Redcat, a very quick impression.

[ollypenrice]

I'll admit to a lingering wariness when it comes to William Optics instruments, suspecting a risk of style over substance, a pretty finish over good mechanical engineering. Maybe I'm just out of date on this, as on many other things.  

However, today I processed some data taken here by a guest using a Canon 5D Mk3, so full frame, in a Redcat with a FL of 250mm.  These are, of course, great numbers for anyone wanting to shoot widefield. We didn't have flats and the image came out with a very red bias, easily subtracted using ABE. The gradient map was a flat sheet of red so there really can't be much vignetting and I saw no sign of any in the stretching. Better still, We ran the data through Blur Xterminator and the stars seemed tiny and tight, corner to corner. Once we started stretching, they remained tiny and tight. Star Xterminator produced a nasty grid pattern this time, as it occasionally does, but then we asked ourselves why we wanted to use it anyway? The image, centred on Sadr, had such small stars that we didn't want them any smaller and they were still perfect into the corners. Sadr itself was better than it was in my Tak FSQ106. It had the smallest of soft halos and was OK as it was or it could be tightened up in 30 seconds in Ps if preferred.

Frankly, I was mightily impressed by these optics. I'm already using two short FL systems, both F2, but, if I weren't, Id be raiding the piggy bank, I think.

Olly

[Elp]

Think you've been missing out. Looking with interest at their Pleiades scopes later this year.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Elp

[ollypenrice]

31 minutes ago, Elp said:

Think you've been missing out. Looking with interest at their Pleiades scopes later this year.

With a RASA 8 and a Samyang 135 I don't feel I'm missing out on widefield, but the Redcat strikes me as being damned good.

Olly

[Elp]

So the big Q. RC or SY? (If you could only have one).

Edited September 8, 2023 by Elp

[ollypenrice]

Just now, Elp said:

So the big Q. RC or SY?

More resolution in the Redcat but far less speed/depth/FOV. It's the imager's choice. On targets with fine detail the Samyang lacks resolution and is at its best making mosaics where each panel will be downsized so that this doesn't matter. With the Redcat you'd get more detail in more time. Is that what you want? I think that it takes a certain amount of experience to find out what you want and what will provide it. What I want is irrelevant. What do you want?

What I really wanted to say is that the Redcat's numbers are out there: Focal length, aperture, F ratio... The question remains, Does it do those numbers well?  The one I met today does them very well indeed, to my eye.

Olly

[StarryEyed]

3 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

... What I want is irrelevant. What do you want? What I really wanted ...

Olly

Olly.

just tell us what you want, what you really really want...

[900SL]

I love the speed of the Samyang, but mine is useless for astro, way off base when it comes to tilt and decentering

My Redcat 51 however is spot on. Flat field, nice contrast, just lacks detail with the 533MC px size

 

[StarryEyed]

I have the same opinion of my samyang. Which is why Olly's view on the Redcat makes for a strong endorsement.