Jump to content

stargazine_ep34_banner.thumb.jpg.28dd32d9305c7de9b6591e6bf6600b27.jpg

Recommended Posts

Has anyone used one of these to image?

After my other thread. Dont know which scope to go for.

Basically after 20 years of having the 200P thats at the end of its life I'm looking for something new and the quattro has got my attention.

Has anyone got any good pics taken through this OTA so I can be sure its for me.

Thanks

 

Stu

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've has a 200P for a good few years, and I reckon it's excellent. I also have a 10" quattro but my impression is what you gain in speed you lose in overall image quality. You also need a more expensive coma corrector - out of interest I tried my SW coma corrector which works great on the 200P, and it's awful on the quattro.

I've had the same thinking process, but my conclusion is that if going for a faster 200mm reflector you need to spend more - maybe one of the TS optics offerings, or perhaps a Vixen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

TS do a upgrade to the skywatcher version. .. looks good, better glass, more attention to detail, better focuser.. that newt type itch is starting to get at me..so last thing I want to do is having to spend more upgrading to a better spec.. this is the carbon tube version, they do a 10 inch too

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p5033_TS-Optics-8--f-4-UNC-Newtonian-Telescope-with-Fused-Quartz-Main-Mirror-and-Carbon-Tube.html

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I think I'm going to go for the ts optics version.

Much better focuser plus cooling fan and guy I spoke to said the optics are better than the skywatcher version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking of getting 6" F/4 TS version at some point to serve as wide field instrument. Not sure if I would go larger than that.

Also note that these smaller newtonians are really suitable for smaller sensors. I don't think one can get very good correction for APS-C or larger sensors at that speed - even with excellent coma corrector.

Larger the sensor - more sensitive it is to tilt and at F/4 - collimation and tilt will be challenging.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you guys do be sure to post some comment or review, because at some point I want to replace my 200P. Also not sure which coma corrector you would fancy?

There's always the Boren Simon offering - either F2.8 or F3.6. Apparently the reducer also does coma correction.

Or maybe tempted by the F2.8 Sharpstar/TS clone ? 

Personally I think a good F4 Newt is safest bet, but thats just my best guess. The Vixen ought to be good too, and is F3.8 with the corrector - never needs collimation is the bold claim!

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Stu Wilson said:

ordered so ill tell you all in around 2 weeks time hopefully 🙂

 

Stu

What did you get? 8" or 10" version?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stu Wilson said:

Yes I think I'm going to go for the ts optics version.

Much better focuser plus cooling fan and guy I spoke to said the optics are better than the skywatcher version.

If you do , then let me know how you get on with it..

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

Link to coma corrector review - doesnt cover all options but I found it useful.

Yes, very nice comparison - important thing to note is that this was done with KAF8300 - which is 22mm diagonal sensor and some CCs have ~30% vignetting in the corners of 22mm sensor. This is 10" version of scope - so larger secondary.

Larger sensors are probably going to have more issues with correction and certainly more vignetting.

Just something to keep in mind to avoid surprises.

10 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

That would be my pick too - apparently it is tolerant to some tilt - that can't be a bad thing :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is a link to a post of mine from 2011.  It was comparing a 8"quattro a good 8" for offering.  Aps chip and Baader coma corrector.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FYI I did some design work using OSLO for a coma corrector, built into the secondary housing. I abandoned this for various reasons, but one thing that became apparent is that the tolerances for curvature and element thickness/separation are much tighter for a shorter corrector. The trade off with a longer corrector is that it can intrude into the light path, depending of course on the position of the secondary relative to the primary. 

Anyhow, the point of all this is that the Baader MPCC MkIII is remarkably short, and yet seems to achieve good results in the review I mentioned and in Martins assessment too. 

Let us know what you go for Stu and how you get on with it.... I'm sure whatever you choose the skies will clear for you. 

  • Thanks 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.