Starfield 102mm (Doublet) vs Askar 103mm (Triplet)

[cloudyweather]

4 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

Starfield 102 on an EQ5 (great mount for visual only), and the scope that replaced it. If you are imaging you'll probably want an HEQ5. Both mount and scope are within your budget.

Phone image through the Tak. There's very little difference between the Starfield and the Tak. I had them side by side and it was a tough call as to which was better.

Thank you so much for the pictures. The Starfield on EQ5 looks great. I'll need to check weights/sizes snd ease of setup on the HEQ5 - even if I'm not imaging immediately on the starfield, it might be good to lay the groundwork.

Do you find your red dot finder awkward for near zenith spotting? Thanks

[Mr Spock]

8 minutes ago, cloudyweather said:

Do you find your red dot finder awkward for near zenith spotting? Thanks

Not if I crawl on the floor  There's no ideal solution. Even a RACI has to be pointed.

[Ratlet]

You can get it a bit further up the scope with a handle.  This one from svbony can take finderscope dovetails so you can mount the rdf quite far forward.  I used mine for my Rigel quick finder for preference.

I've used mine with a GEM28.  Handles it perfectly well, unlike the AZ5 which is wobbly bob on all but the lowest of powers.

[cloudyweather]

This is probably a really stupid question, but why does the EQ5 say 42k+ object catalogue but the HEQ5 13k+?

[WolfieGlos]

3 hours ago, cloudyweather said:

Thank you so much for the pictures. The Starfield on EQ5 looks great. I'll need to check weights/sizes snd ease of setup on the HEQ5 - even if I'm not imaging immediately on the starfield, it might be good to lay the groundwork.

I use my Starfield 102 purely for imaging, and I run it on a HEQ5 as shown here, and have been for just over a year now. The HEQ5 handles it with no problem and is well within the weight limitation, although the HEQ5 is hardly a "portable" mount. Although if using it only at home, you can also purchase a wheeled pillar mount (or make your own!). 

I can carry the mount and tripod out of the house with a single (or two) counterweight's all in 1 go (I'm late 30's if age is a factor), and then attach the scope afterwards. 

Hope that helps.

2 hours ago, Ratlet said:

You can get it a bit further up the scope with a handle.  This one from svbony can take finderscope dovetails so you can mount the rdf quite far forward.  I used mine for my Rigel quick finder for preference.

I've used mine with a GEM28.  Handles it perfectly well, unlike the AZ5 which is wobbly bob on all but the lowest of powers.

Ooohh, interesting. This fits the tube rings on the Starfield 102? I've been looking for ages for a handle for it with no luck. Do you have a link to the one you have?

Edited May 7 by WolfieGlos
Pillar mount added

[Elp]

I use the WO one.

[Ratlet]

35 minutes ago, WolfieGlos said:

I use my Starfield 102 purely for imaging, and I run it on a HEQ5 as shown here, and have been for just over a year now. The HEQ5 handles it with no problem and is well within the weight limitation, although the HEQ5 is hardly a "portable" mount. Although if using it only at home, you can also purchase a wheeled pillar mount (or make your own!). 

I can carry the mount and tripod out of the house with a single (or two) counterweight's all in 1 go (I'm late 30's if age is a factor), and then attach the scope afterwards. 

Hope that helps.

Ooohh, interesting. This fits the tube rings on the Starfield 102? I've been looking for ages for a handle for it with no luck. Do you have a link to the one you have?

SVBONY SV211 203mm Handle Bar for Telescope SV503 102mm and SV550 122mm OTA

Can be got from AliExpress or svbony shop.  I went for the shop as it was slightly cheaper.  Just be aware you need to add vat to the AliExpress prices.

[Adam J]

On 06/05/2024 at 18:54, cloudyweather said:

Hi all,

First let me say that I've read as much as I can find online and I'm looking for help.

I'm fairly new at astronomy, retired and a  semi-professional photographer in the past (love HQ lenses).  Not sure about all the image processing/stacking that seems to be needed for astro but may give that a go (I have an APS-C Fuji). But I'm also looking for Visual and somewhat portable (car / easy setup).

Consider the Starfield 102 + 0.8 reducer/flattener and the Askar 103mm + 08. reducer/flattener to be the same price and both in stock.

I've read nothing but glowing reports of the Starfield everywhere. Praising the quality build, finish & optics for both Visual and Imaging.

The Askar seems to have split views. Concern about cheaper glass than perhaps more expensive triplets. I did read of possible focuser issues on one site.

Why am I asking?  The Starfield has been out of stock for a few months and I could get the Askar, but I'll wait a little longer if needed.

Has anyone actually used both telescopes?  First hand experience of both? For Visual and Imaging?

Many thanks

You will get the TS Optics 115mm triplet for a similar price. Its well established as a good imaging scope. 

Adam

[cloudyweather]

13 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Starfield 102 on an EQ5 (great mount for visual only), and the scope that replaced it. If you are imaging you'll probably want an HEQ5. Both mount and scope are within your budget.

Phone image through the Tak. There's very little difference between the Starfield and the Tak. I had them side by side and it was a tough call as to which was better.

Are you using a Pier extension? I can't see from the photos.  Just trying to price up combinations. Thanks

[Mr Spock]

Just now, cloudyweather said:

Are you using a Pier extension? I can't see from the photos.  Just trying to price up combinations. Thanks

No. Just the tripod as is. I then either sit on a stool, or, for zenith, kneel.

[cloudyweather]

13 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

No. Just the tripod as is. I then either sit on a stool, or, for zenith, kneel.

No risk of scope hitting tripod then? (for Starfield rather than your Tak). Thanks

[Mr Spock]

10 minutes ago, cloudyweather said:

No risk of scope hitting tripod then? (for Starfield rather than your Tak). Thanks

No. The EQ5 has a single leg pointing north. You can reach any part of the sky without contacting that.

[TiffsAndAstro]

18 hours ago, cloudyweather said:

"Brand new, unused but with some carbon fibre irregularities in the weave pattern ...!". I'm not a structural engineer but I'd have thought the weave was integral to the material integrity - but like I say, I'm not a structural engineer.

 

There will probably be YouTube videos testing structural differences between perfect and irregular carbon fibre.

Personally, as a total noob myself, I think my skills would be the biggest limit I'd have to overcome before I'd need worry about non perfect carbon fibre weave in my scope tube

[cloudyweather]

So FLO are recommending the EQM35.

"The EQM35 sits between the EQ5 and the HEQ5 in the line up; the EQM35 is basically a mini HEQ5 in terms of tracking capabilities, only the HEQ5 has a higher payload. The HEQ5 Pro would be best for imaging, followed by the EQM35, then the EQ5 Pro which doesn't have quite so accurate gearing and stepper motors."

The newer EQM35 (6 years old) also takes a slightly higher payload than the EQ5 (which is 13+ years old)...

[John]

Mount payloads should be taken with a pinch of salt IMHO.

The length of the scope tube can also play a significant role in how much stress is put on the mount and tripod. The refractors discussed here are not all that long however.

 

 

Edited May 8 by John

[cloudyweather]

I should also say that I'm going to be principally visual for now. Learn the skies rather than focus on the imaging side. It would be nice to take the odd photo but I know the needed HEQ5 for HQ images is not light (as others have noted).

[Elp]

If you want light consider a harmonic drive mount, small and no counterweights needed. I've imaged DSO through the native FL of the SF with my hem15 perfectly fine, it was autoguided with a 200mm FL guidescope.

[cloudyweather]

1 hour ago, Elp said:

If you want light consider a harmonic drive mount, small and no counterweights needed. I've imaged DSO through the native FL of the SF with my hem15 perfectly fine, it was autoguided with a 200mm FL guidescope.

Is the HEM15 as complicated to align and use as the 'Quick Start Guide' implies? Would this be equivalent to a HEQ5 Pro for tracking? Thanks

[Elp]

39 minutes ago, cloudyweather said:

Is the HEM15 as complicated to align and use as the 'Quick Start Guide' implies? Would this be equivalent to a HEQ5 Pro for tracking? Thanks

Never had a heq5 so can't really say, I do have a gem28 and it's similar performance to that.

You do really need a computer, either to use the ipolar if you buy the mount with one to PA (it's incredibly simple) or use free astro software with phd2 or something like an on board computer like an Asiair which doesn't need ipolar as it uses your main imaging camera (by far the easiest I've used, you are however tied to zwo equipment other than the mount, dslr bodies from Canon, Nikon and Sony are supported), raspberry pi with astroberry or Stellarmate loaded onto it (again no ipolar needed) or a mini pc (use ipolar or a main camera).

I believe hd mounts benefit from the autoguiding due to the mechanics whereas a traditional worm gear mount can at a push kind of do without (though no serious AP is done without autoguiding unless the mount performs exceptionally well without or has absolute encoders). For visual you'd be fine without, it's also exceptionally quiet in operation, not quite gem28 whisper quiet, but close.

If not the hem15 the ZWO am3 would be the next step as it has HD drives in both Ra and Dec so you don't even have to balance the setup properly (hems only have them in the most important for tracking Ra axis, and use their traditional mechanism in the Dec). The am3 (or larger 5) can also be oriented in 90 degrees so you can use them in alt az with goto too or use the supplied joystick for simple slewing. They're higher priced though.

Skywatchers Wave 100 HD mount will be out around Autumn at around 1700 (there seems to be some sort of invisible agreement as to what prices these mounts should be set at at the moment). This one has dual OTA mounting options as well as a slightly heavier payload.

You can't go wrong with a heq5 as far as I've read, but for me, I don't want to deal with CWs or heavy steel tripods anymore. I can also store the mounts in the same bags as my otas as they're so compact.

Edited May 8 by Elp

[Scosmico]

The star field is out of stock, but this one 102mm is. Very good on visual. 

 https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/rvo-horizon-102-ed-doublet-refractor-ota.html

[cloudyweather]

On 08/05/2024 at 20:25, Scosmico said:

The star field is out of stock, but this one 102mm is. Very good on visual. 

 https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/rvo-horizon-102-ed-doublet-refractor-ota.html

I think I'll wait for the Starfield at the moment. Thanks

[cloudyweather]

On 07/05/2024 at 22:20, WolfieGlos said:

I use my Starfield 102 purely for imaging, and I run it on a HEQ5 as shown here, and have been for just over a year now. The HEQ5 handles it with no problem and is well within the weight limitation, although the HEQ5 is hardly a "portable" mount. Although if using it only at home, you can also purchase a wheeled pillar mount (or make your own!). 

I can carry the mount and tripod out of the house with a single (or two) counterweight's all in 1 go (I'm late 30's if age is a factor), and then attach the scope afterwards. 

Hope that helps.

I assume carrying the mount head separately makes it easier? The HEQ5 mount seems to be 3kg heavier than the EQ5 - doesn't 'sound' a lot but... (my wife's stage piano is 20kg and that's a killer).

I would have thought it normal to setup and level tripod, then add mount and then scope? Or is that wrong? As you can tell, still debating HEQ5. Thanks

[Mr Spock]

35 minutes ago, cloudyweather said:

I think I'll wait for the Starfield at the moment.

Good choice 👍

[cloudyweather]

On 07/05/2024 at 19:11, Mr Spock said:

Starfield 102 on an EQ5 (great mount for visual only), and the scope that replaced it. If you are imaging you'll probably want an HEQ5. Both mount and scope are within your budget.

 

Phone image through the Tak. There's very little difference between the Starfield and the Tak. I had them side by side and it was a tough call as to which was better.
 

I was going to get StellaLyra 30mm 2" SuperView Eyepiece and BST StarGuider 60º 5mm ED Eyepiece but not really sure of others. I need long eye-relief for glasses.

Coupled with StellaMira 2" 90º Di-Electric Diagonal and Astro Essentials Variable Polarising Moon Filter 1.25"

I do want to explore the moon and it would be nice to see a planet or two along with everything else. So it would be good to know thoughts on practical useful magnification for the UK. And the other items I've listed. Thanks

[John]

It might be worth starting a new thread on eyepieces for your scope choice - it can be a complex subject - more complex than choosing the scope, believe it or not !