recommend me a small refractor to put a quark on

[Saganite]

11 hours ago, Nigella Bryant said:

You certainly don't need an ed scope, achromatic scope is fine. Solar imaging is only using one wavelength so it doesn't matter. I use cheap achromatic for CaK and continuum, breeser 100mm stopped down to 80mm. My Lunt 60ds is also an achro. Different if you're imaging deepsky or planet's, etc. 

That full Sun image is just glorious !!

[iwols]

On 08/06/2022 at 02:00, Nigella Bryant said:

You certainly don't need an ed scope, achromatic scope is fine. Solar imaging is only using one wavelength so it doesn't matter. I use cheap achromatic for CaK and continuum, breeser 100mm stopped down to 80mm. My Lunt 60ds is also an achro. Different if you're imaging deepsky or planet's, etc. 

was this with bottom one with a quark and bresser? and what do  you use to step it down?

Edited June 10, 2022 by iwols

[Miguel1983]

I have a Daystar Solarscout 60 and am quite happy with it.
The photo below I recently took with this telescope and a 1600MM camera.
I am still a newbie to solar photography.
I've heard from others that you also have to have a bit of luck with a Quark, apparently one is not the other.
But that goes for many astro gear.

As you probably know the Solarscout has a fixed quark, but I've seen someone here or another forum that had converted it to fit It to other scopes.

As far as I know it is the cheapest quark you can find, and cheapest solar scope for that matter.

 

 

[Nigella Bryant]

6 hours ago, iwols said:

was this with bottom one with a quark and bresser? and what do  you use to step it down?

Hi, no it was with a Lunt which is given as an example of an achromatic scope as apposed to needing an ED doublet or better. Wasn't intending it to be an example of a quark. I use a plastic tub slightly smaller than the diameter of the bressers front and cut a hole in the bottom of the tub. Cheap and simple. Hope that helps to clear things up. 

[iwols]

5 hours ago, Nigella Bryant said:

Hi, no it was with a Lunt which is given as an example of an achromatic scope as apposed to needing an ED doublet or better. Wasn't intending it to be an example of a quark. I use a plastic tub slightly smaller than the diameter of the bressers front and cut a hole in the bottom of the tub. Cheap and simple. Hope that helps to clear things up. 

thanks and how do you rate your bresser against the lunt because sooner than later im going to buy a scope just for the solar imaging cheers

[Nigella Bryant]

1 hour ago, iwols said:

thanks and how do you rate your bresser against the lunt because sooner than later im going to buy a scope just for the solar imaging cheers

Hi, the bressers and Lunt are two different kinds of scope. The Lunt is a dedicated solar telescope whereas the bresser is used for white light and calcium II k wavelength. As such the bresser gives a slightly higher resolution because it's working at 80mm. The Lunt is 60mm. I'd certainly recommend the bresser if you're going to use it with a quark. As I said, I use mine with either a Hershel wedge or the Lunt CaK wedge. Mine is the 100mm one but if I was looking to buy again I'd definitely go bigger say the 127 or 150 because of having to stop them down 20mm because it helps with spherical aberration, chromatic aberration isn't worth taking about when using single wavelengths. 

[iwols]

36 minutes ago, Nigella Bryant said:

Hi, the bressers and Lunt are two different kinds of scope. The Lunt is a dedicated solar telescope whereas the bresser is used for white light and calcium II k wavelength. As such the bresser gives a slightly higher resolution because it's working at 80mm. The Lunt is 60mm. I'd certainly recommend the bresser if you're going to use it with a quark. As I said, I use mine with either a Hershel wedge or the Lunt CaK wedge. Mine is the 100mm one but if I was looking to buy again I'd definitely go bigger say the 127 or 150 because of having to stop them down 20mm because it helps with spherical aberration, chromatic aberration isn't worth taking about when using single wavelengths. 

thanks the 127 are fl1200 and f9.5 isnt the fl a bit much? cheers

[Nigella Bryant]

2 hours ago, iwols said:

thanks the 127 are fl1200 and f9.5 isnt the fl a bit much? cheers

Hiya, I use a 0.5 reducer if I want to do full disk and a 1.5x barlow if I want higher resolution. My 100mm is an f10. 

Examples of my imaging using the above with the scope.

Edited June 10, 2022 by Nigella Bryant
Pics added