Great comparison video. I just got an Edge HD 9.25. What is the best Camera, Barlow combination for this telescope? I currently have an ASI482MC but have slightly blurry images. May be bad seeing conditions.
It's probably seeing conditions. I always aim for an imaging scale of about 0.2 arcsec p/pixel. You can use astro tools to calculate different camera/telescope combinations. Good luck!
Great video and very informative!! I currently own just a 5” (1500mm) Celestron Maksutov-Cassegrain, which I use pretty much only for planetary imaging. I live in Melbourne and the light pollution from my place is so heavy, that I can barely see any stars with naked eye. However, I modified the telescope with a DIY focuser, using an Arduino and a stepper motor with an embedded gearbox. This allows me to use even a ridiculous 5x Televue teleconverter, which would be almost impossible to manually focus, because it was going way off the telescope’s optics/magnification. I’m now working on connecting a Raspberry Pi to it for planetary imaging and other things that can help with portability.
It's not just a problem of accurate focusing but also of optimal image scale on your sensor. A Mak and a 5x PM will have you at around f/100 whereas f/25 or so is ideal, depending on the pixel size of your camera. interested to see what results you get! There's theory and then there's practical results ...
@@ishanr8697 The focal length of my 127mm Mak is 1500mm, giving an aperture of f/11.8, which goes up to f/59 with the 5x PowerMate. Obviously that could possibly work only for very bright targets. I tried the focuser first during the day, and I had a very clear view across the field with a Canon 80D, so I then tried it on Jupiter. I managed to get a good separation of the red spot from its clouds band, along with some minor cloud details in the other bands on a clear night and a 30sec video.
@@skesinis Yes, sorry I should have done the calculation myself. I just guessed you were native f/20 for a Mak, but you're only f/11.8. The formula usually followed is 5x your pixel size = ideal f-number. So for your Canon 80D, that's around f/18. f/59 is potentially going to lead to undersampling and you'll need to boost ISO a lot which will lead to more noise and softer results. Do you have a link to your result for Jupiter? It sounds like you did a good job! My guess is you'd do even better with a 2x PM or barlow.
I’m in my binge watching TH-cam phase and just got The Backyard Astronomer’s Guide, as well, which I highly recommend. I’m going to spend some time digesting what I’ve seen. In the meantime, I just ordered a pair of Canon 15x50 IS binoculars. If I had to choose today, I’d get exactly what you showed at 4:17 , the 8” EdgeHD tube with a Skywatcher mount (though I may go with the HEQ5 instead of the EQ6-R Pro, because I plan to convert a van to camp in for my retirement in a couple years and think that beefier mount may be to heavy for me to set up after a while. From what I can see, Celestron has the 8” SCT dialed in, but their mounts are a bit dodgy (e.g., plastic gears). Skywatcher seems to do the best midrange Equatorial mounts. It seems to me that’s the sweet spot in the 8” telescope market at the moment. Thanks for the video!
On Friday, I bought a 5" Explore Scientific Mak-Cas. 1900 mm f.l. I will be mounting it on my EQM-35. Last month, I bought a 10" StarField (GSO) Dobsonian. 1250 mm f.l. I hope to get some images with both of them and see which I like better.
I showed my wife your I LOVE MY WIFE hoodie. She thought it was great. Then she ask me what I wanted and I told her a Sky-Watcher EQ-6 Pro and she let me buy one! Thanks! I can't wait untill it gets here. Oh yeah, I enjoyed this video. I just got a new planetary camera and back focus extenders.
Nice informative video Wido. I even have used a 2x Barlow on my 8 EdgeHD when conditions are very good. The size of the image does depend on the camera pixel size too.
Yes, true. You can use astronomy.tools to calculate your arc seconds per pixel, depending on the focal length of the telescope and pixel size of the camera. Cheers Martyn!
I started with 6" Newtonian then went through 8/11/14 SCT and ended with 14 DK. For maks 127 is their peak scaling. Bigger maks get heavy really fast but mostly they can have thermal lag problems when the meniscus is just to big and doesn't follow ambient temperature change fast enough. Same with bigger SCTs - on my balcony the C11 managed to handle temperature change rather well, while C14 could jump into thermal drag in like 40 minutes after turning fans off and starting using it. So it's something to consider. Aside of that motofocus is a must. For SCT/Maks it would be a motocryford - for fine-focus. SCTs have a large second hand market in the US so you can get relatively cheap OTAs there. Corrected SCTs - I'm not so sure... With such price points I would think 10x. There are GSO RCs and even though they do have 40% central obstruction they still work for planetary, while being a DS astrograph - and most of all - they are open OTA so much better thermals. Russia and around could also check for Klevtzov telescopes which are similar to MakCas but the meniscus have been replaced by a corrector "lens" placed on the secondary - also open OTA and can be used for DS. And top large aperture photographers do use Newtonians, including motorized dobsonians - but those need a loot of open area to operate (16" and up). Barlow lens - this also depends on your camera pixel size. If you get a camera with really small pixels it may be that you don't even need one or a "weaker" one.
Main thermal issues are with convection. You can basically negate this issue by using insulating material e.g. reflectix. This paves the way for 150 and 180mm Maks to become very much viable.
@@ishanr8697 for advanced imaging big aperture rules and maksutov does not offer big apertures. Some do thermostat their C14 for example. In most locations thermal drift will be a problem for only 11-14" or larger closed SCT designs.
Great explanations, thank you. As a complete novice to this subject, I always learn so much with your presentations. Quick question, you gave the reason for why some SCTs are not so good for deep-sky AP but I noticed you also list the Dobs as not good for that either but didn’t say why. Is this because they too suffer the same as the un-corrected SCTs or is there something else that does not make them suitable? Great work as usual. Keep it up!
Hi, dobsonians and newtonians indeed also suffer from coma. You can buy a separate coma corrector for this. Moreover, dobsonians come with an alt-az mount which are great for visual observations, but not great for astrophotography. Planetary imaging is still doable. Clear skies!
Top video! Helaas is het meeste buiten mijn financiele bereik, plus ik ben nog maar een beginner! Mijn Skymax 127/1500 Mak komt maandag en is hopelijk voorlopig voldoende...
Tuurlijk joh, ik ben met die refractor begonnen die ik in het begin laat zien. De planeten zijn wat kleiner en waziger, maar desalniettemin heel leuk om zo te beginnen!
Hey Wido. Good stuff (as always)! A great guide for people starting out. My personal concern was that with modified SCT's and systems with obstructions in the light path and coma correctors and 'trick' add ons that make your instrument faster, and the like, ... the buyer is very much at the mercy of the image quality - cost compromises that the design and manufacturer accepted. These are things the salesman might not be the best advisor about, and a beginner might not be happy down the line with triangular star images or other limitations that the manufacturer accepted to meet a price point. I myself (as a very experienced visual observer) have had some great experiences with big catadioptrics that I didn't own, but I did not want to take that risk myself with a big ticket purchase. OK any compromises are unlikely to affect the center of the FOV and planetary photography but they could detract from all round performance. Now obviously the faster refractors are specialized a bit more towards DSO photography, and I get it that these are not in the frame for this video, but is there a reason you didn't consider the larger mid range f/ratio APO's? In particular I was wondering why the mid length 5" APOs (e.g. EvoStar and EON) weren't considered. At f/7 they can also be pulled out to long focus with x2 or x3 barlow, and with a 0.8x reducer are pretty effective for DSO's. These are essentially corrected for all major optical abberations *by design* and their mid range focal lengths mean that (with modern quality control) they should be almost immune to factors that could disappoint the discerning eye (as experience develops). A very much safer bet in my view. By design they are absolutely unbeatable for visual observing of solar system and messier objects. When mirror reflectivity and secondary mirror considerations are taken into account they punch well above their weight in inches when compared with reflectors. I'm wondering because (of course!) I have an EON 130 ED on an EQ6 myself and am absolutely bowled over with how it performs visually. As a rank beginner in astrophotography I'm also impressed and delighted with early results I got with very little expertise when targeting DSO's with a one shot colour camera. Planetary photography seems to me to be particularly demanding (and rewarding) challenge and I'll need to invest clear nights in it (as you know there have been precious few of those recently around our neighbourhood). After a wake-up call about how hard planets are to photograph (poor results on Jupiter and Saturn low down in '21) I want to give it a try with Mars in '22. I just thought I'd throw in this perspective to see what you think, as in my limited experience these all-round instruments should stack up pretty well against some of the others you covered. Limited experience = I couldn't get a decent picture of a planet with any of them!
Hi there, I've chosen my EDGE HD 8" over an apo as it was a cheaper option, it had a longer focal length and a larger aperture. Also it's light and compact which is important for me in the city with less storage space for my equipment. To be honest, the 8" is a jack of all trades, but definitely not the absolute best at DSO or planetary. If you want to do great planetary photography, you'll need an 11" imo. The apos you're mentioning are great for smaller DSO's, they'll probably outperform my edge hd 8". But with the .7 reducer I've been getting some decent results and an APOD, so I'm happy. At the end it's all about personal preferences, there's not one perfect scope and people probably end up with multiple scopes when they stay in the hobby for many years. Clear skies!
@@AstroForumSpace You're absolutely right that the EDGE 8" is the most comparable to the APO, and that since this video is about photographing planets the edge comes out on top because you'll save at least 30%. What you say about multiple scopes is also very perceptive. On the face of it, it depends a lot on what you can justify spending. You have to be ready to splash the cash if you want something specialized to every purpose that interests you. I'm Scottish born naturalized Dutch so doubly afflicted when it comes to money! I saved my whole life to buy the ideal (single) telescope to best match my particular personal profile of preferences - and that profile includes refusing to pay a crazy premium for the last 0.5% and 'rejecting' the luxury of owning more than one instrument. That being said, the PLAN always was for a clearout, and I did find a home for my long focus (2m) 5" doublet. But I still haven't parted with my trusty old 3", and the 11x80's binos are definitely keeper-peepers. I hope this is it for me now at my age (65) but when you are younger, you'll never know what you might want in future. Now as the bones begin to creak, I have to admit to being tempted to downsize to a 4" in carbon on a harmonic mount. So yes we probably DO end up with multiple instruments when we stay in the game, even if we are really just letting the dust gather on happy memories. Clear skies!
Very informative video. I think the main reason a small diameter secondary mirror is important for planetary is that it reduces diffraction. Also, regular Dobsonians are a poor choice for planetary imaging, due to the lack of tracking. Long focal-length Newtonians on tracking mounts can be a very good option though.
Dobsonian are not tied to a Dobsonian Mount. | built my own 207mm X 750 mm FL "Dobsonian/ Newtonian " style and mounted it on my homemade equatorial mount. It may incorrectly steer people away from Dobsonian telescopes thinking the mounts are always trash.
Hi Wido, thanks again for compiling the available telescopes into one overview video. Very helpful, especially regarding the modified SCT👍 Hope everything is Ok for you over there in the Netherlands, and also with your kids and your wife. All the best to all of you ☀️💪 Cheers, Jason
A couple of tips for equalizing the temperature with a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope. Take the telescope outside before you start setting up the mount. By the time the mount is set up and polar aligned, the telescope temperature will either be equalized, or very nearly equalized. A Sky-Watcher Skymax 127 will take around 30 minutes to equalize. The Sky-Watcher Skymax180 around about an hour. If you have a well weather proofed garden shed. Keep the telescope in there. It'll reduce the equalization time to only a few minutes.
Awesome, thanks for the feedback. I fully agree, in fact, I also do this with my 8" edge hd. So cool down may not be a such a big issue with maks after all...clear skies.
@@AstroForumSpace I have added two small 12V fans to my 8 EdgeHD to equalize the temperature faster. They mount where the air vents are near the main mirror. I think it roughly halves the time.
Thanks for the tip. Looking at the specs, I think this will be an excellent telescope for planetary imaging. The F/ratio - even when applying the 0.8 reducer so probably somewhat less suited for deepsky AP.
I could use some help. So I live in Colorado and have a beautiful view of nothing, meaning just wide open. I would like to get into something that would allow me to view planets, stars and constellations and other planets. What can you suggest that would allow connection of cell phones as well. Thanks in advance.
One scope that is fun for planets..enough for a little rush.. and that is great for lunar and the sun...is the Questar Maksutov. It's 3.5 inches, fits on the keyboard of your laptop, and if You want to crank up the power..You might be surprised. It is also a great terrestrial spotting scope and the ultimate eclipse chaser. The best retail planetary imaging scope is a C-14, unless You want to go out and spend as much as a used ferrari in which case a 24 inch classical cassegrain..say f/20 with a CO of around 20% would be hard to beat. For instance..this scope would have 20 inches of clear aperture and a C-14 has 9.5. Fun fact..some of the better earth based planetary images are coming out of the Pic du Midi observatory..optics by Texereau.. Clear Aperture ? 27.5 inches from it's 106cm mirror. Buy a used C-14..new equipment from China includes the cost of a communist police state running 100 concentration camps.. unless of course you think you have no need to score points with your Maker. (In China praying in public will land You in Prison)
TX for the feedback Dan, that 27.5 inch sounds like a dream. It would be hard to get into astrophotography without buying equipment from China. Both SkyWatcher and ZWO are based in Suzhou. I've chatted with some of the people who work there and they seem nice people with an interest in astrophotography.
@@AstroForumSpace Yes 27.5 in is the Pic du Midi clear aperture..it's mirror is a 42 inches classical Cassegrain and being on top of a mountain in the Alps is a big help. Well..my theory is that we have to negotiate life as a Human Being. We cannot afford to lose that part of Ourselves collectively. Chinese Technical College 2nd year students must work for 120 euros per month for 10 months..10 hours per day, 6 days per week in order to be allowed to continue their studies and optical fabrication factories are using these cost savings to put Western Mfgrs. out of business. WHO CAN COMPETE WITH ALMOST FREE LABOR? A tech in the West gets paid in a day what Chinese firms pay in a MONTH using this Program MANDATED BY THE COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT! China sees this vicious predatory advantage as necessary to create World ECONOMIC DEPENDENCE on Chinese Manufacturing, and DAMNED IF THEY DID NOT GET IT. The human toll WE PAY FOR is why "We have no choice but to buy from China". The TRUTH IS WHEN DEMOCRACIES STOP TRADE WITH COMMUNIST CHINA IS EXACTLY HOW WE WILL GET OUR CHOICES BACK FROM CHINA WHO NOW OWNS THEM..AND PAY AT A BIG HUMAN AND ENVIRO COST THAT NO ONE ONE ELSE IS IMMORAL AND CORRUPT ENOUGH TO PAY. SYNTA OPTICS OF CHINA IS A MAJOR SUPPLIER TO THE ARMY OF COMMUNIST CHINA. EXPECT AT SOME POINT THEY ARE BOYCOTTED BY THE WEST. MOST OF YOUR ED OPTICS ARE MADE BY THEIR CNC POLISHING MACHINES.THEN WHAT? Then Taiwan or Japan will come in with CNC machines and begin to fill the void, albeit at a marginally higher cost, because the HUMAN TOLL has been removed from the Moral equation.
Such an informative video, thank you! You mention that an AltAz plus a wedge is not as good as an EQ. Do you have any links to anywhere you discuss this in more detail?
There are lots of discussions to be found on AP fora, like this one: www.cloudynights.com/topic/689260-celestron-altaz-mount-w-wedge-good-or-bad-idea-for-astrophotography/
Hi Patrick, sure! To my best knowledge the LX200 - as mentioned in the video - is one of the advanced coma free line schmidt-cassegrain telescopes, so they are quite nice to have for planetary and (preferably with a reducer) deep-sky astrophotography. The LX-85 you're mentioning is - again to my best knowledge - an equatorial telescope mount. I'm not sure what you're looking for...planetary imaging, deep-sky astrophotography, or perhaps visual backyard astronomy? Best regards, Wido.
I would put aperture first over focal lenght. The aperture will determine how much details you can resolve and is a fixed parameter, while the focal lenght is a dinamic param that you can always increase it by using a barlow lens. Also the focal lenght usefull will be determinated by the diameter of the aperture. So the aperture diameter always rules here.
Excellent video. Only one correction: there are not "dobsonian" telescopes. There are "newtonian" telescopes mounted on a "dobsonian" mount. And I not agree to use them to do planetary photo because, how you are going to do the tracking, in case you use sharpcap or another acquisition software ?
A dobsonian scope is a newton on an altaz mount. That's the definition. Planetary imaging pre processor can be used to center the video images. Downside is indeed the manual tracking in Alt-Az. Upside is the aperture needed for planetary at low cost.
Hi Wido, at 2:30, yes, larger aperture does increase resolution, but of course it is not because of the light collecting capability. Two 4.5” telescopes a continent apart will have millions times higher resolution than a single 20” telescope, even though the big telescope has 10x more light gathering than the two small telescopes together. See also en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_resolution
Yes, like Clive said. You could also use a Newtonian but most of them have a focal length of 800 to 1000. So you'll need at least a 2x Barlow lens or higher. Newtonians are often f/5 or f/4 ratio telescopes, good for deepsky astrophotography.
Thanks a lot for your videos and information related. As far as I could see in others media, Ritchey- Cretien telescopes area very good solution for astrophotography. You said in your video that they are dificult to colimate. Could you tell me something more. I was thinking to acquire TS optics RC203, 8" and people told me that rarely needs to colimate. What is your opinion. Thanks in advance
You need a special laser collimator for the parabolic mirrors. It's much easier to collimate a modified Schmidt cassegrain, and they have a correction plate that keeps out the rain and other stuff. Of course, the RC is more affordable. Good Luck!
@@AstroForumSpace Yes, that's what I did. I do only the Moon and planets astrophotography plus visual DS so I went for "plain" XLT version. Thanks for very good video.
Hi there, yes, if the reducer also corrects for coma you can do Deepsky AP, also depending on your mount. I've made a separate video about gear and software you'll need for astrophotography, check: th-cam.com/video/y5D5JyN42SU/w-d-xo.html. Hope this helps! Clear skies.
Wow Wido. That was a wealth of knowledge in a short time! Excellent presentation. Thank you sir.
Great comparison video. I just got an Edge HD 9.25. What is the best Camera, Barlow combination for this telescope? I currently have an ASI482MC but have slightly blurry images. May be bad seeing conditions.
It's probably seeing conditions. I always aim for an imaging scale of about 0.2 arcsec p/pixel. You can use astro tools to calculate different camera/telescope combinations. Good luck!
2 years later and the prices more than doubled. Should have bought these telescopes when the video came out!
Great video and very informative!! I currently own just a 5” (1500mm) Celestron Maksutov-Cassegrain, which I use pretty much only for planetary imaging. I live in Melbourne and the light pollution from my place is so heavy, that I can barely see any stars with naked eye. However, I modified the telescope with a DIY focuser, using an Arduino and a stepper motor with an embedded gearbox. This allows me to use even a ridiculous 5x Televue teleconverter, which would be almost impossible to manually focus, because it was going way off the telescope’s optics/magnification. I’m now working on connecting a Raspberry Pi to it for planetary imaging and other things that can help with portability.
It's not just a problem of accurate focusing but also of optimal image scale on your sensor. A Mak and a 5x PM will have you at around f/100 whereas f/25 or so is ideal, depending on the pixel size of your camera. interested to see what results you get! There's theory and then there's practical results ...
@@ishanr8697 The focal length of my 127mm Mak is 1500mm, giving an aperture of f/11.8, which goes up to f/59 with the 5x PowerMate. Obviously that could possibly work only for very bright targets. I tried the focuser first during the day, and I had a very clear view across the field with a Canon 80D, so I then tried it on Jupiter. I managed to get a good separation of the red spot from its clouds band, along with some minor cloud details in the other bands on a clear night and a 30sec video.
@@skesinis Yes, sorry I should have done the calculation myself. I just guessed you were native f/20 for a Mak, but you're only f/11.8.
The formula usually followed is 5x your pixel size = ideal f-number. So for your Canon 80D, that's around f/18.
f/59 is potentially going to lead to undersampling and you'll need to boost ISO a lot which will lead to more noise and softer results. Do you have a link to your result for Jupiter? It sounds like you did a good job! My guess is you'd do even better with a 2x PM or barlow.
If you're budget is small even a 5" Maksutov can do a good job. You'll need filters for planetary imaging too.
What do filters do tho
Do they dampen the "fuzz" from bright planets like jupiter?
@@gameseeker6307 Ir/Uv cut or pass filters can improve images. You can use RGB colour filters and blend them together as well.
@@bazpearce9993 interesting
The best instrument, first and foremost, is : a good seeing !
I’m in my binge watching TH-cam phase and just got The Backyard Astronomer’s Guide, as well, which I highly recommend. I’m going to spend some time digesting what I’ve seen. In the meantime, I just ordered a pair of Canon 15x50 IS binoculars. If I had to choose today, I’d get exactly what you showed at 4:17 , the 8” EdgeHD tube with a Skywatcher mount (though I may go with the HEQ5 instead of the EQ6-R Pro, because I plan to convert a van to camp in for my retirement in a couple years and think that beefier mount may be to heavy for me to set up after a while. From what I can see, Celestron has the 8” SCT dialed in, but their mounts are a bit dodgy (e.g., plastic gears). Skywatcher seems to do the best midrange Equatorial mounts. It seems to me that’s the sweet spot in the 8” telescope market at the moment.
Thanks for the video!
On Friday, I bought a 5" Explore Scientific Mak-Cas. 1900 mm f.l. I will be mounting it on my EQM-35.
Last month, I bought a 10" StarField (GSO) Dobsonian. 1250 mm f.l.
I hope to get some images with both of them and see which I like better.
Nice, i I'm happy to hear about your experiences, clear skies!
Let us know about the results. Is mak comparable with 10" newton at all?
I showed my wife your I LOVE MY WIFE hoodie. She thought it was great. Then she ask me what I wanted and I told her a Sky-Watcher EQ-6 Pro and she let me buy one! Thanks! I can't wait untill it gets here. Oh yeah, I enjoyed this video. I just got a new planetary camera and back focus extenders.
LOL, glad my hoodie was useful. Thanks for the positive feedback Robert, clear skies!
Nice informative video Wido. I even have used a 2x Barlow on my 8 EdgeHD when conditions are very good. The size of the image does depend on the camera pixel size too.
Yes, true. You can use astronomy.tools to calculate your arc seconds per pixel, depending on the focal length of the telescope and pixel size of the camera. Cheers Martyn!
Thanks for warning me of the less-than-satisfactory wedge mount accessories. 😊
Mak 127 and ZWO Asi 178 is a killer combo. No Barlow needed!
Sounds good, the 178 does have a small pixel size. Clear skies!
1,25" or 2" version?
Very helpful information, thanks! Money Pit is right!!
Thanks for the positive feedback, clear skies!
I started with 6" Newtonian then went through 8/11/14 SCT and ended with 14 DK. For maks 127 is their peak scaling. Bigger maks get heavy really fast but mostly they can have thermal lag problems when the meniscus is just to big and doesn't follow ambient temperature change fast enough. Same with bigger SCTs - on my balcony the C11 managed to handle temperature change rather well, while C14 could jump into thermal drag in like 40 minutes after turning fans off and starting using it. So it's something to consider. Aside of that motofocus is a must. For SCT/Maks it would be a motocryford - for fine-focus.
SCTs have a large second hand market in the US so you can get relatively cheap OTAs there. Corrected SCTs - I'm not so sure... With such price points I would think 10x. There are GSO RCs and even though they do have 40% central obstruction they still work for planetary, while being a DS astrograph - and most of all - they are open OTA so much better thermals. Russia and around could also check for Klevtzov telescopes which are similar to MakCas but the meniscus have been replaced by a corrector "lens" placed on the secondary - also open OTA and can be used for DS.
And top large aperture photographers do use Newtonians, including motorized dobsonians - but those need a loot of open area to operate (16" and up).
Barlow lens - this also depends on your camera pixel size. If you get a camera with really small pixels it may be that you don't even need one or a "weaker" one.
Main thermal issues are with convection. You can basically negate this issue by using insulating material e.g. reflectix. This paves the way for 150 and 180mm Maks to become very much viable.
@@ishanr8697 for advanced imaging big aperture rules and maksutov does not offer big apertures. Some do thermostat their C14 for example. In most locations thermal drift will be a problem for only 11-14" or larger closed SCT designs.
New schmidts cassegrains black and orange have fastar
Yes, thanks. The Edge HD line has the hyperstar option. Clear skies!
Please can you drop a link to that finder shoe I noticed on you Edge HD? Thanks
I have a Celestron astro master 130 with a 650 mil focal length. What a piece of junk.
As long as you're having fun Harvey 😉. I started with the 102slt.
bonjour vraiment super video heureux de voir tous ca et d apprendre merci a vous
Great explanations, thank you. As a complete novice to this subject, I always learn so much with your presentations.
Quick question, you gave the reason for why some SCTs are not so good for deep-sky AP but I noticed you also list the Dobs as not good for that either but didn’t say why. Is this because they too suffer the same as the un-corrected SCTs or is there something else that does not make them suitable?
Great work as usual. Keep it up!
Hi, dobsonians and newtonians indeed also suffer from coma. You can buy a separate coma corrector for this. Moreover, dobsonians come with an alt-az mount which are great for visual observations, but not great for astrophotography. Planetary imaging is still doable. Clear skies!
Top video! Helaas is het meeste buiten mijn financiele bereik, plus ik ben nog maar een beginner! Mijn Skymax 127/1500 Mak komt maandag en is hopelijk voorlopig voldoende...
Tuurlijk joh, ik ben met die refractor begonnen die ik in het begin laat zien. De planeten zijn wat kleiner en waziger, maar desalniettemin heel leuk om zo te beginnen!
Hey Wido. Good stuff (as always)! A great guide for people starting out. My personal concern was that with modified SCT's and systems with obstructions in the light path and coma correctors and 'trick' add ons that make your instrument faster, and the like, ... the buyer is very much at the mercy of the image quality - cost compromises that the design and manufacturer accepted. These are things the salesman might not be the best advisor about, and a beginner might not be happy down the line with triangular star images or other limitations that the manufacturer accepted to meet a price point. I myself (as a very experienced visual observer) have had some great experiences with big catadioptrics that I didn't own, but I did not want to take that risk myself with a big ticket purchase. OK any compromises are unlikely to affect the center of the FOV and planetary photography but they could detract from all round performance. Now obviously the faster refractors are specialized a bit more towards DSO photography, and I get it that these are not in the frame for this video, but is there a reason you didn't consider the larger mid range f/ratio APO's? In particular I was wondering why the mid length 5" APOs (e.g. EvoStar and EON) weren't considered. At f/7 they can also be pulled out to long focus with x2 or x3 barlow, and with a 0.8x reducer are pretty effective for DSO's. These are essentially corrected for all major optical abberations *by design* and their mid range focal lengths mean that (with modern quality control) they should be almost immune to factors that could disappoint the discerning eye (as experience develops). A very much safer bet in my view. By design they are absolutely unbeatable for visual observing of solar system and messier objects. When mirror reflectivity and secondary mirror considerations are taken into account they punch well above their weight in inches when compared with reflectors. I'm wondering because (of course!) I have an EON 130 ED on an EQ6 myself and am absolutely bowled over with how it performs visually. As a rank beginner in astrophotography I'm also impressed and delighted with early results I got with very little expertise when targeting DSO's with a one shot colour camera. Planetary photography seems to me to be particularly demanding (and rewarding) challenge and I'll need to invest clear nights in it (as you know there have been precious few of those recently around our neighbourhood). After a wake-up call about how hard planets are to photograph (poor results on Jupiter and Saturn low down in '21) I want to give it a try with Mars in '22. I just thought I'd throw in this perspective to see what you think, as in my limited experience these all-round instruments should stack up pretty well against some of the others you covered. Limited experience = I couldn't get a decent picture of a planet with any of them!
Hi there, I've chosen my EDGE HD 8" over an apo as it was a cheaper option, it had a longer focal length and a larger aperture. Also it's light and compact which is important for me in the city with less storage space for my equipment. To be honest, the 8" is a jack of all trades, but definitely not the absolute best at DSO or planetary. If you want to do great planetary photography, you'll need an 11" imo. The apos you're mentioning are great for smaller DSO's, they'll probably outperform my edge hd 8". But with the .7 reducer I've been getting some decent results and an APOD, so I'm happy. At the end it's all about personal preferences, there's not one perfect scope and people probably end up with multiple scopes when they stay in the hobby for many years. Clear skies!
@@AstroForumSpace You're absolutely right that the EDGE 8" is the most comparable to the APO, and that since this video is about photographing planets the edge comes out on top because you'll save at least 30%. What you say about multiple scopes is also very perceptive. On the face of it, it depends a lot on what you can justify spending. You have to be ready to splash the cash if you want something specialized to every purpose that interests you. I'm Scottish born naturalized Dutch so doubly afflicted when it comes to money! I saved my whole life to buy the ideal (single) telescope to best match my particular personal profile of preferences - and that profile includes refusing to pay a crazy premium for the last 0.5% and 'rejecting' the luxury of owning more than one instrument. That being said, the PLAN always was for a clearout, and I did find a home for my long focus (2m) 5" doublet. But I still haven't parted with my trusty old 3", and the 11x80's binos are definitely keeper-peepers. I hope this is it for me now at my age (65) but when you are younger, you'll never know what you might want in future. Now as the bones begin to creak, I have to admit to being tempted to downsize to a 4" in carbon on a harmonic mount. So yes we probably DO end up with multiple instruments when we stay in the game, even if we are really just letting the dust gather on happy memories. Clear skies!
Very informative video. I think the main reason a small diameter secondary mirror is important for planetary is that it reduces diffraction. Also, regular Dobsonians are a poor choice for planetary imaging, due to the lack of tracking. Long focal-length Newtonians on tracking mounts can be a very good option though.
Dobsonian are not tied to a Dobsonian Mount.
| built my own 207mm X 750 mm FL "Dobsonian/ Newtonian " style and mounted it on my homemade equatorial mount.
It may incorrectly steer people away from Dobsonian telescopes thinking the mounts are always trash.
Hi Wido, thanks again for compiling the available telescopes into one overview video. Very helpful, especially regarding the modified SCT👍 Hope everything is Ok for you over there in the Netherlands, and also with your kids and your wife. All the best to all of you ☀️💪 Cheers, Jason
Thanks for asking! We are healthy again, my wife and kids are recovered and back to school/work as of this week. Clear skies!
Very valuable information compacted very well into this one video. 👍 thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
I am looking at a 6" mak or rc. My viewing conditions are 💩 and DSO are not possible for me. I am happy with lunar and planetary views/pictures 😀🔭
Good video, thanks!
The edge hd slide has kg and lbs inverted.
And why care at all about focal length when at the end you will need a barlow?
Ah, thanks. I've changed it in my blog and table. Shorter focal length telescopes usually also have shorter apertures. Clear skies!
If only anything was in stock. :). Great job as usual
Maybe one day, lol!
EXACTLY
A couple of tips for equalizing the temperature with a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope. Take the telescope outside before you start setting up the mount. By the time the mount is set up and polar aligned, the telescope temperature will either be equalized, or very nearly equalized. A Sky-Watcher Skymax 127 will take around 30 minutes to equalize. The Sky-Watcher Skymax180 around about an hour. If you have a well weather proofed garden shed. Keep the telescope in there. It'll reduce the equalization time to only a few minutes.
Awesome, thanks for the feedback. I fully agree, in fact, I also do this with my 8" edge hd. So cool down may not be a such a big issue with maks after all...clear skies.
@@AstroForumSpace Clear skies back at yah 🔭😀!
@@AstroForumSpace I have added two small 12V fans to my 8 EdgeHD to equalize the temperature faster. They mount where the air vents are near the main mirror. I think it roughly halves the time.
@@martynh5410 that's very cool in a literal sense 😉.
How about the Takahashi Mewlon 210? Any thoughts on that?
Thanks for the tip. Looking at the specs, I think this will be an excellent telescope for planetary imaging. The F/ratio - even when applying the 0.8 reducer so probably somewhat less suited for deepsky AP.
I suppose a newtonian/dobsonian telescope does not require a dry cabinet storage?
You'll have to look out for moisture, but lots of people store their dobsonians in an unheated shed or garage.
I could use some help. So I live in Colorado and have a beautiful view of nothing, meaning just wide open. I would like to get into something that would allow me to view planets, stars and constellations and other planets. What can you suggest that would allow connection of cell phones as well. Thanks in advance.
What's your budget Brandon?
@@AstroForumSpace would like to stay under 2,000.00
One scope that is fun for planets..enough for a little rush.. and that is great for lunar and the sun...is the Questar Maksutov. It's 3.5 inches, fits on the keyboard of your laptop, and if You want to crank up the power..You might be surprised. It is also a great terrestrial spotting scope and the ultimate eclipse chaser. The best retail planetary imaging scope is a C-14, unless You want to go out and spend as much as a used ferrari in which case a 24 inch classical cassegrain..say f/20 with a CO of around 20% would be hard to beat. For instance..this scope would have 20 inches of clear aperture and a C-14 has 9.5. Fun fact..some of the better earth based planetary images are coming out of the Pic du Midi observatory..optics by Texereau.. Clear Aperture ? 27.5 inches from it's 106cm mirror. Buy a used C-14..new equipment from China includes the cost of a communist police state running 100 concentration camps.. unless of course you think you have no need to score points with your Maker. (In China praying in public will land You in Prison)
TX for the feedback Dan, that 27.5 inch sounds like a dream. It would be hard to get into astrophotography without buying equipment from China. Both SkyWatcher and ZWO are based in Suzhou. I've chatted with some of the people who work there and they seem nice people with an interest in astrophotography.
@@AstroForumSpace Yes 27.5 in is the Pic du Midi clear aperture..it's mirror is a 42 inches classical Cassegrain and being on top of a mountain in the Alps is a big help. Well..my theory is that we have to negotiate life as a Human Being. We cannot afford to lose that part of Ourselves collectively. Chinese Technical College 2nd year students must work for 120 euros per month for 10 months..10 hours per day, 6 days per week in order to be allowed to continue their studies and optical fabrication factories are using these cost savings to put Western Mfgrs. out of business. WHO CAN COMPETE WITH ALMOST FREE LABOR? A tech in the West gets paid in a day what Chinese firms pay in a MONTH using this Program MANDATED BY THE COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT! China sees this vicious predatory advantage as necessary to create World ECONOMIC DEPENDENCE on Chinese Manufacturing, and DAMNED IF THEY DID NOT GET IT. The human toll WE PAY FOR is why "We have no choice but to buy from China". The TRUTH IS WHEN DEMOCRACIES STOP TRADE WITH COMMUNIST CHINA IS EXACTLY HOW WE WILL GET OUR CHOICES BACK FROM CHINA WHO NOW OWNS THEM..AND PAY AT A BIG HUMAN AND ENVIRO COST THAT NO ONE ONE ELSE IS IMMORAL AND CORRUPT ENOUGH TO PAY. SYNTA OPTICS OF CHINA IS A MAJOR SUPPLIER TO THE ARMY OF COMMUNIST CHINA. EXPECT AT SOME POINT THEY ARE BOYCOTTED BY THE WEST. MOST OF YOUR ED OPTICS ARE MADE BY THEIR CNC POLISHING MACHINES.THEN WHAT? Then Taiwan or Japan will come in with CNC machines and begin to fill the void, albeit at a marginally higher cost, because the HUMAN TOLL has been removed from the Moral equation.
Such an informative video, thank you! You mention that an AltAz plus a wedge is not as good as an EQ. Do you have any links to anywhere you discuss this in more detail?
There are lots of discussions to be found on AP fora, like this one: www.cloudynights.com/topic/689260-celestron-altaz-mount-w-wedge-good-or-bad-idea-for-astrophotography/
@@AstroForumSpace Thank you.
Great video. Nice comparison and in-depth discussion
Thank you so much!
HI can you comment on a Meade lx200 vs Meade LX85? or LX90
Hi Patrick, sure! To my best knowledge the LX200 - as mentioned in the video - is one of the advanced coma free line schmidt-cassegrain telescopes, so they are quite nice to have for planetary and (preferably with a reducer) deep-sky astrophotography. The LX-85 you're mentioning is - again to my best knowledge - an equatorial telescope mount. I'm not sure what you're looking for...planetary imaging, deep-sky astrophotography, or perhaps visual backyard astronomy? Best regards, Wido.
Awesome for response!
Hello to whoever reads this what telescope would be better for planetary imaging a 127mm mak or an 8 inch dob?
The 8 inch. Aperture is better, leading to a higher resolution view.
Thankyou for the quick response 😁
The Mak has better contrast and sharpness. But, a 150mm Mak would be better than a 127mm Mak.
I would put aperture first over focal lenght. The aperture will determine how much details you can resolve and is a fixed parameter, while the focal lenght is a dinamic param that you can always increase it by using a barlow lens. Also the focal lenght usefull will be determinated by the diameter of the aperture. So the aperture diameter always rules here.
Thank you for this video! Just what i needed.
Nice to hear that, thanks!
Excellent video. Only one correction: there are not "dobsonian" telescopes. There are "newtonian" telescopes mounted on a "dobsonian" mount. And I not agree to use them to do planetary photo because, how you are going to do the tracking, in case you use sharpcap or another acquisition software ?
A dobsonian scope is a newton on an altaz mount. That's the definition. Planetary imaging pre processor can be used to center the video images. Downside is indeed the manual tracking in Alt-Az. Upside is the aperture needed for planetary at low cost.
Hi Wido, at 2:30, yes, larger aperture does increase resolution, but of course it is not because of the light collecting capability. Two 4.5” telescopes a continent apart will have millions times higher resolution than a single 20” telescope, even though the big telescope has 10x more light gathering than the two small telescopes together. See also en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_resolution
??? astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/a/Aperture and astronomy.tools/calculators/telescope_capabilities
A must is a mewlon Takahashi.
Thanks for the tip! Clear skies.
I see no mention of Newtonians...are these not great for Planetary?
Dobsonians are Newtonian telescopes but on a simple Alt Az mount
Yes, like Clive said. You could also use a Newtonian but most of them have a focal length of 800 to 1000. So you'll need at least a 2x Barlow lens or higher. Newtonians are often f/5 or f/4 ratio telescopes, good for deepsky astrophotography.
Thanks a lot for your videos and information related. As far as I could see in others media, Ritchey- Cretien telescopes area very good solution for astrophotography. You said in your video that they are dificult to colimate. Could you tell me something more. I was thinking to acquire TS optics RC203, 8" and people told me that rarely needs to colimate. What is your opinion. Thanks in advance
You need a special laser collimator for the parabolic mirrors. It's much easier to collimate a modified Schmidt cassegrain, and they have a correction plate that keeps out the rain and other stuff. Of course, the RC is more affordable. Good
Luck!
@@AstroForumSpace Thank you Wido
How about SCT 9,25 XLT and not neccesary Edge Hd version?
Check the video and you'll know the difference.
@@AstroForumSpace Yes, that's what I did. I do only the Moon and planets astrophotography plus visual DS so I went for "plain" XLT version. Thanks for very good video.
mooi video :)
Thanks Nik!
If I buy a c8 original I have to buy the 6.3 reducer and a webcam and normally I can astrophotography without coma ?
And vinetage ?
It mainly depends on sensors size. For DSO, it's very good for galaxies, not for great nebulaes.
Hi there, yes, if the reducer also corrects for coma you can do Deepsky AP, also depending on your mount. I've made a separate video about gear and software you'll need for astrophotography, check: th-cam.com/video/y5D5JyN42SU/w-d-xo.html. Hope this helps! Clear skies.
Good as always and very interesting, thank you !
Thanks!
Love it
C11 XLT is a beast :)
Yes, for sure!