end up with nothing. No views. 

Both of the scopes you mention are good. Weigh up your preferences for price, aperture provided and/or any other consideration. And go for it!

Enjoy.

[Highburymark]

Tico - the truth is that there’s too much variation between scopes under the same brand name (be that PST or Lunt 60 or anything else ) for anyone to give you definitive advice.  PST double stacks have a pretty good reputation - but you will be limited with the detail you can see with such a small aperture. My experience with Lunt 60s is also varied single stacked, but the chances are you are going to see much more detail, but not so contrasted as with the double stack system. And if at a later date you can add a double stack you will have a very nice telescope indeed. Also - you don’t need a B1200 blocking filters with the LS60 unless you want to image or use binoviewers - otherwise the B600 is ok.

[richard ashbee]

Lunt LS60, just made the decision myself after a lot of research

[Solar B]

Richard if your going to spend a reasonable amount my choice 

would be more toward the SMIII 70mm , granted its actually a 60mm etalon 

but it is externally mounted and thus preferential to an internally mounted one.

Brian 

[Stu]

11 hours ago, Solar B said:

Richard if your going to spend a reasonable amount my choice 

would be more toward the SMIII 70mm , granted its actually a 60mm etalon 

but it is externally mounted and thus preferential to an internally mounted one.

Brian 

I find that a confusingly marketed product as it clearly states a clear aperture of 70mm and has 70 in the model number yet has a front mounted 60mm etalon so can, by definition, only have a clear aperture of 60mm, same as the Lunt.

I’m not saying it’s not a good product, but think it is confusing in how it is described, many might think it is 70mm at first glance.

[Solar B]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

I find that a confusingly marketed product as it clearly states a clear aperture of 70mm and has 70 in the model number yet has a front mounted 60mm etalon so can, by definition, only have a clear aperture of 60mm, same as the Lunt.

I’m not saying it’s not a good product, but think it is confusing in how it is described, many might think it is 70mm at first glance.

Agreed ... they shouldn't advertise as such and I don't know why (an attempt to differentiate themselves from lunt) as they don't with the SMIII90mm having said that I'd still have it over any LS60 and it looks 10 times better to 🌞

Brian