Lunt60 or Quark with Esprit 150

[bluesilver]

Hi,  I am looking at getting into solar imaging,  have been doing DSO imaging for a few years with the Skywatcher Esprit 150

I was looking at getting a Lunt 60 as you can get it now with what they call a viewer package,  basically it comes with two filters so you can view both Chromosphere and prominence ( i think i have got that correct )

The other option was trying to set my Esprit 150 up for solar imaging,  but a bit unsure exactly what i need to achieve this,

I think i need a Quark for starters and i see that they now have a model out that switches between both Chromosphere and prominence.

I think i also need a special type of filter for the front of the OTA and if i am correct, also a filter just in front of the Quark.

I am interested to find out if this setup with the Quark on the Esprit 150 is a better option that going for the Lunt 60 for imaging?

 

It looks like cost wise, it will be very similar either way i go.

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

 

[Franklin]

An internal, before the diagonal UV/IR cut filter is required when using a Quark with scopes up to 120mm. Larger scopes such as your Espirit150 would need a front-fitting ERF (energy rejection filter) and they are expensive. The Quark comes in Chromosphere and Prominence models but the Chromosphere shows prominences as well so most people seem to get that model. The Combo version is a bit misleading as there are still the two models, I believe this Combo Quark is intended for use with catadioptric scopes and long focal length refractors.

I'm not an imager but your Espirit150 with correct filters would be the superior rig.

The Quark has an inbuilt barlow which would take your scope up around F/30 and this would work well, they say F/29 is optimum.

I'm no expert but I recently got a Chromosphere Quark for use in my F/7.7 refractors visually and I have not been disappointed. Highly recommended.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Franklin

[Stu]

36 minutes ago, Franklin said:

An internal, before the diagonal UV/IR cut filter is required when using a Quark with scopes up to 120mm. Larger scopes such as your Espirit150 would need a front-fitting ERF (energy rejection filter) and they are expensive. The Quark comes in Chromosphere and Prominence models but the Chromosphere shows prominences as well so most people seem to get that model. The Combo version is a bit misleading as there are still the two models, I believe this Combo Quark is intended for use with catadioptric scopes and long focal length refractors.

I'm not an imager but your Espirit150 with correct filters would be the superior rig.

The Quark has an inbuilt barlow which would take your scope up around F/25 and this would work well, they say F/29 is optimum.

I'm no expert but I recently got a Chromosphere Quark for use in my F/7.7 refractors visually and I have not been disappointed. Highly recommended.

There is a dual version called Gemini which allows you to select between prominence and chromosphere.

http://www.daystarfilters.com/QuarkGemini.shtml
 

You are right about the combo which doesn’t have the built-in Barlow and is for SCTs, Maks and long f/l refractors.

http://www.daystarfilters.com/COMBOQuark.shtml

I don’t think I would bother with the Gemini; the Chromosphere version does a very good job on both surface and prominences.

@bluesilver I guess the answer lies in what you want to achieve. The Lunt option should give you full disk views but limited in resolution by the relatively small aperture. The 150mm plus quark will be a high power, hi resolution option I think. You won’t get full disk views but will get amazing up close detail. It will be more susceptible to poor seeing, don’t forget that.

Quarks can be variable in quality and also reliability so buy from somewhere with a good returns policy and service.

 

[Nik271]

Since you already have the Esprit, why don't you try some white light imaging first? Solar imaging is very different from DSO, aperture of course determines maximal theoretical resolution but the seeing is  actualy the biggest factor, generally seeing is worse during the day than in the night because of thermals from the ground.

A Baader whitelight filter on the front of your scope will cost very little to get started. Once you know how the seeing conditions are in your location you can decide whether a full disc Ha scope or a Quark with ERF for your Esprit for close up images suit you better.

 

Edited July 8, 2023 by Nik271

[bluesilver]

Appreciate the replies and advice.

I like the idea of the close up view with prominences.

I have only now just found a video of someone with a Quark and imaging the surface and then the prominences, very interesting procedure.

So if i were to stay with the Esprit 150 and go the Quark Chromosphere option,  All i need then is a filter for the front of my OTA?

One of my dealerships here have the Badder filters for the front of the OTA

I take it i don't need any other filters that go in the front of the Quark then?

 

 

 

[bluesilver]

Sorry to bring in another question to all of this,

I appreciate what everyone is advising me,  I am planning to do a test with the Esprit 150 with some some solar film and a red imaging filter,

From what i have read and what i have been told is,   i can do this as a white light test to see if the 150 can handle the seeing conditions.

I plan to use a asi17m mono camera with a 5X barlow.  ( I hope i got all that correct )

 

But the other question was,  if i were to choses to go with a Quark,  would something like a Skywatcher ED80 Evostar be a good match and still using the asi174 camera?

Image would be a bit larger compared to the Esprit 150,  but being a smaller aperture and shorter focal length,  i am thinking the seeing conditions would not be as critical.

Plan is to get close up images of the sides.

 

 

 

[Carbon Brush]

An LS60 is a 'plug and play' solution. That is remove from box, tune etalon and look/image.
Unless you are going to dedicate a scope to a Quark, there is a longer setup time. I'm thinking here of adding filters, assembling parts, etc, then the Quark warm up time.

To avoid the setup time, is it worth committing an expensive refractor to one job?
You could use a cheaper refractor (CA is of course not an issue) and leave the Ha parts permanently assembled.

In the UK, I don't think our skies warrant anything much bigger than a 60mm scope for Ha viewing.
Going bigger hursts the wallet more than the stable sunny skiy availability. Just my opinion. Others may differ.
As for your Australian skies, I have no idea.

My solar viewing in Ha is with an LS60. Yes quick views out of the box. Very happy.

Don't forget etalon quality/performance does vary. Regadless of manufacturer.

Slightly off topic, but maybe worth a mention.
My white light is a refractor with Herschel wedge, optional polarising filter and solar continuum (narrow green) filter.
By viewing in green, you avoid the CA inherent in a low cost scopes.
This has allowed me to 'play' with different low cost refractors as well as leave a scope set up ready to drop on a tripod.

HTH, David.

[Stu]

19 minutes ago, bluesilver said:

Sorry to bring in another question to all of this,

I appreciate what everyone is advising me,  I am planning to do a test with the Esprit 150 with some some solar film and a red imaging filter,

From what i have read and what i have been told is,   i can do this as a white light test to see if the 150 can handle the seeing conditions.

I plan to use a asi17m mono camera with a 5X barlow.  ( I hope i got all that correct )

 

But the other question was,  if i were to choses to go with a Quark,  would something like a Skywatcher ED80 Evostar be a good match and still using the asi174 camera?

Image would be a bit larger compared to the Esprit 150,  but being a smaller aperture and shorter focal length,  i am thinking the seeing conditions would not be as critical.

Plan is to get close up images of the sides.

 

 

 

I can’t advise on the camera side, but in terms of scopes, the 150 will be a much better option for hi res, large image scale prominence shots, on days when the seeing is good. The ED80 will work well in a wider range of conditions though won’t give the same resolution on those still days.

Just as a related aside, I have 102mm PST mod which is excellent on most days, and am soon to pick up a 150mm version. With this one, I expect it to be worthwhile only when the seeing is very steady as it will operate at high powers.

The obvious answer is to have both options available. Quarks kind of operate in reverse to normal scopes. With a normal scope you change your eyepiece to change the mag/fov. With a Quark, it’s more a case of changing scopes to get different image scales. I used my Quark in a range of scopes from 60mm to 150mm for that reason. The 150mm was an f5 skywatcher though and the views weren’t great, likely due to excess SA.

[Stu]

3 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

In the UK, I don't think our skies warrant anything much bigger than a 60mm scope for Ha viewing.
Going bigger hursts the wallet more than the stable sunny skiy availability. Just my opinion. Others may differ.

I’ve had good success with my 100mm PST mod. It is set up for hi power binoviewing so yes, there are times when the seeing says no, but quite often if you choose your time right the views are good, and on occasion they can be stunning.

The Lunts and Coronado scopes are certainly more flexible, allowing both full disk views and high powers, albeit at lower resolution and, as you say, there is none of the messing about you have with Quarks in terms of power and waiting time.

I believe you can use a 35nm Ha filter in front of the diagonal instead of a full aperture filter on scopes up to a certain aperture but I’m not certain how big you can go with this option. Worth checking out though.