Jump to content


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Does a 14" LX200GPS OTA + Field flattener = 14" Edge HD?

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#26 Timmo


    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2016
  • Loc: Johannesburg, South Africa

Posted 03 January 2018 - 10:32 AM

The Starizona SCT Correctors. 

Edited by Timmo, 03 January 2018 - 10:34 AM.

#27 freestar8n


    Vendor - MetaGuide

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 7976
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007

Posted 03 January 2018 - 04:45 PM

A key question in all this is just how well you want things to work.  You can use any of the scopes at the native focal length and be able to image that way - but it would probably require longer exposures - and a normal sct without any correction would show coma at the edges - like the examples I provided.  But if you aren't critical about it then you may be fine.


There is a big distinction between the actual improved performance that is possible in one system vs. another - and how much you would actually notice or care about that difference.


If you are just getting started in imaging and your sensor is small, then either the 6.3 reducer or the small Starizona reducer would make it easier to image - and unless your guiding and focus are good you may not need to worry about the outer stars.


But later as your technique improves you may be limited by those reducers and would benefit either from the big starizona reducer - or an actual edge system and its reducer.


Unfortunately there are few examples of really well focused and guided images with the big starizona reducer - so I don't know how well it works compared to Edge with its reducer.  And as a consequence I also can't tell how well it would work with a Meade (non-ACF) vs. a Celestron (non Edge) sct.


Even with EdgeHD and its custom designed reducer for each OTA size - it takes care to get it collimated and aligned so the field looks good across a large sensor.  So I assume there would be additional challenges with the big starizona one.


I think if you are starting out and want to save money then the cheapest compromise might be a standard sct plus the smaller starizona one.  That may be fine for you for some time.  And in that case either meade or celestron would do ok - and most of the main problem - which is coma - would be reduced.



#28 akulapanam



  • *****
  • Posts: 2440
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012

Posted 03 January 2018 - 10:35 PM

The Starizona SCT Correctors. 



Take a look at this image.  But keep in mind the chip is pretty small.



#29 DuncanM



  • -----
  • Posts: 2244
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Arizona Sky Village or the rain forest

Posted 08 January 2018 - 03:36 AM

I have both the older F7.5 and the newer F6.3 Starizona SCT reducers and have done preliminary testing with Meade F10 SCTs. These reducers will provide near full illumination with an APSC sensor. They are greatly superior to the Celestron F6.3 reducer in terms of off axis correction and field illumination. I won't be able to provide full test results until mid Feb when I'll have another opportunity at ASV during the new moon period. These reducers were designed for Celestron classic SCTs but they will work with Meade SCTs, albeit with slightly different spacing for optimal results.


I also physically confirmed that the large format Starizona SCT reducer will thread securely onto the Meade 3.25in SCT threads.

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Recent Topics

Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics