ZWO Seestar 50

[LDW1]

1 hour ago, DaveL59 said:

So an adaptor ring and some hot glue might be needed then 😉 

 

Edited September 13, 2023 by LDW1

[powerlord]

1 hour ago, DaveL59 said:

ahh but it ain't a filter, I was talking about adding a tele-converter lens on the front to increase the mag, so a bit (lot) chunkier. Hey ya never know, the diameter of the opening might match a threaded filter adaptor and it'd just screw right in with a bit of persuasion 😉 

It'll be an experiment once I'm happy I've figured out the system, hopefully it won't affect its ability to g-to and track. Risk will be remembering to remove before "parking" or that may give some nasty moments. The tele adaptor landing on the ground would be minor vs the graunching of (likely plastic) gears 😮 

Id have thought a wideangle would make more sense - the fov is equiv to a FF sensor and 1700mm or something.

[DaveL59]

4 minutes ago, powerlord said:

Id have thought a wideangle would make more sense - the fov is equiv to a FF sensor and 1700mm or something.

So I dug out the fisheye adaptor as I knew where I'd put it and unfortunately the slightly thicker than filter sized part is macro rather than tele. Somewhere I do/did have a tele/wide set for the video camera from some time back so will have to find that. Thinks tht set was x0.7/1.4 so yeah should be worth a play with both.

My thoughts on the tele one was a bit more magnification on planets and darkening the image a touch since we'd have no exposure control. Would make it easier for viewing with the grandkids etc perhaps. Of course there may well be issues with its ability to solve what its seeing if using it like that for starfields, but planets/moon (for a closer look) once focused and locked on it should be able to track, time will tell. Gonna be a while before I get to play about tho as I doubt I'll have an S50 in my hands for a couple months yet.

[Albir phil]

Regarding the seestar 50 the lazy geek as done a full review.As far as any dislike of the seestar 50 by some I would never say I dislike a new scope till I have tried it.Zwo I think are opening new ways of imaging which will no doubt improve as time goes by. I for one will be ordering one soon.End of the day it's our choice buy or don't buy .

[M40]

Playing again last night, I think this picture shows that the Seestar is not for planets, but at the same time, I dont think I have a picture with Jupiter and five moons 

[Elp]

Can you manually control the exposure as it needs to be dialled way back for planetary (talking ms not 10s)? Planetary also requires lucky imaging type acquisition due to atmospheric seeing disturbances.

[DaveL59]

36 minutes ago, M40 said:

Playing again last night, I think this picture shows that the Seestar is not for planets, but at the same time, I dont think I have a picture with Jupiter and five moons 

That's kinda why I was thinking of trying a x1.4/1.7/2 tele adaptor. It'd up the mag and as we know when adding a barlow, reduce the brightness of the target. Perhaps a polarizing filter might also?

I think tho the grandkids would've been wowed to just see that image but I figure it may be worth seeing if we can squeeze a touch more out of the base kit 😉 

[M40]

31 minutes ago, Elp said:

Can you manually control the exposure as it needs to be dialled way back for planetary (talking ms not 10s)? Planetary also requires lucky imaging type acquisition due to atmospheric seeing disturbances.

Not as far as I know, there is a brightness selector but that didn't seem to do much, likely to be user error again. That was the best single shot I could get, even pulling out a single frame from a video did not improve it. It got worse if I autofocused on Jupiter so I focused on a star. There has to be some level of brightness control otherwise how will it work on the moon?  

[M40]

35 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

That's kinda why I was thinking of trying a x1.4/1.7/2 tele adaptor. It'd up the mag and as we know when adding a barlow, reduce the brightness of the target. Perhaps a polarizing filter might also?

I think tho the grandkids would've been wowed to just see that image but I figure it may be worth seeing if we can squeeze a touch more out of the base kit 😉 

Now there's an idea. I have a 2" polarizing filter, touch of blu tack later (definately not hot glue) and maybe give it a go.

[DaveL59]

8 minutes ago, M40 said:

Not as far as I know, there is a brightness selector but that didn't seem to do much, likely to be user error again. That was the best single shot I could get, even pulling out a single frame from a video did not improve it. It got worse if I autofocused on Jupiter so I focused on a star. There has to be some level of brightness control otherwise how will it work on the moon?  

I recall in one of the vids that the issue was the lack of user adjustment of exposure time hence no brightness control. Did you try the daytime scenic mode, that may give a bit more control but IIRC the reviewer didn't find a way around it. At the time I was thinking some form of filter (CPL or ND) might help but so far I don't think anyone's tried it, at lest not in the review vids.

[rnobleeddy]

Haven't been astronomy-ing for a while but saw a YouTube video of this and wanted to come and read the thread. Obviously mixed thoughts, but from my perspective, it's a game changer at this price point. Maybe not right now, but if you think that might be possible in 5-years, I can imagine getting this eating the budget end of the AP market.

 

On the flip side, I have no answer to the Q about why you'd do this over look at pictures on the internet. The same could be said of all AP - very few of us produce images that are as good as those on astrobin.

 

For example, I've kept some kit to take white light photos of the sun. I enjoy it. All this needs is a way to attach a 1.25" or 2" filter somewhere, and the right software, and it's going to produce white light solar images as good as my setup, which cost a lot more. 

Edited September 16, 2023 by rnobleeddy

[GTom]

On 14/09/2023 at 08:55, M40 said:

Playing again last night, I think this picture shows that the Seestar is not for planets, but at the same time, I dont think I have a picture with Jupiter and five moons 

Even at that short FL it produces elongated stars/moons, LoL.

I can't see myself paying £50 for such results not to mention 500...

Edited September 16, 2023 by GTom

[rnobleeddy]

1 minute ago, GTom said:

Even at that short FL it produces elongated stars/moons, LoL.

I wouldn't read too much in to that - the images I saw of nebula are much better, and there'll almost certainly be more options around stacking in future.

[DaveL59]

23 hours ago, rnobleeddy said:

For example, I've kept some kit to take white light photos of the sun. I enjoy it. All this needs is a way to attach a 1.25" or 2" filter somewhere, and the right software, and it's going to produce white light solar images as good as my setup, which cost a lot more. 

It ships with a solar filter that pops in in front of the objective so can do solar out of the box 🙂 

[DaveL59]

If anyone wants a bahtinov mask for theirs someone on the bay-of-e is doing them for £10.99 inc postage, 3D printed

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/276044825431

 

[Giles_B]

10 hours ago, DaveL59 said:

It ships with a solar filter that pops in in front of the objective so can do solar out of the box 🙂 

I doubt this filter compares to a dedicated WL setup with Herschel wedge and a continuum filter. Even the stacked pictures that have been posted look inferior to the sorts of visual results I'm used to.  It clearly is a versatile telescope, but as a visual observer it is the DSO performance that attracts me - it has no viable competitor unless you are willing to spend megabucks on a night vision system.

[LDW1]

3 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

If anyone wants a bahtinov mask for theirs someone on the bay-of-e is doing them for £10.99 inc postage, 3D printed

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/276044825431

 

Some have said you don't need a mask, that it doesn't improve anything !

[DaveL59]

1 minute ago, LDW1 said:

Some have said you don't need a mask, that it doesn't improve anything !

Reviews so far seem to say their AF works pretty well, but at least with one you have the means to verify. If manual focus come along then it may be useful as an aid should you feel the need.

[DaveL59]

3 minutes ago, Giles_B said:

I doubt this filter compares to a dedicated WL setup with Herschel wedge and a continuum filter. Even the stacked pictures that have been posted look inferior to the sorts of visual results I'm used to.  It clearly is a versatile telescope, but as a visual observer it is the DSO performance that attracts me - it has no viable competitor unless you are willing to spend megabucks on a night vision system.

can't comment re solar as I'll never do that directly by eye, I don't do bright objects very well, migraines and all. With the S50 tho at least I can give it a go and not cause myself issues so it'll do fine for me 🙂 

[LDW1]

1 minute ago, Giles_B said:

I doubt this filter compares to a dedicated WL setup with Herschel wedge and a continuum filter. Even the stacked pictures that have been posted look inferior to the sorts of visual results I'm used to.  It clearly is a versatile telescope, but as a visual observer it is the DSO performance that attracts me - it has no viable competitor unless you are willing to spend megabucks on a night vision system.

Come on now ! Haven't you realized its a great compliment to WL / Ha !  Not a replacement and if you don't already have those systems then guess what, it saves big $'s, lol ! Don't you think, lol ?

[LDW1]

3 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

Reviews so far seem to say their AF works pretty well, but at least with one you have the means to verify. If manual focus come along then it may be useful as an aid should you feel the need.

It remains to be seen one way or the other.

[Elp]

1 hour ago, Giles_B said:

Even the stacked pictures that have been posted look inferior to the sorts of visual results I'm used to

Aperture makes a big difference for white light (as does the associated focal length increase), you tend to see more granulation and detail the larger you go, well it makes a difference for everything really. Tbh, you can likely achieve the same if you have some binos and make the white light filters to cover each lens. You also need fast exposures for solar (same as planetary) otherwise the detail will blend into a blur due to seeing. Seestar i suppose is more for DSO viewing.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Elp

[rnobleeddy]

When I referred to a filter, I meant a solar continuum filter. 

 

In terms of shorter exposures and stacking, there's no hardware limitations to prevent recording a videos and stacking the frames, but I guess the software doesn't offer that option yet.

[LDW1]

If you are a WL / Ha astronomer you must know, I hope you know, that when viewing the sun especially in the afternoon when max heat is rising and a breeze has come up that solar seeing conditions can change by the minute especially when taking photos ie good one moment and pp the next. So why would taking them with the SS be any different, criticize all you want but make sure you know your solar ........... !   PS:  So when many  of these solar pics were taken who knows the conditions !

Edited September 17, 2023 by LDW1

[powerlord]

10 hours ago, LDW1 said:

Q

 

10 hours ago, DaveL59 said:

If anyone wants a bahtinov mask for theirs someone on the bay-of-e is doing them for £10.99 inc postage, 3D printed

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/276044825431

 

I think I'll design one and get a batch sls printed to sell at cost on here like I did for eos clip in 1 1/4in filters. Give me a few weeks. They'll be much higher quality. I'll do a 2" filter adapter too. Watch this space.

Stu