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.

Photo

Stellarvue SVX080T-3SV w/ .74X Reducer-Flattener

astrophotography dslr refractor
  • Please log in to reply
265 replies to this topic

#151 Tim C

Tim C

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,844
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Marietta, GA

Posted 04 December 2019 - 03:49 PM

If you are worried about the tilt issue, I think you are just as likely to encounter it with other brands as you are with the Stellarvue. I don’t think it’s a case where there is something especially problematic with the Stellarvue, it’s just that tilt is a common problem in fast scopes. By the way, you don’t typically have to modify anything to correct for tilt. You can add tilt adjusters sold by different vendors that make it easier to adjust for tilt in your imaging train.

In theory, you should have a better chance of a optically excellent scope with Stellarvue versus other similarly priced brands because they are making the lenses in house and they do perform a number of quality control checks. I have had very good luck with Stellarvue scopes over the years. I also like that there are good auto focusing options available for the scope (eg optec) and the risers are a very useful thing to have.

Tim


Sorry to be slightly off topic, but would I be making a poor choice by canceling my order and going with something like the WO GT81mm or the SW 80mm? They appear to sell both flatteners and reducers that work without modifying the scope. Thoughts?


  • moon_nut_99, epdreher and thelosttrek like this

#152 SeymoreStars

SeymoreStars

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,487
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 04 December 2019 - 03:50 PM

Tim I will put the Canon 6D (with reducer) on it first opportunity, but the forecasts are s___ for the next 10 days. Please be patient.


  • Tim C and moon_nut_99 like this

#153 Chris Valentine

Chris Valentine

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2007

Posted 04 December 2019 - 04:56 PM

 

 
 
 
 
Can someone please tell me where to find the serial# on this scope?

 

It's on the bottom opposite of the Stellarvue  SVX80T plate.  Took me a minute to find it.  Does your test report have the lens number or the telescope serial number?  My report has the lens serial number which matches the inspection sheet.



#154 SeymoreStars

SeymoreStars

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,487
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 04 December 2019 - 06:21 PM

I had to order the SFFTCanon T-Ring from Highpoint, wouldn't you know.

 

Also I seem to recall someone asking about the FT focuser locking mechanism. Anyway I did a test and suspended the scope, riser blocks ect (the whole kit and kaboodle) from the reducer flange and the entire weight of the scope didn't budge the FT focuser. Wayne at FT touch said the locking mechanism tension could be increased with the thumbscrew (on the underneath) of the focuser.


  • moon_nut_99 likes this

#155 moon_nut_99

moon_nut_99

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: NM

Posted 04 December 2019 - 06:26 PM

I did Steve. And thanks for the report. That is a nice focuser. Sorry about the bad weather. I don't know how you guys can handle all that snow...



#156 thelosttrek

thelosttrek

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2019
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 05 December 2019 - 12:34 AM

Hey Steve & Tim,

 

It sounds like you both opted for the reducer and were successful in installing. I assume you both knew going into it that degradation of image quality might be an issue? If so, what are the adjustments you're making to ensure you're happy with the image?

 

Tim, I looked at your images and I couldn't tell if there was anything different because of tilt. I'm not even sure what to look for. I appreciate your comment about the quality of Stellarvue. It is the reason I chose them in the first place.

 

I think what's challenging is finding the right camera, with the right pixel size so you don't under-sample. I'd like a smaller sensor, with smaller pixel size, but the combination with the 80mm crops most wide-field subjects. If I go with a 4/3 sensor it's not too bad, but there are a few subjects that get pretty close to the edge and wouldn't it be nice to have that reducer. If I choose the full frame camera, the pixel size is huge and my sampling takes a dive. It's all kinda driving me crazy trying to figure this out. smile.gif

 

Thanks,

Burt


Edited by thelosttrek, 05 December 2019 - 12:39 AM.


#157 SeymoreStars

SeymoreStars

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,487
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 05 December 2019 - 06:51 AM

These are the cameras I have that will be used on the 80mm scope...

 

ASI071MC-cool pro

ASI1600MM-cool NON pro

Canon 6D modified by Hap Griffin

Canon 7D M2 NOT modified.

 

It's taken me a year to get a good feel for the CCD camera in my signature and it's less complicated than today's CMOS cameras. The 80mm scope was purchased to get wide angle shots of large astro targets (M31, California nebula, blah blah blah)

 

http://astronomy.too...ccd_suitability

 

When using the website above to evaluate sensor+scope suitability the combination in my signature yields this...

The ideal pixel size for OK Seeing (2-4" FWHM) seeing is: 0.67 - 2" / pixel.

This combination leads to slight over-sampling. Will require a good mount and careful guiding. (NSSherlock)

 

So it's essentially telling me that I am wasting pixels, big deal. I bought the camera (sensor) primarily because of the physical size 36mm X 36mm, it's huge but so is the image circle produced by the scope (70mm).

 

Here is an the results of the combination for the 80mm scope & the Canon 6D...

Capture
 
At the bottom it tells me .....

The ideal pixel size for OK Seeing (2-4" FWHM) seeing is: 0.67 - 2" / pixel.

This combination leads to under-sampling. This reduces the influence of guiding errors and improves signal to noise at the expense of finest detail. OK for widefield imaging.

 

And widefield imaging is it's intended purpose, so we are good. The 80mm scope won't be used to image tiny planetary nebula, tiny galaxies or the planets. The 80mm scope is not suitable for tiny targets requiring long focal lengths, even though someone will argue that it can with small enough pixels. And you can use small pixels for greater resolution, but at some point the dynamic range is sacrificed. At the other extreme I could produce a extremely detailed image of M31 with the equipment is my signature, by doing mosaics. Sure and I could also have hot needles stuck in my eyes too but it would not be fun. This hobby can be difficult I lean towards easy, KISS.

 

get.jpg?insecure

 

This 80mm scope is supposed to have a large corrected flat field that can accomodate a full frame camera. That's what we are initially trying to determine and I will use the Canon 6D to assess that claim within then next 3 weeks (hopefully).

 

NOTE:  Here is an the results of the combination for the 80mm scope & the Canon 6D  (With the Reducer) the website tells me...

The ideal pixel size for OK Seeing (2-4" FWHM) seeing is: 0.67 - 2" / pixel.

This combination leads to significant under-sampling. This reduces the influence of guiding errors and improves signal to noise at the expense of finest detail. May be OK for widefield imaging but might result in softer images.

 

Using the reducer might make cameras based on The IMX551 (3.76 um square pixels, 52,000 e- full well, and 1.76 e- read noise) worth considering. But not for awhile, let someone else get cut on the bleeding edge first.

 

I hope this post make sense, it's early and haven't had coffee.


Edited by sink45ny, 05 December 2019 - 09:13 AM.

  • moon_nut_99, zakry3323 and thelosttrek like this

#158 zakry3323

zakry3323

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,502
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Pittsburgh

Posted 05 December 2019 - 08:55 AM

If it helps at all Burt, I'm also planning to use the 1600mm and 071mc and a full frame DSLR with this OTA for much the exact same reasons as Sink45 smile.gif

And don't let my nit-picking of this ota bother you, these are barely significant foibles of an otherwise top-notch scope. 


Edited by zakry3323, 05 December 2019 - 08:59 AM.

  • moon_nut_99 and thelosttrek like this

#159 thelosttrek

thelosttrek

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2019
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 05 December 2019 - 01:12 PM

Thanks guys for the responses. And thanks for letting me go slightly off topic to the OP. It sounds like the 071 is a good choice. Is there a reason you didn’t go with the 294 other than a little bit more sensor size?

Basically, I’m looking at the 294, 071, 2600 (which looks great and is a new release forthcoming , but 60mb files ouch), and the 1600 for mono. I have the unmodified 6D and 7DII already.

It sounds like we are all shooting for the same setup, which is comforting. And it sounds like under sampling shouldn’t be too much of a concern with these setups if I’m understanding you guys correctly. I really appreciate everyone’s help.

#160 YAOG

YAOG

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,101
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Southern California

Posted 05 December 2019 - 02:28 PM

Hi Jim. I know its a late reply and all, but maybe you're still interested?

I am using this telescope. Just got it the beginning of September. I was able to do a shakedown test last Friday 9/20/19. Be more than happy to answer your questions. BUT pls be aware that I am new to ALL of this. This is my first post ever, my first image, my first trial with Polemaster, with PHD, with EQ6 pro, etc., etc., so my help will be limited.

I did manage to take 15 180 secs lights and darks, plus10  bias and 10 flats, of a star field adjacent Sagittarius. I was also able to stack and register with Deepskystacker (DSS). This is as far as I got with postprocessing. I do have a copy of Nebulosity but that is TBD. Anyhow, the final image from DSS is pleasing to me. I attached a JPG copy of it for your perusal (I hope it worked). I had to resize it to meet the CN 500Kb limit, so it lost some resolution.

 
I live at the southern end of a very small town in NM (pop 2900, & one traffic light). It's a rather dark place. Telescope is stock and operates with included flattener at f6. Images were taken at ISO1600 with an unmod Canon 6D. The mount tracked with a total error not exceeding 0.20pix & using an Orion SSAG with SV 50mm finder. 

I am pleased with this telescope. Fit and finish is superb.attachicon.gif cn-6.jpg

Not to be a killjoy but this image looks very undersampled, there are obvious aliasing issues.



#161 Esso2112

Esso2112

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,102
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2017
  • Loc: Magnolia, TX

Posted 05 December 2019 - 02:32 PM

Got a notice today that reducer/flattener for my scope shipped today. I ordered it early in October before they removed it from the website.
  • zakry3323 likes this

#162 SeymoreStars

SeymoreStars

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,487
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 05 December 2019 - 03:03 PM

I bought the ASI071 because the camera has low noise and large sensor.

 

ASI294 = Diagonal: 23.2mm

 

ASI071 = Diagonal: 28.4mm   (22% bigger than ASI294)

 

Canon 6D = Diagonal 43.04 mm (52% bigger than ASI071)


  • zakry3323 and thelosttrek like this

#163 Gene3

Gene3

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Del Mar, CA

Posted 05 December 2019 - 03:34 PM

Based on the email (see below) from Alex on Monday, my SVX080T should be shipping any day. I went ahead and got the 0.74 reducer since it was matched and ready to go.

Camera-wise I am starting with my QHY367C (2.06 arc"/px), but will migrate to the new 268C (about 1.60 arc"/px I think) or 600C when they are available.

 

"Gene,

 

    The telescope is finished, awaiting the final cosmetic QC checks + serialization.

 

I suspect we'll have this shipped by Friday at the latest!

 

PS:  I matched a .74 reducer to the telescope during it's assembly.     I'll keep it on the shelf might you decide to go that route.   Of course the large flattener has been matched and is included with the telescope."


  • SeymoreStars and zakry3323 like this

#164 VuurEnVlam

VuurEnVlam

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2015

Posted 06 December 2019 - 05:08 AM

My reducer should be on the way finally.

 

But, despite I should be happy, what I'm reading is keeping me unquiet.
I wonder how will the reducer that I'm receiving perform, since SV say that they match reducer with OTA before shipping.
I ordered them together but received the OTA first and then the reducer with a huge delay. So I don't think they (OTA and Reducer) ever met.

 

I think this is definitly my worse experience in buying astronomical stuffs, ironically is also one of the most expensive I ever bought..Considering the ocean between me and SV the situation looks even worse.

I spent a lot of money and now I have to hope that I will be so lucky that the OTA and Reducer matches.. And I spent that money also because it was supposed to be a controlled product leaving nothing to the case/fate, like for less expansive brands.

Also the fact that I have to read this OTA + reducer match thing from a public topic and nobody in SV (I had direct contact with them despite I ordered from OPT) told me this, degrades the consideration I have on this company.

 

My only hope is that the one I will receive is an early version of the new one they developing that should have a built in tilt adjustment system (if rumors are true). I use an OAG and I don't have room for an external tilt adjuster..

I'm definitly regretting the decision I made an year ago.

Maybe the performance of the imaging system at the end will dispove me but until now I begin wishing I never started the entire process..


Edited by VuurEnVlam, 06 December 2019 - 06:12 AM.


#165 moon_nut_99

moon_nut_99

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: NM

Posted 06 December 2019 - 01:39 PM

Not to be a killjoy but this image looks very undersampled, there are obvious aliasing issues.

You're not a killjoy at all. I'm always willing to learn and do appreciate constructive comments. That's why I love this free forum. Members are always so helpful. And the absolute lack of annoying ads is great too!smile.gif 

 

But pls note that frame was my first ever. First Polemaster PA, first PHD2 guiding, first everything. I was so proud that I managed to get everything to work that I just had to post it. Heck, it was even my first CN post to boot. What I'm trying to say is that I'm extremely green and I have no experience to help me understand undersampling and aliasing issues let alone what to do to correct them. 

 

Besides, and to make matters worse, my imaging has come to a screeching halt. For some reason my SSAG camera becomes disconnected shortly after an imaging session and PHD2 is unable to re-connect. And this has already happened many times and on different imaging sessions. I suspect USB cable issues and so I ordered a powered hub from Amazon. I will also try to shorten the Laptop/SSAG cable length as well (it is 15 feet). It might help...smile.gif

 

Cheers

 

Joe


  • SeymoreStars, YAOG and thelosttrek like this

#166 Tim C

Tim C

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,844
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Marietta, GA

Posted 06 December 2019 - 06:59 PM

All the talk of tilt has probably caused too much worry.  I hope yours performs well VuurEnVlam.  I don't really put a lot of stock in the matching of the reducer/flattener to the individual scope.  Seems like tilt is more often than not caused by the extension tubes, and OAG, or the camera chip itself.  Also, most of the time, people complaining about tilt (including me) are being very nit picky and these issues aren't really even noticeable when looking at the picture as it was intended to be viewed (i.e., not zooming to 100% and looking at the corners).

 

My reducer should be on the way finally.

 

But, despite I should be happy, what I'm reading is keeping me unquiet.
I wonder how will the reducer that I'm receiving perform, since SV say that they match reducer with OTA before shipping.
I ordered them together but received the OTA first and then the reducer with a huge delay. So I don't think they (OTA and Reducer) ever met.

 

I think this is definitly my worse experience in buying astronomical stuffs, ironically is also one of the most expensive I ever bought..Considering the ocean between me and SV the situation looks even worse.

I spent a lot of money and now I have to hope that I will be so lucky that the OTA and Reducer matches.. And I spent that money also because it was supposed to be a controlled product leaving nothing to the case/fate, like for less expansive brands.

Also the fact that I have to read this OTA + reducer match thing from a public topic and nobody in SV (I had direct contact with them despite I ordered from OPT) told me this, degrades the consideration I have on this company.

 

My only hope is that the one I will receive is an early version of the new one they developing that should have a built in tilt adjustment system (if rumors are true). I use an OAG and I don't have room for an external tilt adjuster..

I'm definitly regretting the decision I made an year ago.

Maybe the performance of the imaging system at the end will dispove me but until now I begin wishing I never started the entire process..


  • moon_nut_99, SeymoreStars, zakry3323 and 2 others like this

#167 thelosttrek

thelosttrek

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2019
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 07 December 2019 - 01:51 AM

I feel your pain, VuurEnVlam. I didn't realize the optics would not play well with a reducer when making the purchase. I assumed like other manufacturers that reducers are a standard part among all telescope designs. However, I can see why Stellarvue is having issues. According to the email I received from them this is a common issue with all fast scopes, and with such a high precision of quality that must pass their tests, I assume any deviation brought on by the reducer would fail their QC tests. It is odd that other companies are able to provide reducers that apparently just work, but then again, I'm too new to the hobby to know what other scopes look like for comparison. 

 

In the end I chose not to go with the reducer and rely on a larger sensor. The timing couldn't be more perfect with the announcement of the ZWO 2600. It looks like it will suit my needs. I counted at least 17 targets without the reducer, which will keep me busy for quite some time. Even if your reducer doesn't work, I think you'll be happy with the scope based on all the comments I've read. Of course I have yet to receive mine, but I'm being optimistic.

 

Unfortunately, the other feedback I received from Stellarvue was this, "at the current time we are not planning on making a reducer designed exclusively for this system since it appears we will still face the same issues with some customers." When I read this, I agree with your comment about making things public. It would be nice if they went into more detail on their website, however, they have been easy to get a hold of and talk to. I think what makes this challenging, at least for me, is that this was my first telescope purchase. And an expensive one at that, like you said. I boil it down to being new to all of this and now that I'm "all in," I will chalk this up as a lessoned learned for purchases down the road.  

 

I think Tim said it best and it sounds like you'll be happy with what they send you. 

 

My reducer should be on the way finally.

 

But, despite I should be happy, what I'm reading is keeping me unquiet.
I wonder how will the reducer that I'm receiving perform, since SV say that they match reducer with OTA before shipping.
I ordered them together but received the OTA first and then the reducer with a huge delay. So I don't think they (OTA and Reducer) ever met.

 

I think this is definitly my worse experience in buying astronomical stuffs, ironically is also one of the most expensive I ever bought..Considering the ocean between me and SV the situation looks even worse.

I spent a lot of money and now I have to hope that I will be so lucky that the OTA and Reducer matches.. And I spent that money also because it was supposed to be a controlled product leaving nothing to the case/fate, like for less expansive brands.

Also the fact that I have to read this OTA + reducer match thing from a public topic and nobody in SV (I had direct contact with them despite I ordered from OPT) told me this, degrades the consideration I have on this company.

 

My only hope is that the one I will receive is an early version of the new one they developing that should have a built in tilt adjustment system (if rumors are true). I use an OAG and I don't have room for an external tilt adjuster..

I'm definitly regretting the decision I made an year ago.

Maybe the performance of the imaging system at the end will dispove me but until now I begin wishing I never started the entire process..


Edited by thelosttrek, 07 December 2019 - 02:00 AM.

  • moon_nut_99 likes this

#168 Tim C

Tim C

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,844
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Marietta, GA

Posted 07 December 2019 - 08:32 AM

I really don't think this is a Stellarvue specific issue, at least in this price range.  Granted, SV is on the upper end of this price range now (e.g, William Optics, TS/Sharpstar, Explore Scientific, Sky-Watcher, etc.).  Based on other scope brands I've used and seen in use, it's difficult to get perfect stars to the corners when you get below f/5.  My current SV reducer is the best performing one I've used at this focal length (earlier SV and William Optics scopes I've used).  Tilt is a different issue and as I said earlier can be caused by anything in the imaging train and even users of Taks have to solve for it sometimes.

 

On a side note, the Strehl ratio of the scope gets a lot of attention but the reducer/flattener component is just as important (if not more important for imaging).  Seems like that is the harder part to execute on.  I'm assuming these reducers are not made in house but are tweaked or adjusted in house or the lenses are mounted to assemblies that are machined in house.

 

 It is odd that other companies are able to provide reducers that apparently just work, but then again, I'm too new to the hobby to know what other scopes look like for comparison. 

 


Edited by Tim C, 07 December 2019 - 08:44 AM.

  • moon_nut_99 and thelosttrek like this

#169 YAOG

YAOG

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,101
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Southern California

Posted 07 December 2019 - 11:57 AM

You're not a killjoy at all. I'm always willing to learn and do appreciate constructive comments. That's why I love this free forum. Members are always so helpful. And the absolute lack of annoying ads is great too!smile.gif

 

But pls note that frame was my first ever. First Polemaster PA, first PHD2 guiding, first everything. I was so proud that I managed to get everything to work that I just had to post it. Heck, it was even my first CN post to boot. What I'm trying to say is that I'm extremely green and I have no experience to help me understand undersampling and aliasing issues let alone what to do to correct them. 

 

Besides, and to make matters worse, my imaging has come to a screeching halt. For some reason my SSAG camera becomes disconnected shortly after an imaging session and PHD2 is unable to re-connect. And this has already happened many times and on different imaging sessions. I suspect USB cable issues and so I ordered a powered hub from Amazon. I will also try to shorten the Laptop/SSAG cable length as well (it is 15 feet). It might help...smile.gif

 

Cheers

 

Joe

Joe,

 

You're off to a good start but you will want a better Pixel pitch to avoid the telltale square and curious rectangular stars in the image. The astronomy.tools calculators are handy but only if used well, don't use the ok seeing as a guide unless you really measure the sky conditions actually being at this low a quality level. Use good and better seeing to avoid mushy images and work to keep you guided image PE as low as possible for your mount. The effects of PE are not all that visible at these low Pixel pitches but will become more obvious as you increase sample rate and resolution. Have fun and don't get too crazy, quality will come in time, there are many paths to good images. 


  • ken30809, moon_nut_99 and thelosttrek like this

#170 moon_nut_99

moon_nut_99

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 43
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2010
  • Loc: NM

Posted 07 December 2019 - 07:05 PM

Joe,

 

You're off to a good start but you will want a better Pixel pitch to avoid the telltale square and curious rectangular stars in the image. The astronomy.tools calculators are handy but only if used well, don't use the ok seeing as a guide unless you really measure the sky conditions actually being at this low a quality level. Use good and better seeing to avoid mushy images and work to keep you guided image PE as low as possible for your mount. The effects of PE are not all that visible at these low Pixel pitches but will become more obvious as you increase sample rate and resolution. Have fun and don't get too crazy, quality will come in time, there are many paths to good images. 

Thank you Chip! I'll treasure your advice! And thank to all of you for your comments and suggestions.

 

Cheers,

 

Joe



#171 Esso2112

Esso2112

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,102
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2017
  • Loc: Magnolia, TX

Posted 07 December 2019 - 11:27 PM

My reducer arrived today. It is a massive chunk of glass and seems very well made. I had it all set up to be mounted and tested out, but I want to do some visual with a different scope for a while. After viewing the moon and a few other objects, high clouds rolled in so I didn’t get to test out the Stellarvue with its reducer. The forecast for next weekend looks good right now, so hopefully will be able to run it through the paces. 


  • moon_nut_99 and zakry3323 like this

#172 gundark

gundark

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Southern California

Posted 08 December 2019 - 11:58 AM

My reducer arrived last week, and I can confirm that it is a substantial hunk of glass and metal. Now I just need a scope to put it on! I have been planning to order one of the SVX080s but bought the reducer from OPT when I heard the they would no longer be produced. I plan to order the scope in the next week or two. I am selling a couple of my existing scopes to fund the purchase.
  • moon_nut_99, zakry3323 and Esso2112 like this

#173 thelosttrek

thelosttrek

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2019
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 08 December 2019 - 04:28 PM

Hey guys, I'm curious with Stellarvue recommending not to use the the reducer on the SVX080T-3SV, what are you hoping to capture with the reducer in place? I ask because I feel like I'm missing out on something with this scope. Is it the combination of the camera you're using and you're trying to compensate for a reduced sensor size? Is it to stop down the scope even further? Should I purchase this reducer?



#174 Esso2112

Esso2112

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,102
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2017
  • Loc: Magnolia, TX

Posted 08 December 2019 - 06:35 PM

Hey guys, I'm curious with Stellarvue recommending not to use the the reducer on the SVX080T-3SV, what are you hoping to capture with the reducer in place? I ask because I feel like I'm missing out on something with this scope. Is it the combination of the camera you're using and you're trying to compensate for a reduced sensor size? Is it to stop down the scope even further? Should I purchase this reducer?

 

It gives you the option of shooting at f4.5 instead of f6, so shorter exposeres. I will try it with my 35mm ZWO camera, but not very optimistic from what I’ve heard. However, it should work fine with the ZWO ASI183C camera. I also have some APS sized ccd cameras that should be fine as well, especially shooting narrowband. 

 

Since I didn’t get a chance to test, I can’t recommend whether to buy it or not, yet. 



#175 Tim C

Tim C

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,844
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Marietta, GA

Posted 08 December 2019 - 09:02 PM

Hey guys, I'm curious with Stellarvue recommending not to use the the reducer on the SVX080T-3SV, what are you hoping to capture with the reducer in place? I ask because I feel like I'm missing out on something with this scope. Is it the combination of the camera you're using and you're trying to compensate for a reduced sensor size? Is it to stop down the scope even further? Should I purchase this reducer?

For me, it's a little bit extra FOV with the APS-C sized sensor in my ASI1600.  A lot of objects will be just fine and even preferable with just the flattener at f6.   However, many nebula such as Sh2-129 which I'm in the process of shooting now benefits from the larger FOV afforded by the reducer at f4.5.  First pic below is how sh2-129 would look in the SVX080T at f/6, 2nd one is with the reducer.  This is from the Sequence Generator Pro Framing and Mosaic Wizard.

Attached Thumbnails

  • sh2-129 f6.JPG
  • sh2-129 f4.5.JPG

Edited by Tim C, 08 December 2019 - 09:05 PM.

  • moon_nut_99 and zakry3323 like this


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





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: astrophotography, dslr, refractor



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics