Thank you for the information. Your second telescope is equipped with the comacorrector. Does that fit to the cheaper one as well? Which one do you prefer? Well, nice video. Thank you
Thank you for the comment. 🙏Yes, theoretically the coma corrector can be used on both telescopes as both have a 2 inch focuser. However, the first telescope has so little coma in the corners that it is almost not needed. Stacking usually results in the images overlapping anyway, which means that the image has to be cropped again at the end anyway. Therefore, the coma corrector is not absolutely necessary for the first telescope. I hope I was able to answer your question. 😊
To be honest, the cheaper scope did a better job. 1- less background noise. 2- you never used the coma corrector on the cheaper scope, so it would have delivered even sharper images with the coma corrector. 3- the image has more detail than the more expensive scopes image. If you are going to do a comparison video on scopes, then you must image with the same for both scopes, like use the coma corrector with both scopes.
You are absolutely right. There is actually a lot more noise in the picture with the more expensive telescope. I also like the colors a little better with the cheaper telescope. However, if you zoom in a little, you can clearly see that there are more details with the more expensive telescope. Unfortunately, you can't see that so well in the video. However, if I look at the picture in full resolution on the computer, you can see it. Thank you very much for your comment. 😊🙏
I think he mentioned that the moon was more dominant when he used the Skywatcher scope, so that would explain the difference in noise. A telescope itself cannot really "produce noise", that comes from the camera and the light pollution.
Thank you very much for your comment.😊🙏 I think there are more details in the second picture. But I definitely agree with you that the galaxy looks much nicer and better in the first picture. Do you also have a telescope?
@@FelixsAstrophotography i just have a little 70/750 mak.... I have just started astrophotography. I currently have an astromodded Canon T3i, a SA 2i, and i just use my camera lenses for now. I am hoping to get a legit telescope sometime this year. I wanna keep the focal length under 450, so i am looking at 60 - 70mm refractors.
interesting. Have you ever heard of the Askar 180pro? It is relatively cheap and has a focal length of 180mm. I personally do not own this telescope but have heard good things about it.maybe this would be interesting for you
@@FelixsAstrophotography i have heard of it, but wasnt sure about it. I'll look into it again. The scope I have been looking at was the Apertura 60/360 with a field flattener and guide scope for $600. But it is constantly on back order.
I honestly like the first image more. In the second image the galaxy looks pink and there is a lot of walking noise probably due to autoguiding and not dithering (I may be wrong just my 1st impression). Anyway great video, thanks for publishing !!!
Thank you very much for your comment. I also like the color of the first picture more. Unfortunately, you can't see the colors so well in the second picture because the moon has negatively affected the image. You're right, unfortunately I have quite a lot of walking noise in the second picture. That's because I used the wrong settings for guiding. Do you have a telescope?
Yes a 70mm refractor. I am also quite a beginner in goto. How do you find the target at >700mm focal length? You do plate solving with the Canon? I ask because I have problems doing that with Fujifilm 😞
Is the 2nd picture color calibrated? It seems much more red/violet. Color wise the first is much better. 2nd had auto guiding so naturally the stars are going to be slightly better.
Thank you for your comment. I actually don't like the color in the second picture too, which was partly due to the moon. Thank you for your comment. I like the colors in the first picture a little better too. Have you ever photographed this galaxy?
@FelixsAstrophotography its actually my current project. I just got an asi178mm cooled and I'm using M101 as my first mono target. I'm using a refractor and so far my pictures do not look as good as yours.
@FelixsAstrophotography I just got the Askar 71f. So far the couple of test images compared to my old scope the SVBony SV48p are night and day. The M13 I took is soooo much sharper. Part of it was my camera pairing. When I bought my dslr (Canon 6D mk1) I had no idea how to check the scope with the camera.
I don't think this is a good comparison - it's clear that these two nights must've had different conditions for the second image to turn out so much worse. The first image has great colors, low amount of noise and very nice contrast while the second image has very poor contrast, almost no colors at all besides blue tint and A LOT of walking noise. Dunno why, maybe it's just a difference in processing or maybe the conditions on the second night were just much worse resulting in poorer signal to noise ratio. Both these telescopes are pretty cheap and there shouldn't be that much difference between them except for the diffraction spikes and obviously the coma since you only used a corrector on one of them. The amount of light gathered on both should be nearly identical with maybe the cheaper one having a bit more vignetting because of the smaller secondary. And about those diffraction spikes - the ones on the cheap telescope are extremely weird - 3 spider vanes should produce pretty nice 6 spike star pattern instead of what you got and I'm wondering if the telescope was just out of collimation or perhaps the primary mirror had pinched optics (clips holding it in place could be overtightened in which case you need to pull out the mirror from the tube, undo the screws just a little and put the mirror back in). The diffraction spikes on the more expensive telescope are also pretty ugly and it could be the collimation and pinched optics but in that case I know from experience that it's mostly just because of the cheap flimsy sky-watcher spider that's identical in all their Newtonians (I replaced mine with a 3D printed one and it's miles better).
First of all, thank you for your comment.😊🙏 The conditions were actually a little different on both nights. Unfortunately, the moon had an impact on the second night, which made it difficult to get the color in the picture. I manually dithered the first picture, but unfortunately I set something wrong with the guiding on the second, which is why I have walking noise in the picture. Unfortunately. Regarding the spikes on the first telescope, all I can say is that it's because of the metal parts at the front of the opening that lead to the spikes. Unfortunately, these are much too big, which is why the spikes don't look so nice. I know that both telescopes aren't incredibly expensive. Unfortunately, I don't own a telescope that's more expensive. But I do think that the price is big enough to make a comparison. One telescope wasn't even built for astrophotography, just for visual observation. I hope I was able to answer your comment. If not, please write to me again. Do you also have a telescope, and if so, which one? Kind regards, Felix 😊 Clear skies 🔭
I would try masking the primary mirror clips to help with those miscellaneous "spikes". Heck, a well collimated 6" Newtonian for less than $200 is totally good enough if it produces the sample images you captured.
Thank you for your comment and your tip. The problem with the Bresser telescope is actually that the individual metal parts that provide the spikes at the opening of the telescope are way too thick. Thank you for your tip. I have already thought about that. which picture do you like more?
@@FelixsAstrophotography both. All and any capture still amazes me. Those specific photons made an appointment to hit your sensors at this moment in time...And you just happen to have the software to process the captured images and share it online with the world. Good times!
Both of those scopes are classed as cheap, it's just that one is cheaper than the other. There are upgrades available for the Sky Watcher which includes tube flocking material, a better focuser, secondary mirror spider and an edge cover for the main mirror to prevent artifacts around stars caused by the clips holding the main mirror. I was going to upgrade my own Sky Watcher 150P in this way but as I now own a 115 f7 apo refractor, I probably won't bother. For the price both of the scopes have given reasonable images, but I think that overall the image captured through. the Sky Watcher scope was better. Both scopes probably required collimating and fine tuning. Were they straight out of the box? The main mirror clips are often over tightened for shipment to prevent any movement during transit which may result in pinched optics.
Thank you very much for your comment. I know that this is not an extremely expensive telescope, which is why I have shown the prices in the title. I think that the difference is big enough to make a comparison. Yes, you are right, this telescope can be significantly improved with upgrades. I will do that in the future. Both telescopes were collimated before using them. Which camera do you use?
With the Sky Watcher Explorer 150P I used a Canon 600D DSLR and and an Altair GPCAM 224 C (OSC) for the odd time that I image Jupiter or Saturn. I don't use my 150P for DSO imaging so have not used any of my cooled OSC or mono cameras with it. To be fair to Sky Watcher they have never really claimed the explorer P f5 Newtonians in the smaller sizes were anything other than entry level instruments intended mainly for visual use, the fact that they can be turned into effective imaging scopes without spending a fortune says a lot about the quality of the optics. These scopes are often supplied with an EQ3-2 mount which I think is too small, the odd time that I use it I placed it on my EQ6-R Pro mount which is of course far more stable.
I also got an 150/750 dps but I don't have a comma detector and a tripod. Do you maybe got any tips for wich comma detector and tripod i shoeld buy (and maybe a lens)
As a coma corrector I can definitely recommend the Maxfield coma corrector. As a tripod or mount for this telescope I can recommend the heq5 pro from skywatcher. I hope I was able to help. If you have any questions just let me know.
Hey felix! Great video! Question, what Bresser telescope is that? I cannot find any for under 200 euros for the life of me. All of the Polluxs start at almost twice that?
Hi. First of all, thank you for your comment. In this video I only calculated the price for the Newton telescope itself. I said that when I introduced the telescope. The telescope with the tripod, so as a set, costs more, as you have noticed.
Great video and comparison! I wonder why only the second image has walking noise? Did you dither while taking subs for the first image? Also, those spikes are caused by the tabs that hold the primary mirror in place. It's recommended to install a round mask on top of the mirror to make the stars look almost perfect.
Thank you for your comment. I didn't use guiding for the first image and therefore dithered manually. I used guiding for the second. Unfortunately the guiding didn't dither because of the wrong setting. Thanks for the tip with the spikes. which picture do you like more?
@@FelixsAstrophotography Oh that makes sense. Well, dither or die is what they say 😂. I personally like the galaxy in the first image. There's more detail in the galaxy but the coma in the corners is something expected. Also, unfortunately not every coma corrector works well with a given scope. I've tried many with my Quattro and only the Starizona 0.75x produced exceptional images with pinpoint stars across the frame. Anyway, I bumped into your channel just today and already like your videos. I wish you rapid growth in your audience!
Your video really helped me understand the difference in these telescope. can you please suggest budget friendly goto mount for the first telescope. Amazing video , Keep Growing👍
@gamerorion2844 That depends on what you want to do with it. Do you want to use it just for observation or do you want to attach a camera and a guidescope and other equipment later?
Thank you very much for your comment. Your support means a lot to me. I don't currently own a refractor, but that would be an idea for another video. Do you also own a telescope and if so, which one?
Nice video, i recently got into astro this year with the 150P so almost the same telescope! That picture looks better than most of my images so nice job. But im also not the best with polar alignment given im in the southern hemisphere and dont go out of a bortle 9 area.
Oddly enough. I prefer the cheaper image... Looks a little sharper in the center galaxy region. Also the colour post processing is better. The stars definately look better in the skywatcher scope.
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately the colors are not so nice in the second picture because the moon had a negative influence on the picture. Do you also have a telescope ?
11:11 I definitely KNOW you are not correct. Please redo the capture on an equally moonless night. The image taken with the cheaper scope looks way better. DEFINITELY way better.
Thank you very much for your comment. I like the colors of the picture with the cheaper one more too. But I have to say that in the second picture you can actually see more details in the galaxy. Unfortunately the difference is not as clear as on my computer. When I look at the picture on my computer the picture actually has a lot more details. Unfortunately some details are lost in the video. The fact that the moon was visible on the second night obviously influenced the image. I will make another video like this in the summer. Do you also have a telescope and if so which one?
First of all, thank you for your comment.😊🙏 Both telescopes were collimated before I used them.I always collimate my telescopes before using them because I forgot to do it once and the end image wasn't that good.
Hello, I always use a laser collimator. It should be fine at f5. But I know what you mean. The spikes are not perfect. Perhaps the focus is not quite right. Do you have any ideas?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have used 2 cheap (sub $100) laser collimators and neither of them was collimated in itself 😅 I didn’t feel like collimating my collimation tool… So I opted for the Ocal 2 pro collimator. Never got better results. The laser won’t be able to tell you how misaligned the secondary mirror depth/rotation/etc is. I liked the video idea, which is why I clicked on it, but I know better results can be had even with a dirt cheap Newtonian that are properly set up for imaging.
Thank you for your answer. My collimator wasn't collimated either. So I collimated the collimator. Since then it's worked very well. Which telescopes do you use?
I expect the optics (mirrors) are the same in the two scopes. The main difference is the heavier/thicker 3-pronged spider vanes on the Bresser causing the less pleasing diffraction flares, and the coma corrector + autoguider used with the Skywatcher resulting in a cleaner sharper image. The SW focuser is a lot nicer too - it's a better scope all-round, probably more comparable with the Bresser NT150s OTA than this basic 6-inch kit scope on that wobbly EQ you're forced to buy with it.
@@FelixsAstrophotography I had quite a few over the years, SW and GSO Dobs and Newtonians, ED80, 6-inch Intes Mak and few others.. That was back in Australia. Living in Scotland for a few years now I only have a fast 4-inch achromat for widefield visual but would like to get an 8-inch Dob for later in summer for Saturn. For astrophotography I'll just stick with camera lenses for the foreseeable future. I still need to get a half decent EQ mount for that too..
@@FelixsAstrophotography Just DSLR. Have only dabbled over the years, have been more invested in visual astronomy. My best attempts so far have been with an old manual focus 135mm f/2.8 film lens on a crop sensor on some southern sky gems and Virgo cluster galaxy zoo. Have a full frame now but need a tracker, maybe a used EQ5 with an RA motor...
Which camera exactly? I am currently using the Canon EOS 2000D. In the future, however, I would like to buy an astro-modified DSLR. So I'm currently looking for a new camera
I wouldn't say the SW is necessarily an expensive telescope. More than the other, sure. But still on the cheap side. Luckily, even cheap telescopes have decent mirrors, meaning that the extra money pays for stuff that does not appear on the image, but still are important, such as focuser, rings, screws, etc.
Thank you for your comment. You are absolutely right.That is why I mentioned the prices of the two telescopes in the title. Do you also own a telescope and if so, which one?
Please: don’t say I‘ll attach the counterweights in a view minutes. It is always recommended to put the counterweights on first and I don’t want your viewers to dent their OTA on their tripod. The images are very different, I think it would have been wiser to capture less time but on the same night as you initially intended. The Skywatcher is far from beeing an expensive telescope but Bresser is often surprisingly cheap. It should be noted that Skywatcher uses standard Vixen dovetails to attach on your mount as well as standard finder shoes. Although Bresser is usually Vixen compatible, I have seen telescopes that made mount connection surprisingly hard and not using standard finder shoes but their own Bresser/explore scientific type complicates things (for example you can’t swap your finder for a guide scope so easily. That said, seems like the optics are fine and there are a couple modifications that can make the Bresser a lot better (main mirror mask).
Thank you for your comment. 😊🙏You are absolutely right that I should attach the counterweights first. I usually do it the way you said. It would have actually been better to take both pictures on one night. Do you also have a telescope and if so, which one exactly?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have a couple of telescopes. My most used are an old 200P (as I recall there was no PDS version at that time but I might be mistaken) modified a lot by now and a Skywatcher 80/600 doublet ED. The Newtonian sits on an EQ6-R, the ED on a belt modified HEQ-5 (it is a great mount). Rarely I do have a chance to use my TS classic Cassegrain and the Bresser 90/900 achromat which is great for visual astronomy but I modified it by changing the focuser and finder shoe.
@@FelixsAstrophotography The old and trusty ZWO ASI 1600MM Pro after great success with my Fuji APS-C mirrorless camera which unmodified was a lot better than my unmodified Canon full frame camera (less loss of H-alpha signal.
You are absolutely right. I actually wanted to set dithering but unfortunately I forgot and only noticed it the next morning. Thank you for your comment. Do you also have a telescope and if so which one?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have a Samyang 135mm lens combined with a DSLR on a Star Adventurer. I also have guiding but since my mount is not GOTO, I manually dither DEC.
@@FelixsAstrophotography This lens is wonderful, there is a bit of luck with getting a good copy, unfortuneately my camera is not modified, I don't want to get it modded but I am gonna upgradge to a cooled astro cam when I can.
@tahademir27 Thank you for your answer. I've heard a lot that there are differences with this lens compared to other lenses. Which camera are you using exactly?
In summary, I like the left picture more too. Unfortunately, the moon influenced the picture on the second night. Unfortunately, you can't see the difference so well in the video. When I look at the pictures on my computer in full resolution, you can see more details in the right picture.
The Bresser telescope has very little coma, so I didn't use a coma corrector. In addition, it was about the galaxy. This is in the middle where there is normally no coma anyway.
@FelixsAstrophotography coma should be the same, based on the focal ratio. Perhaps the bresser has a spherical mirror or is under or overcorrected? A proper parabola figure will have the coma inherent to any f5 mirror. Does it handle high powers as well as the proper synta model? Low power and imaging at prime focus can sometimes be tolerated on a spherical, or not properly figured parabola mirror, the spherical abberation starts to show up at higher powers
You mean because of the spikes? The thing with the spikes is actually due to the parts at the front of the Newton that cause the spikes. These are simply to big and that's why the spikes look so weird
@@FelixsAstrophotography No, not the spikes, they are normal, produces by the secondary vanes. I am talking about the weird veil of light next to the spikes.
@@FelixsAstrophotography Well I saw the same artefact on my 14 inch Newtonian, after I reattached the mirror to it's mounting with less force it was gone. I don't know how your mirror is fixed to its base, in my case I used just a few drops of silicone and three angles that the mirror could never fall out, these angles did not touch the mirror, just extra security. Bubble rap creates a great base for a telescope mirror, it's almost like adaptive optics because it supports the mirror on multiple points.
Of course for expensive, you can spend $50,000 on a set-up. Realistically, you need to spend around $2500 to get a system that uses a telescope and doesn't drive you nuts with having to fix and tweak it because it's a cheap Chinese unit.
Thank you for your comment 😊🙏Of course, there are much more expensive telescopes. I think the difference between a cheap telescope that costs about 150 euros and which was not built for astrophotography and a telescope that costs 600 euros is big enough to be able to show a comparison.Unfortunately I don't have a telescope, which is more expensive. I have mentioned the prices specifically in the thumbnail to show the exact price of the two telescopes
I know that one telescope is not incredibly expensive. The price difference between the two telescopes is, in my opinion, large enough to make a comparison. The cheap telescope is not even made for astrophotography. Thank you for your comment
bresser have spherical main mirror and built in barlow lens, so why dont you take some cheap parabolic reflector without any additional optical structure on it
Thank you for the information. Your second telescope is equipped with the comacorrector. Does that fit to the cheaper one as well?
Which one do you prefer?
Well, nice video. Thank you
Thank you for the comment. 🙏Yes, theoretically the coma corrector can be used on both telescopes as both have a 2 inch focuser. However, the first telescope has so little coma in the corners that it is almost not needed. Stacking usually results in the images overlapping anyway, which means that the image has to be cropped again at the end anyway. Therefore, the coma corrector is not absolutely necessary for the first telescope. I hope I was able to answer your question. 😊
To be honest, the cheaper scope did a better job. 1- less background noise. 2- you never used the coma corrector on the cheaper scope, so it would have delivered even sharper images with the coma corrector. 3- the image has more detail than the more expensive scopes image. If you are going to do a comparison video on scopes, then you must image with the same for both scopes, like use the coma corrector with both scopes.
You are absolutely right. There is actually a lot more noise in the picture with the more expensive telescope. I also like the colors a little better with the cheaper telescope. However, if you zoom in a little, you can clearly see that there are more details with the more expensive telescope. Unfortunately, you can't see that so well in the video. However, if I look at the picture in full resolution on the computer, you can see it. Thank you very much for your comment. 😊🙏
I think he mentioned that the moon was more dominant when he used the Skywatcher scope, so that would explain the difference in noise.
A telescope itself cannot really "produce noise", that comes from the camera and the light pollution.
You are absolutely right. I mentioned that. Maybe I will make another video like that and make sure to have the same conditions for both telescopes
Maybe i am ignorant, but the first picture looks like more detail is showing in the galaxy.
Thank you very much for your comment.😊🙏 I think there are more details in the second picture. But I definitely agree with you that the galaxy looks much nicer and better in the first picture. Do you also have a telescope?
@@FelixsAstrophotography i just have a little 70/750 mak.... I have just started astrophotography. I currently have an astromodded Canon T3i, a SA 2i, and i just use my camera lenses for now. I am hoping to get a legit telescope sometime this year. I wanna keep the focal length under 450, so i am looking at 60 - 70mm refractors.
interesting. Have you ever heard of the Askar 180pro? It is relatively cheap and has a focal length of 180mm. I personally do not own this telescope but have heard good things about it.maybe this would be interesting for you
@@FelixsAstrophotography i have heard of it, but wasnt sure about it. I'll look into it again. The scope I have been looking at was the Apertura 60/360 with a field flattener and guide scope for $600. But it is constantly on back order.
I personally don't know the Askar 180Pro too. Which guiding System would you like to buy?
A comparison means changing one variable while keeping everything else unchanged. Same time, same gear, accessories,...etc.
You are absolutely right. The conditions were not perfect . I definitely plan to make another video like this😊🔭
I honestly like the first image more. In the second image the galaxy looks pink and there is a lot of walking noise probably due to autoguiding and not dithering (I may be wrong just my 1st impression). Anyway great video, thanks for publishing !!!
Thank you very much for your comment. I also like the color of the first picture more. Unfortunately, you can't see the colors so well in the second picture because the moon has negatively affected the image. You're right, unfortunately I have quite a lot of walking noise in the second picture. That's because I used the wrong settings for guiding. Do you have a telescope?
Yes a 70mm refractor. I am also quite a beginner in goto. How do you find the target at >700mm focal length? You do plate solving with the Canon? I ask because I have problems doing that with Fujifilm 😞
yes, I use plate solve. I also used the telescope without goto in the beginning. That can be a bit tricky. What focal length do you have exactly?
Is the 2nd picture color calibrated? It seems much more red/violet. Color wise the first is much better. 2nd had auto guiding so naturally the stars are going to be slightly better.
Thank you for your comment. I actually don't like the color in the second picture too, which was partly due to the moon. Thank you for your comment. I like the colors in the first picture a little better too. Have you ever photographed this galaxy?
@FelixsAstrophotography its actually my current project. I just got an asi178mm cooled and I'm using M101 as my first mono target. I'm using a refractor and so far my pictures do not look as good as yours.
Amazing😊
Which telescope are you using?
@FelixsAstrophotography I just got the Askar 71f. So far the couple of test images compared to my old scope the SVBony SV48p are night and day. The M13 I took is soooo much sharper.
Part of it was my camera pairing. When I bought my dslr (Canon 6D mk1) I had no idea how to check the scope with the camera.
I have actually heard a lot of good things about the telescope.😊How far have you got with the project so far ?
I don't think this is a good comparison - it's clear that these two nights must've had different conditions for the second image to turn out so much worse. The first image has great colors, low amount of noise and very nice contrast while the second image has very poor contrast, almost no colors at all besides blue tint and A LOT of walking noise. Dunno why, maybe it's just a difference in processing or maybe the conditions on the second night were just much worse resulting in poorer signal to noise ratio.
Both these telescopes are pretty cheap and there shouldn't be that much difference between them except for the diffraction spikes and obviously the coma since you only used a corrector on one of them. The amount of light gathered on both should be nearly identical with maybe the cheaper one having a bit more vignetting because of the smaller secondary.
And about those diffraction spikes - the ones on the cheap telescope are extremely weird - 3 spider vanes should produce pretty nice 6 spike star pattern instead of what you got and I'm wondering if the telescope was just out of collimation or perhaps the primary mirror had pinched optics (clips holding it in place could be overtightened in which case you need to pull out the mirror from the tube, undo the screws just a little and put the mirror back in).
The diffraction spikes on the more expensive telescope are also pretty ugly and it could be the collimation and pinched optics but in that case I know from experience that it's mostly just because of the cheap flimsy sky-watcher spider that's identical in all their Newtonians (I replaced mine with a 3D printed one and it's miles better).
First of all, thank you for your comment.😊🙏 The conditions were actually a little different on both nights. Unfortunately, the moon had an impact on the second night, which made it difficult to get the color in the picture. I manually dithered the first picture, but unfortunately I set something wrong with the guiding on the second, which is why I have walking noise in the picture. Unfortunately. Regarding the spikes on the first telescope, all I can say is that it's because of the metal parts at the front of the opening that lead to the spikes. Unfortunately, these are much too big, which is why the spikes don't look so nice. I know that both telescopes aren't incredibly expensive. Unfortunately, I don't own a telescope that's more expensive. But I do think that the price is big enough to make a comparison. One telescope wasn't even built for astrophotography, just for visual observation. I hope I was able to answer your comment. If not, please write to me again. Do you also have a telescope, and if so, which one?
Kind regards, Felix 😊
Clear skies 🔭
I would try masking the primary mirror clips to help with those miscellaneous "spikes". Heck, a well collimated 6" Newtonian for less than $200 is totally good enough if it produces the sample images you captured.
Thank you for your comment and your tip. The problem with the Bresser telescope is actually that the individual metal parts that provide the spikes at the opening of the telescope are way too thick. Thank you for your tip. I have already thought about that.
which picture do you like more?
@@FelixsAstrophotography both. All and any capture still amazes me. Those specific photons made an appointment to hit your sensors at this moment in time...And you just happen to have the software to process the captured images and share it online with the world. Good times!
Both of those scopes are classed as cheap, it's just that one is cheaper than the other. There are upgrades available for the Sky Watcher which includes tube flocking material, a better focuser, secondary mirror spider and an edge cover for the main mirror to prevent artifacts around stars caused by the clips holding the main mirror. I was going to upgrade my own Sky Watcher 150P in this way but as I now own a 115 f7 apo refractor, I probably won't bother.
For the price both of the scopes have given reasonable images, but I think that overall the image captured through. the Sky Watcher scope was better. Both scopes probably required collimating and fine tuning. Were they straight out of the box? The main mirror clips are often over tightened for shipment to prevent any movement during transit which may result in pinched optics.
Thank you very much for your comment. I know that this is not an extremely expensive telescope, which is why I have shown the prices in the title. I think that the difference is big enough to make a comparison. Yes, you are right, this telescope can be significantly improved with upgrades. I will do that in the future. Both telescopes were collimated before using them. Which camera do you use?
With the Sky Watcher Explorer 150P I used a Canon 600D DSLR and and an Altair GPCAM 224 C (OSC) for the odd time that I image Jupiter or Saturn. I don't use my 150P for DSO imaging so have not used any of my cooled OSC or mono cameras with it.
To be fair to Sky Watcher they have never really claimed the explorer P f5 Newtonians in the smaller sizes were anything other than entry level instruments intended mainly for visual use, the fact that they can be turned into effective imaging scopes without spending a fortune says a lot about the quality of the optics. These scopes are often supplied with an EQ3-2 mount which I think is too small, the odd time that I use it I placed it on my EQ6-R Pro mount which is of course far more stable.
can you recommend the Canon Eos 600d? I am thinking about buying it for astrophotography
I also got an 150/750 dps but I don't have a comma detector and a tripod. Do you maybe got any tips for wich comma detector and tripod i shoeld buy (and maybe a lens)
As a coma corrector I can definitely recommend the Maxfield coma corrector. As a tripod or mount for this telescope I can recommend the heq5 pro from skywatcher. I hope I was able to help. If you have any questions just let me know.
As a cheap lens I can recommend the 75-300mm lens from canon. I have already uploaded a few videos about this lens
Hey felix! Great video! Question, what Bresser telescope is that? I cannot find any for under 200 euros for the life of me. All of the Polluxs start at almost twice that?
Hi. First of all, thank you for your comment. In this video I only calculated the price for the Newton telescope itself. I said that when I introduced the telescope. The telescope with the tripod, so as a set, costs more, as you have noticed.
Great video and comparison! I wonder why only the second image has walking noise? Did you dither while taking subs for the first image? Also, those spikes are caused by the tabs that hold the primary mirror in place. It's recommended to install a round mask on top of the mirror to make the stars look almost perfect.
Thank you for your comment. I didn't use guiding for the first image and therefore dithered manually. I used guiding for the second. Unfortunately the guiding didn't dither because of the wrong setting. Thanks for the tip with the spikes.
which picture do you like more?
@@FelixsAstrophotography Oh that makes sense. Well, dither or die is what they say 😂. I personally like the galaxy in the first image. There's more detail in the galaxy but the coma in the corners is something expected. Also, unfortunately not every coma corrector works well with a given scope. I've tried many with my Quattro and only the Starizona 0.75x produced exceptional images with pinpoint stars across the frame. Anyway, I bumped into your channel just today and already like your videos. I wish you rapid growth in your audience!
Outstanding job, thanks for sharing.
@BurgerOosthuizen thanks a lot😊🙏
Your support means so much to me😊🔭
Thank you so so much.I really appreciate your Support 😊🔭
Your video really helped me understand the difference in these telescope. can you please suggest budget friendly goto mount for the first telescope. Amazing video , Keep Growing👍
Thank you very much for your nice comment. Your support means a lot to me. Which telescope do you want to attach to the mount?
@@FelixsAstrophotography Bresser Pollux 150/750 Reflector Telescope
So you want to buy a new mount for the Bresser Pollux telescope?
@@FelixsAstrophotography yes
@gamerorion2844 That depends on what you want to do with it. Do you want to use it just for observation or do you want to attach a camera and a guidescope and other equipment later?
Which camera did you use?
relatively at the beginning I present the entire telescope😊
I am using the canon eos 2000d
Excellent video. Refractor vs newtonian would also be very very interesting :)
Thank you very much for your comment. Your support means a lot to me. I don't currently own a refractor, but that would be an idea for another video. Do you also own a telescope and if so, which one?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I own only refractors - 70/700 mm achromat (my first telescope), 102/1000 mm achromat and 102/714 mm Svbony FPL51.
Nice video, i recently got into astro this year with the 150P so almost the same telescope! That picture looks better than most of my images so nice job. But im also not the best with polar alignment given im in the southern hemisphere and dont go out of a bortle 9 area.
Thank you very much. Your support means a lot to me.
Looks like the bresser has 3 vane spider and the skywatcher a 4 vane
Oddly enough. I prefer the cheaper image... Looks a little sharper in the center galaxy region. Also the colour post processing is better.
The stars definately look better in the skywatcher scope.
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately the colors are not so nice in the second picture because the moon had a negative influence on the picture. Do you also have a telescope ?
11:11 I definitely KNOW you are not correct. Please redo the capture on an equally moonless night. The image taken with the cheaper scope looks way better. DEFINITELY way better.
Thank you very much for your comment. I like the colors of the picture with the cheaper one more too. But I have to say that in the second picture you can actually see more details in the galaxy. Unfortunately the difference is not as clear as on my computer. When I look at the picture on my computer the picture actually has a lot more details. Unfortunately some details are lost in the video.
The fact that the moon was visible on the second night obviously influenced the image. I will make another video like this in the summer. Do you also have a telescope and if so which one?
Seems like collimation of both of them was pretty off. I’d do that first and then compare!
First of all, thank you for your comment.😊🙏 Both telescopes were collimated before I used them.I always collimate my telescopes before using them because I forgot to do it once and the end image wasn't that good.
@@FelixsAstrophotography May I ask how? The diffraction spikes on the PDS usually look much better when collimated.
Hello, I always use a laser collimator. It should be fine at f5. But I know what you mean. The spikes are not perfect. Perhaps the focus is not quite right. Do you have any ideas?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have used 2 cheap (sub $100) laser collimators and neither of them was collimated in itself 😅 I didn’t feel like collimating my collimation tool… So I opted for the Ocal 2 pro collimator. Never got better results. The laser won’t be able to tell you how misaligned the secondary mirror depth/rotation/etc is. I liked the video idea, which is why I clicked on it, but I know better results can be had even with a dirt cheap Newtonian that are properly set up for imaging.
Thank you for your answer. My collimator wasn't collimated either. So I collimated the collimator. Since then it's worked very well. Which telescopes do you use?
I expect the optics (mirrors) are the same in the two scopes. The main difference is the heavier/thicker 3-pronged spider vanes on the Bresser causing the less pleasing diffraction flares, and the coma corrector + autoguider used with the Skywatcher resulting in a cleaner sharper image. The SW focuser is a lot nicer too - it's a better scope all-round, probably more comparable with the Bresser NT150s OTA than this basic 6-inch kit scope on that wobbly EQ you're forced to buy with it.
Thank you very much for your comment. You are absolutely right.😊🙏 Do you also own a telescope and if so, which one?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I had quite a few over the years, SW and GSO Dobs and Newtonians, ED80, 6-inch Intes Mak and few others.. That was back in Australia. Living in Scotland for a few years now I only have a fast 4-inch achromat for widefield visual but would like to get an 8-inch Dob for later in summer for Saturn. For astrophotography I'll just stick with camera lenses for the foreseeable future. I still need to get a half decent EQ mount for that too..
Interesting. Very nice telescopes. Do you use a cooled camera or an DSLR camera?
@@FelixsAstrophotography Just DSLR. Have only dabbled over the years, have been more invested in visual astronomy. My best attempts so far have been with an old manual focus 135mm f/2.8 film lens on a crop sensor on some southern sky gems and Virgo cluster galaxy zoo. Have a full frame now but need a tracker, maybe a used EQ5 with an RA motor...
Which camera exactly? I am currently using the Canon EOS 2000D. In the future, however, I would like to buy an astro-modified DSLR. So I'm currently looking for a new camera
I wouldn't say the SW is necessarily an expensive telescope. More than the other, sure. But still on the cheap side. Luckily, even cheap telescopes have decent mirrors, meaning that the extra money pays for stuff that does not appear on the image, but still are important, such as focuser, rings, screws, etc.
Thank you for your comment. You are absolutely right.That is why I mentioned the prices of the two telescopes in the title. Do you also own a telescope and if so, which one?
Please: don’t say I‘ll attach the counterweights in a view minutes. It is always recommended to put the counterweights on first and I don’t want your viewers to dent their OTA on their tripod.
The images are very different, I think it would have been wiser to capture less time but on the same night as you initially intended.
The Skywatcher is far from beeing an expensive telescope but Bresser is often surprisingly cheap. It should be noted that Skywatcher uses standard Vixen dovetails to attach on your mount as well as standard finder shoes. Although Bresser is usually Vixen compatible, I have seen telescopes that made mount connection surprisingly hard and not using standard finder shoes but their own Bresser/explore scientific type complicates things (for example you can’t swap your finder for a guide scope so easily.
That said, seems like the optics are fine and there are a couple modifications that can make the Bresser a lot better (main mirror mask).
Thank you for your comment. 😊🙏You are absolutely right that I should attach the counterweights first. I usually do it the way you said. It would have actually been better to take both pictures on one night. Do you also have a telescope and if so, which one exactly?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have a couple of telescopes. My most used are an old 200P (as I recall there was no PDS version at that time but I might be mistaken) modified a lot by now and a Skywatcher 80/600 doublet ED. The Newtonian sits on an EQ6-R, the ED on a belt modified HEQ-5 (it is a great mount). Rarely I do have a chance to use my TS classic Cassegrain and the Bresser 90/900 achromat which is great for visual astronomy but I modified it by changing the focuser and finder shoe.
Fantastic.What cameras do you use or do you observe the night sky?
@@FelixsAstrophotography The old and trusty ZWO ASI 1600MM Pro after great success with my Fuji APS-C mirrorless camera which unmodified was a lot better than my unmodified Canon full frame camera (less loss of H-alpha signal.
Interesting.I am planning to buy a new camera in the next weeks
It seems like you got walking noise on the 2nd image, you should dither :)
You are absolutely right. I actually wanted to set dithering but unfortunately I forgot and only noticed it the next morning. Thank you for your comment. Do you also have a telescope and if so which one?
@@FelixsAstrophotography I have a Samyang 135mm lens combined with a DSLR on a Star Adventurer. I also have guiding but since my mount is not GOTO, I manually dither DEC.
@tahademir27 Interesting. I've also been thinking about buying this lens. Is the camera astro-modified?
@@FelixsAstrophotography This lens is wonderful, there is a bit of luck with getting a good copy, unfortuneately my camera is not modified, I don't want to get it modded but I am gonna upgradge to a cooled astro cam when I can.
@tahademir27 Thank you for your answer. I've heard a lot that there are differences with this lens compared to other lenses. Which camera are you using exactly?
ehh..not sure what you did or maybe your eyes need collimation? there is way more detail in the left image
In summary, I like the left picture more too. Unfortunately, the moon influenced the picture on the second night. Unfortunately, you can't see the difference so well in the video. When I look at the pictures on my computer in full resolution, you can see more details in the right picture.
Never put the ota on before the weights
You are absolutely right.Normally I do it differently
Well done👍
I really appreciate your support.Thanks😊🙏
placebo effect do not waste money for the 600USD has less contrast. AND, LOWER RESOLUTION IN THE CENTER
Do you mean compared to the cheaper version of this telescope?
Comparing one scope with a coma corrector and another of the same design without the coma corrector makes the video null and void
The Bresser telescope has very little coma, so I didn't use a coma corrector. In addition, it was about the galaxy. This is in the middle where there is normally no coma anyway.
@FelixsAstrophotography coma should be the same, based on the focal ratio.
Perhaps the bresser has a spherical mirror or is under or overcorrected? A proper parabola figure will have the coma inherent to any f5 mirror. Does it handle high powers as well as the proper synta model? Low power and imaging at prime focus can sometimes be tolerated on a spherical, or not properly figured parabola mirror, the spherical abberation starts to show up at higher powers
I'll keep this simple...
I like the Bresser 1st images better! ❤ 😂
Thank you for your comment. I also like the first one more in terms of colors😊👍
Bonita toma de la galaxia del molinete
Thank you very much for your comment 😊I also like this picture very much👍🔭
Hi, I can tell.you exactly what is wrong with your cheap reflector, the star image shows pinched optics, likely on the main mirror.
You mean because of the spikes? The thing with the spikes is actually due to the parts at the front of the Newton that cause the spikes. These are simply to big and that's why the spikes look so weird
@@FelixsAstrophotography No, not the spikes, they are normal, produces by the secondary vanes. I am talking about the weird veil of light next to the spikes.
@@FelixsAstrophotography Well I saw the same artefact on my 14 inch Newtonian, after I reattached the mirror to it's mounting with less force it was gone. I don't know how your mirror is fixed to its base, in my case I used just a few drops of silicone and three angles that the mirror could never fall out, these angles did not touch the mirror, just extra security. Bubble rap creates a great base for a telescope mirror, it's almost like adaptive optics because it supports the mirror on multiple points.
Thank you very much for your helpful comment. I will definitely try it out. Thank you😊🙏
Which camera do you use to take photos?
Isn't it a bit of a waste of time getting a cheap telescope when the mount is over 1000 Euros?
I already had the cheap telescope before. I mostly use it for observing and the big one for taking photos
Of course for expensive, you can spend $50,000 on a set-up. Realistically, you need to spend around $2500 to get a system that uses a telescope and doesn't drive you nuts with having to fix and tweak it because it's a cheap Chinese unit.
You're right. There's almost no limit in terms of price
smart how you titled it cheap vs expensive "telescope" and made it seem like you're presenting cheap vs expensive OTA
Thank you for your comment 😊🙏Of course, there are much more expensive telescopes. I think the difference between a cheap telescope that costs about 150 euros and which was not built for astrophotography and a telescope that costs 600 euros is big enough to be able to show a comparison.Unfortunately I don't have a telescope, which is more expensive.
I have mentioned the prices specifically in the thumbnail to show the exact price of the two telescopes
These are both cheap telescopes.
I know that one telescope is not incredibly expensive. The price difference between the two telescopes is, in my opinion, large enough to make a comparison. The cheap telescope is not even made for astrophotography. Thank you for your comment
bresser have spherical main mirror and built in barlow lens, so why dont you take some cheap parabolic reflector without any additional optical structure on it
This telescope does not have an integrated Barlow lens
The Bresser telescope also has no spherical mirror