Orion optics VX12 - standard 1/6 wave good enough?

[Piero]

I agree with all what Stu said above.

@Flame Nebula I certainly don't want to put you off, but have you already had some experience in imaging with your 80mm refractor?

Reading your posts I suspect that you don't. Of course there is nothing wrong with this, but if this is the case, I would advise to approach this gradually. Imaging is a hobby in the hobby. Everyone in this forum appreciates astro images, but that's only the final result or the tip of the iceberg. Behind that there is a lot of effort, often long hours taking shots, processing, etc. Some people love all of this, others don't.

Moving around an AZ6 is doable but I would not say that it is effortless.. and that's only one bit of the required equipment.

What I am trying to say is to give it a go with a simple and cheap equipment to understand whether this is really your thing.

Like you I was also interested in imaging when I came back to this hobby again, about 10 years ago. I researched half the Internet at that time regarding the equipment required for DSOs or planetary imaging. I decided not to press the button (and have no regrets about this) after mentally putting myself in the context of doing imaging. For instance, I work with computers all day and there is no way that I want to spend my free time processing data in front of a screen. I don't even like the idea of spending "at least" 30 min setting all up and then sitting on a chair watching and controlling my equipment in the dark whilst a lovely sky is above me. Let's not even mention the clouds coming and obscuring the target. I admire people pursuing this "other" hobby with pleasure. For me something like that is enjoyable as a job (e.g. as a way to get data for research), not as a hobby.

As I said above, I really don't want to put you off. My advice is just to take it gradually, incrementing your knowledge and experience with time, and understanding whether you like it or not.

To be honest with you, the same advice is also well applicable to visual observing and that's at least one order of magnitude simpler than imaging.

Hope this helps.

Piero 

[Peter_D]

I don't use a Newt for planetary imaging so putting the question out wrt to the OP's first post: would a coma corrector be needed when the planet is on axis? An F4 scope will need a Barlow so if a coma corrector is also used, is that just adding another layer of glass to the image train?

[Flame Nebula]

5 minutes ago, Piero said:

I agree with all what Stu said above.

@Flame Nebula I certainly don't want to put you off, but have you already had some experience in imaging with your 80mm refractor?

Reading your posts I suspect that you don't. Of course there is nothing wrong with this, but if this is the case, I would advise to approach this gradually. Imaging is a hobby in the hobby. Everyone in this forum appreciates astro images, but that's only the final result or the tip of the iceberg. Behind that there is a lot of effort, often long hours taking shots, processing, etc. Some people love all of this, others don't.

Moving around an AZ6 is doable but I would not say that it is effortless.. and that's only one bit of the required equipment.

What I am trying to say is to give it a go with a simple and cheap equipment to understand whether this is really your thing.

Like you I was also interested in imaging when I came back to this hobby again, about 10 years ago. I researched half the Internet at that time regarding the equipment required for DSOs or planetary imaging. I decided not to press the button (and have no regrets about this) after mentally putting myself in the context of doing imaging. For instance, I work with computers all day and there is no way that I want to spend my free time processing data in front of a screen. I don't even like the idea of spending "at least" 30 min setting all up and then sitting on a chair watching and controlling my equipment in the dark whilst a lovely sky is above me. Let's not even mention the clouds coming and obscuring the target. I admire people pursuing this "other" hobby with pleasure. For me something like that is enjoyable as a job (e.g. as a way to get data for research), not as a hobby.

As I said above, I really don't want to put you off. My advice is just to take it gradually, incrementing your knowledge and experience with time, and understanding whether you like it or not.

To be honest with you, the same advice is also well applicable to visual observing and that's at least one order of magnitude simpler than imaging.

Hope this helps.

Piero 

Hi Piero, 

I appreciate your advice. In fact, I've already changed course significantly after Stu's post, as he got me thinking, particularly about the potential issues of mounting/dismounting a 12" scope, even if it is only 14 kg, it's awkward shaped, and so as a compromise, I've decided to drop down to an 8", which actually are also very capable imaging scopes. This will allow me to see potential issues going to much larger scopes on an AZEQ6, but at the same time, give me a chance to try planetary imaging, which would be better than anything I can obtain with my current aperture (since aperture does rule in thus case). 

But, anyway, back to your opening question. Indeed you summise almost correctly, but not fully. I have tried using the ed80 with a D7000, with some limited exposure times, with darks and flats, using DSS to stack. But, getting long enough exposure time per exposure is the killer without an EQ mount. Now, my thinking in the past, has been Heq5 pro, but I don't want to spend > £1k on that mount, when for £1.7k, I could get an AZEQ6, with greater abilities wrt future scopes and az for visual too(good for Newts!) . So, either way I look, the path goes through this mount. I guess at that point, I could stop further scope purchase. But, the good thing about the SW 200pds, is it's cheap😁. Worst case, I use it for visual observation, get used to handling it on the mount, but start getting experience with equatorial dso AP with the ed80. As mentioned, I already have a dslr, so not much additional layout would be needed to start out, except maybe bigger sd memory cards! I've already invested in two 500gb ssd in preparation for memory needs. 

So, I could go down this path, in increments, and the worst that happens, is I have a good solid versatile Azeq mount and an 8" cheap newt, for visual obs, which would be a significant increase on my current apertures.

Of course, I am definitely not ruling out the possibility of a nice 5" apo in the future, if I decide not to continue down the AP path. I would still have reserve in my budget to get a 5" StellaMira apo. 

I do listen to you guys and consider your wise words. 😉 I don't always totally agree with everything(but that's normal) , but importantly, I do like that it makes me think again. 

Thanks 

Mark 

[Flame Nebula]

5 minutes ago, Peter_D said:

I don't use a Newt for planetary imaging so putting the question out wrt to the OP's first post: would a coma corrector be needed when the planet is on axis? An F4 scope will need a Barlow so if a coma corrector is also used, is that just adding another layer of glass to the image train?

Hi Peter, 

Things have changed slightly, after Stu's post, and I'm now thinking about an 8" F5. But, as far as I know from my research, a coma corrector isn't used for planetary AP, even for a f4. The common accessories for Newts looks like various Barlows and, an atmospheric dispersion corrector. 

If I do eventually get the F4, in all likelihood, I'd get a paracorr. 

For the F5 SW scope, perhaps a cheaper skywatcher coma corrector will do, although I understand at F5, it depends on the observer's preference, as coma is apparently not so pronounced(I'm sure others can comment there) 

Mark

[dweller25]

There is also the 8” F/6 Newtonian to consider….

Edited April 1 by dweller25

[Flame Nebula]

48 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

There is also the 8” F/6 Newtonian to consider….

Thanks Dweller, 

I did also check that out, but the F5 version seems pretty good and is, supposedly, better for AP. I know the 200p has many good reviews for visual observation. 

Mark

[dweller25]

36 minutes ago, Flame Nebula said:

Thanks Dweller, 

I did also check that out, but the F5 version seems pretty good and is, supposedly, better for AP. I know the 200p has many good reviews for visual observation. 

Mark

I am confused now, I thought you wanted the Newtonian for planetary imaging, in which case the longer focal length and smaller secondary of the F/6 version should make it the better choice.

But if you are using the Newtonian for DSO then yes, the shorter focal lengths would be better.

[bosun21]

I started planetary imaging last year in earnest and I'll contribute my two pennies worth. I started out with a 150mm Maksutov on an EQ5 pro mount which I chose for its refractor like images. There's so much to learn and so many aspects that need to be fine tuned, usually on the night of capture itself. I will stick to the equipment i used. I used the Mak with EQ5 pro for months, imaging every clear sky i could get. I was pleased with the modest results I attained. I then moved to a 10" go to dobsonian which I bought primarily for planetary imaging but also some visual observing. The increase of 4" extra aperture didn't immediately produce drastically better images and is now a work in progress waiting for the planets return and better seeing conditions. I also bought a AZ-EQ6 but I have no intention of putting a larger Newtonian on it as the 10" is more than adequate. I want the AZ-EQ6 for an apo and a 180 Mak. The learning curve for planetary imaging is a steep one, but it's a journey I'm pleased to have started. I consciously left out any mention of the image processing which is a topic for another day. Planetary imaging whether captured on an EQ rig or ALT/AZ will have no bearing on the results of the final image. A coma corrector is not required for planetary imaging. You should ask yourself what is it you want to do. Is it planetary imaging, astrophotography or visual? You seem to be changing your aims between them. This will have a huge effect on what recommendations you receive.

[John]

1 hour ago, dweller25 said:

I am confused now, I thought you wanted the Newtonian for planetary imaging, in which case the longer focal length and smaller secondary of the F/6 version should make it the better choice.

 

Just my thoughts as well 🤔

[Flame Nebula]

3 hours ago, dweller25 said:

I am confused now, I thought you wanted the Newtonian for planetary imaging, in which case the longer focal length and smaller secondary of the F/6 version should make it the better choice.

But if you are using the Newtonian for DSO then yes, the shorter focal lengths would be better.

Hi Dweller, 

From what I've seen on astrobin, the F5 can produce really good planetary images as well as DSO, so given its smaller size, I would prefer it for going on the az-eq6. It's also a test run on how I can cope with a moderate sized tube, wrt mounting/dismantling, because if I can't cope with that scope , God knows how I'll cope with a 12" OO f4 on it, which I might want, at some point in future. 

The F5 seems like a good all rounder for planetary AP and visual. But, I could do DSO AP on it too. However, I'll probably try and do that on my ed80 to start with

Thanks 

Mark 

Edited April 1 by Flame Nebula

[Flame Nebula]

1 hour ago, John said:

Just my thoughts as well 🤔

Hi John 

See my reply to Dweller😊

[davidc135]

It's all personal choices but I'd give an 8'' the best chance of excelling on the moon and planets by getting a 1/10 wave wf f6 with a 25% secondary from OOUK.  I'd want it to snap and sing at x400 on the best nights rather than feel it fell just a touch short.

David

[Flame Nebula]

53 minutes ago, davidc135 said:

It's all personal choices but I'd give an 8'' the best chance of excelling on the moon and planets by getting a 1/10 wave wf f6 with a 25% secondary from OOUK.  I'd want it to snap and sing at x400 on the best nights rather than feel it fell just a touch short.

David

Hi David

Thanks for your suggestion. 

The OO route had crossed my mind, but I've seen lots of good comments about the 200pds as both a visual and imaging scope, but never any direct comparison between the scope and a VX8L.

In theory, one would expect it to perform better visually, but I'd be very interested if anyone has done a side-by-side comparison for visual that shows a clear win for the OO scope under UK skies. 

But the main reason I'm getting the 200pds is for planetary AP (with potential for dso AP,) where I know it can be used with success. Any slight difference in contrast can be sorted in post capture processing. The shorter tube will also help on the az-eq6 mount (and give me a glimpse of what mounting much larger Newts might be like!) 

If I'm not satisfied with the visual views on planets, I'd probably end up getting a 4 or 5" apo,  which I suspect will provide very good sharp/contrasty views on planets and shine with doubles etc. I might do this anyway, as a quicker grab and go option to the 8" newt. 

In the end, this might prove a more sensible path to follow than my original plan of placing a 12" VX12 onto the mount, to try for best of all worlds in one scope. 

Mark

 

[seven_legs]

I thought SCT or CC was better on planets than Newt of the same size because of the longer Focal lenght, F10 to F15.

[alacant]

On 31/03/2024 at 20:40, Elp said:

no amount of reading makes up for it

+1

@OP: Perhaps the best (only?) way to make a decision is to go along to a nearby astro club [1] and see items you're considering first hand. The members will be only too pleased to let you have a go with stuff gear you're considering. Between them, they'll have it all and it could help you avoid making an expensive and frustrating error.

Cheers and HTH

[1] Just remember that at astro club, everyone knows the best setup. For everything😉

[Acrab67]

I know there are a lot of horror stories out there regarding OO UK telescopes. The OO UK SPX 10" f4'8 (1148 mm) 1/8 pv that I currently have, and that I recently recovered (I sold it years ago to a good friend and bought it again recently) has some improvements made, including a change of focuser, spider collimation screws and black flocking on the interior. I have also made a long plate to prevent the tube from flexing. Mechanically mediocre, it has outstanding optics. I remember when I bought it that I was able to squeeze it with the planets with a TeleVue Nagler Zoom 6 -3mm, and at the shortest focal length (383X), there were nights when the images offered excellent contrast and resolution. I live in the south of Spain, near the sea, and I enjoy exceptional seeing on many occasions. I'm waiting for it to come back season of planets for use with binoviewer. I would not pay much attention to the interferometry tests that accompany their mirrors, but if you are lucky you can get one that, without being 0.99 strehl, performs excellently on nights of good seeing,

[Flame Nebula]

1 hour ago, seven_legs said:

I thought SCT or CC was better on planets than Newt of the same size because of the longer Focal lenght, F10 to F15.

Hi,

Indeed, for AP, at its native FL, yes, there are far more good images with C11 and C14 scopes on astrobin. But, I've seen enough images from Newts with Barlow to match the FL, to be happy enough, to go with a Newtonian. 

 For visual, the same aperture of newt,  has been reported to be as good, and often better, in the UK seeing, at least.

To be honest, I had originally decided on the C9.25, but after reading more reviews and comments on this forum, I think the 8" newt may be the better option, for now. 

I'm satisfied, based on astrobin images, that it will be a good starting point for a 1/4 of cost of C9.25. 

Thanks 

Mark 

[Flame Nebula]

1 hour ago, alacant said:

+1

@OP: Perhaps the best (only?) way to make a decision is to go along to a nearby astro club [1] and see items you're considering first hand. The members will be only too pleased to let you have a go with stuff gear you're considering. Between them, they'll have it all and it could help you avoid making an expensive and frustrating error.

Cheers and HTH

[1] Just remember that at astro club, everyone knows the best setup. For everything😉

Thanks Alicant

Since that post, you may notice I have taken on board various warnings and have decided to go for a much smaller 200pds. It's not a huge outlay. If I can't handle that, then that'll be the end of any ideas to go larger! 😬

Mark

[Flame Nebula]

47 minutes ago, Acrab67 said:

I know there are a lot of horror stories out there regarding OO UK telescopes. The OO UK SPX 10" f4'8 (1148 mm) 1/8 pv that I currently have, and that I recently recovered (I sold it years ago to a good friend and bought it again recently) has some improvements made, including a change of focuser, spider collimation screws and black flocking on the interior. I have also made a long plate to prevent the tube from flexing. Mechanically mediocre, it has outstanding optics. I remember when I bought it that I was able to squeeze it with the planets with a TeleVue Nagler Zoom 6 -3mm, and at the shortest focal length (383X), there were nights when the images offered excellent contrast and resolution. I live in the south of Spain, near the sea, and I enjoy exceptional seeing on many occasions. I'm waiting for it to come back season of planets for use with binoviewer. I would not pay much attention to the interferometry tests that accompany their mirrors, but if you are lucky you can get one that, without being 0.99 strehl, performs excellently on nights of good seeing,

Thanks Acrab

Well, I was thinking of getting the VX12 and putting it on an AZEQ6. I've read some good reviews. But, I appreciate all the warnings about this being a potential nightmare. I think once I get some experience with an 8" in Az mode, I may decide I'm satisfied. 😉

And if I'm not, maybe the more sensible route after that is either a SW300 goto Dob, or a 5" apo.

Probably need to get some experience in first, as mentioned by Elp. 

Thanks 

Mark 

[seven_legs]

looking at the 200pds, (which looks a nice scope.) on FLO it weighs 8.8kgs so its light enough to handle.

Anyway look forward to your first light and thoughts.

[Flame Nebula]

31 minutes ago, seven_legs said:

looking at the 200pds, (which looks a nice scope.) on FLO it weighs 8.8kgs so its light enough to handle.

Anyway look forward to your first light and thoughts.

Thanks 👍

Yes, I think I can handle that weight. 

Well, unless something bad happens over the next few months(I'm having some worrying health issues at the moment, as well as potential job security issues, both of which have the potential to mess up my plans😔) I'm planning to buy these things in September. 

Mark

[Stu]

@Flame Nebula just a polite note to stop bypassing the swear filter with asterisks as per the CoC.

Many thanks,

Stu

[Flame Nebula]

33 minutes ago, Stu said:

@Flame Nebula just a polite note to stop bypassing the swear filter with asterisks as per the CoC.

Many thanks,

Stu

Hi Stu, 

I should have read the CoC more carefully. It wasn't intentional to violate the CoC.

Won't happen again. 😏

Thanks 

Mark