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

Any new refr triplet with FPL-53 or great quality in 90-100mm?

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 18 October 2020 - 06:15 AM

Hi,

 

As long i am waiting my scope TS 90mm F/6 to be in stock next year and shipped to me i am thinking about that second one in same range, or even slightly larger up to 100mm aperture, but i don't know what much available these days with good price and high quality, or what is in production and might be out very soon.

 

I still dream about FSQ-106, it will be a nice pair to my 90mm F/6, but i can't hold a difficult hope, i might not get it any soon or maybe never who knows, so i didn't wait and i can't wait also, ordered that one and looking for second, but i am not sure if that second should be like at 90mm aperture or 100mm or even go smaller with 80mm and keep the door open for Tak 106.

 

It is all about astrophotography only, not visual.



#2 mmalik

mmalik

    DSLR camera modifications

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 10,954
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2012
  • Loc: USA

Posted 18 October 2020 - 07:28 AM

Here is what I would suggest...

 

 

1. Cancel your TS 90mm...

 

2. Get a Red CAT 51mm [...chat directly at website to order RED or SpaceCAT] or Raptor 61mm, whichever you can get sooner

 

3. Order an FSQ-85ED w/flattener (...wait is about 3-4 months) or an FSQ-106EDX4 (...not sure about the wait time)

 

4. Order a Lunt 60mm with B1200FT & ASI178MM for daytime (...should be in stock)

 

5. Get a SkyGuider Pro if you get a CAT/Raptor/Lunt/FSQ-85ED (Note: Not sure at this point if SkyGuider Pro can handle FSQ-85ED w/Flattener...)

 

6. Get Mach2 if you go for FSQ-106EDX4

 

 

Regards


Edited by mmalik, 18 October 2020 - 07:44 AM.


#3 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 18 October 2020 - 08:02 AM

Here is what I would suggest...

 

 

1. Cancel your TS 90mm...

 

2. Get a Red CAT 51mm [...chat directly at website to order RED or SpaceCAT] or Raptor 61mm, whichever you can get sooner

 

3. Order an FSQ-85ED w/flattener (...wait is about 3-4 months) or an FSQ-106EDX4 (...not sure about the wait time)

 

4. Order a Lunt 60mm with B1200FT & ASI178MM for daytime (...should be in stock)

 

5. Get a SkyGuider Pro if you get a CAT/Raptor/Lunt/FSQ-85ED (Note: Not sure at this point if SkyGuider Pro can handle FSQ-85ED w/Flattener...)

 

6. Get Mach2 if you go for FSQ-106EDX4

 

 

Regards

Ok, thank you very much smile.gif



#4 Jasev

Jasev

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Hermitage, PA, USA

Posted 18 October 2020 - 08:43 AM

I am a novice to be sure, however I know that framing is everything.  You seem to have very good taste in optics, but your range is too small.  If you own a 90mm, buying a 100mm will be redundant.  The 106 would be the min. increase (altough that particular scope is a big invest.).  I'd recomnend you spread out and go low, like a 72mm, or 60mm which will enable you to capture the big stuff (and save $).  I have an AT60 (fpl-53) to go wide.  It is tiny and built like a tank. Has an amazing Rack and pinion focuser that can handle any imaging train.  The Astro Tech 72 may be better yet, as the scope rings are better if you will guide.  The optics in my AT60 nearly defy the laws of phys.  I often view Saturn w it and have clear Cass. Division at 90x. It might be best to decide what you want to capture, and then work backwards.  Which scope can frame it, then what pixel size (camera purch.) does said scope need to properly sample it.

Jasev



#5 Jasev

Jasev

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Hermitage, PA, USA

Posted 18 October 2020 - 09:02 AM

Wanted to mention, I do own an AT-106 triplet apo (again w an FPL-53 glass element).  It is an amazing scope that I couldn't live without.  That said, with a 0.8xFF / reducer, I am no where close to framing Andromeda or the whole Orion neb complex up through Running Man.

You seem to have amazing cameras etc., which really love to go wide.  Poss a WO 51 is a great choice, and then an AT115 or similar for smaller targets.  Do not fear the AT "on back order" listings.  These folks get stuff in constantly.



#6 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 18 October 2020 - 09:04 AM

I am a novice to be sure, however I know that framing is everything.  You seem to have very good taste in optics, but your range is too small.  If you own a 90mm, buying a 100mm will be redundant.  The 106 would be the min. increase (altough that particular scope is a big invest.).  I'd recomnend you spread out and go low, like a 72mm, or 60mm which will enable you to capture the big stuff (and save $).  I have an AT60 (fpl-53) to go wide.  It is tiny and built like a tank. Has an amazing Rack and pinion focuser that can handle any imaging train.  The Astro Tech 72 may be better yet, as the scope rings are better if you will guide.  The optics in my AT60 nearly defy the laws of phys.  I often view Saturn w it and have clear Cass. Division at 90x. It might be best to decide what you want to capture, and then work backwards.  Which scope can frame it, then what pixel size (camera purch.) does said scope need to properly sample it.

Jasev

Jasev, thank you very much for your answer, really appreciate it.

 

I have few things to add here just to explain or help the topic.

 

1. That 90mm triplet will be my first ever APO scope, i do have 6" F/4 to give me 600m and with reducers i can go faster and wider, also i have 8" F/5 giving me 1000mm focal length and again i can go wider and faster with reducers.

 

2. I want to buy a second scope to be my main scope as well next to my first one, i am doing dual imaging setup, means two cameras and two scopes, i have QHY163M camera and ASI1600MM-C camera, i want to use them both together at the same time, i bought ZWO ASI for this purpose, each has own filter wheel and filters, so i want to use each camera with different filters to collect data more [not necessary faster, more is what i need not fast].

 

3. I asked on Facebook about wider or ultra wide scope which allow me to frame or image two targets at once without mosaic and without buying APS-C/full frame cameras, but sounds there is no such scope for that, Redcat or 60-70mm scopes are giving you mostly 250mm at widest field, and with my cameras at 4/3" i still can't get both targets in one frame, something like heart and soul nebula or Pelican and north America for example, i do have lenses at different focal length, but i am not planning to use lenses all the time or for serious imaging.



#7 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 18 October 2020 - 09:07 AM

Wanted to mention, I do own an AT-106 triplet apo (again w an FPL-53 glass element).  It is an amazing scope that I couldn't live without.  That said, with a 0.8xFF / reducer, I am no where close to framing Andromeda or the whole Orion neb complex up through Running Man.

You seem to have amazing cameras etc., which really love to go wide.  Poss a WO 51 is a great choice, and then an AT115 or similar for smaller targets.  Do not fear the AT "on back order" listings.  These folks get stuff in constantly.

Again, i choose wisely, with 90mm i can frame Andromeda just fine, using reducers such as 0.8x i am at 432mm, i can go even more with reducers such as 0.7x or 0.65x new one to put me at about 350mm field, in fact i was trying to image Andromeda with my ST80 or with my Canon 300mm f/2.8L lens, but i am trying to stay away from Andromeda for now, i won't buy a scope only for M31, but i was thinking about cheap scope like 60mm or 70mm something, but i don't know if i will use this scope once i buy a second scope to match my 90mm and later 106mm, i feel i won't use that 60-70mm scope anymore, so i better think twice for future if this small refractor will live longer.



#8 Jasev

Jasev

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Hermitage, PA, USA

Posted 18 October 2020 - 12:49 PM

You have very big plans for sure.  My only advice with a Dual Imaging rig, is to operate 100% the same. I have read where even using identical everything, on a horizontal bar, the frames don't perfectly align. A small "acceptable" diff. In lense grinding at any point (think focal reducers), can cause differences especially moving away from the center.  You can measure and set all your lengths exact, and still have a battle.  When it does work, you will have achived a victory Vs. Time itself.  Definetly worth a try.



#9 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 18 October 2020 - 01:19 PM

You have very big plans for sure.  My only advice with a Dual Imaging rig, is to operate 100% the same. I have read where even using identical everything, on a horizontal bar, the frames don't perfectly align. A small "acceptable" diff. In lense grinding at any point (think focal reducers), can cause differences especially moving away from the center.  You can measure and set all your lengths exact, and still have a battle.  When it does work, you will have achived a victory Vs. Time itself.  Definetly worth a try.

Well, someone told me, i can do it and it doesn't have to be 100% perfect or aligned, i even crop a lot or always with my one single scope, so while software such as PixInsight or APP can align and then i crop what is off i still have something there, mostly the main target is in center, and i will use reducer so i can have enough area around to play with and crop, he told he could do it, he did it with DSLR lenses, and i know someone else who used 3 scopes all at once on one mount, so if those people managed to do it why can't i, i saw someone did like 15 hours integration of one target in one night, i SWEAR that even if i have F2 scopes i can't do that in one night, 3 scopes anyone can do 5 hours with each, i have two so i can try anywhere between 6 hours up to 10 hours maximum.



#10 xonefs

xonefs

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2020

Posted 18 October 2020 - 03:28 PM

Here is what I would suggest...

 

 

5. Get a SkyGuider Pro if you get a CAT/Raptor/Lunt/FSQ-85ED (Note: Not sure at this point if SkyGuider Pro can handle FSQ-85ED w/Flattener...)

 

6. Get Mach2 if you go for FSQ-106EDX4

 

 

Regards

 

A skyguider pro absolutely cannot handle an FSQ-85. It's just barely adequate for the redcat/raptor combo (as long as there's no breeze, and you don't touch it). I would say realistically it's mostly suited towards even wider dslr camera lenses. By the time you spend money upgrading a skyguider you would be better off just getting a smaller goto mount like a cem25p or similar for a redcat/raptor as a skyguider is not worth the hassle. 


Edited by xonefs, 18 October 2020 - 03:34 PM.


#11 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 October 2020 - 02:28 AM

A skyguider pro absolutely cannot handle an FSQ-85. It's just barely adequate for the redcat/raptor combo (as long as there's no breeze, and you don't touch it). I would say realistically it's mostly suited towards even wider dslr camera lenses. By the time you spend money upgrading a skyguider you would be better off just getting a smaller goto mount like a cem25p or similar for a redcat/raptor as a skyguider is not worth the hassle. 

I won't do that anyway.



#12 Suavi

Suavi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 563
  • Joined: 05 May 2017
  • Loc: 20.25 deg South of the Equator

Posted 19 October 2020 - 03:35 AM

It sounds interesting, but if I may suggest an alternative.

 

An f/2 telescope requires 1/9 of exposure that of an f/6 telescope, given one matches arcseconds per pixel with both setups. To put it more simply, it takes nine (9) f/6 telescopes to keep up with one f/2 telescope, given we have the same arcseconds per pixel in both setups. One significant challenge could be no doubt collimating an f/2 telescope, but the rewards would well worth it. Chances are f/2 telescope would have a larger aperture (6" plus), so resolution (spot size) cshould be better and only sky limited, as opposed to 80-100mm aperture that is most often aperture limited. On top of that, a single telescope setup is no doubt orders of magnitude simpler than a multiple camera/scope combo, perhaps cheaper too.

 

Please keep us updated waytogo.gif



#13 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 October 2020 - 06:42 AM

It sounds interesting, but if I may suggest an alternative.

 

An f/2 telescope requires 1/9 of exposure that of an f/6 telescope, given one matches arcseconds per pixel with both setups. To put it more simply, it takes nine (9) f/6 telescopes to keep up with one f/2 telescope, given we have the same arcseconds per pixel in both setups. One significant challenge could be no doubt collimating an f/2 telescope, but the rewards would well worth it. Chances are f/2 telescope would have a larger aperture (6" plus), so resolution (spot size) cshould be better and only sky limited, as opposed to 80-100mm aperture that is most often aperture limited. On top of that, a single telescope setup is no doubt orders of magnitude simpler than a multiple camera/scope combo, perhaps cheaper too.

 

Please keep us updated waytogo.gif

Yes, but i did use 135mm F/2 at F/2 as well, and i hated waiting each filter to finish even if i will expose each for 10min or less, and with narrowbanding i will expose longer than 10min anyway, so i hated waiting each filter to finish, i want to shoot 2-3 filters at the same time rather than waiting each to finish, and i can't guarantee the sky if i finish one filter then it will stay clear for next filters, and even with F/2 such as RASA i looked at many results of nebula, and they still use long integration time, less than slower but still long [such as 4-6 hours minimum], for me i hate to do like 1 hour per filter which means like 3 hours of NB, or LRGB for like 2 hours or less if i go fast.

 

Bottom like is, it is not the speed of the scope that is the problem, i accept using even F5 or F6, but it is about how long i have to wait to change each filter and how to get all filters done, chances for me to have data doing 2-3 filters at the same time is higher than i shoot each filter individually one after another, imagine i have 3 hours which most of the time this is the best period for targets i my sky, if i have 3 scopes for example, i can shoot each filter for 3 hours, or 2 filters for 3 resulting into 6 hours, while with F/2 i might do like 1.5hour for each filter to complete 3 hours giving them equal time, and checking focus between all filters one after another is also not great, i use SGP which never show any live view, and if i do another use another software to check out the focus then cooling in SGP just go off automatically, and i have to wait few minutes to cool it, and if there is an issue then i turn off or warm it and cool it again, i always have issues when i turn on and off cooling, that happens even with F/2 lens, so why RASA or Hyperstar will be any better in this case? and most likely they need F/2 highspeed filters anyway.



#14 xonefs

xonefs

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2020

Posted 19 October 2020 - 10:54 AM

Someone on here has pics of a setup with three 102mm refractors (stellarvue access?) and three asi1600s side by side on one mount. Sounds like that’s what you want

#15 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 19 October 2020 - 12:48 PM

Someone on here has pics of a setup with three 102mm refractors (stellarvue access?) and three asi1600s side by side on one mount. Sounds like that’s what you want

That is exactly the one i am talking about, His name is Rey i think, he is in flickr, so, if he made it with three scopes, and another one i know made it with two scopes or two lenses, then why can't i do the same?



#16 xonefs

xonefs

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2020

Posted 19 October 2020 - 02:58 PM

There’s no reason you can’t other than money and having a mount to handle them. I wouldn’t want to mix and match scopes if you did that and would want everything identical.

I do think about one day adding a second to mine. Three would be pushing it

#17 Suavi

Suavi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 563
  • Joined: 05 May 2017
  • Loc: 20.25 deg South of the Equator

Posted 19 October 2020 - 04:36 PM

Yes, but i did use 135mm F/2 at F/2 as well, and i hated waiting each filter to finish even if i will expose each for 10min or less, and with narrowbanding i will expose longer than 10min anyway, so i hated waiting each filter to finish, i want to shoot 2-3 filters at the same time rather than waiting each to finish, and i can't guarantee the sky if i finish one filter then it will stay clear for next filters, and even with F/2 such as RASA i looked at many results of nebula, and they still use long integration time, less than slower but still long [such as 4-6 hours minimum], for me i hate to do like 1 hour per filter which means like 3 hours of NB, or LRGB for like 2 hours or less if i go fast.

 

Bottom like is, it is not the speed of the scope that is the problem, i accept using even F5 or F6, but it is about how long i have to wait to change each filter and how to get all filters done, chances for me to have data doing 2-3 filters at the same time is higher than i shoot each filter individually one after another, imagine i have 3 hours which most of the time this is the best period for targets i my sky, if i have 3 scopes for example, i can shoot each filter for 3 hours, or 2 filters for 3 resulting into 6 hours, while with F/2 i might do like 1.5hour for each filter to complete 3 hours giving them equal time, and checking focus between all filters one after another is also not great, i use SGP which never show any live view, and if i do another use another software to check out the focus then cooling in SGP just go off automatically, and i have to wait few minutes to cool it, and if there is an issue then i turn off or warm it and cool it again, i always have issues when i turn on and off cooling, that happens even with F/2 lens, so why RASA or Hyperstar will be any better in this case? and most likely they need F/2 highspeed filters anyway.

I understand, this was just a suggestion of an alternative. Ultimately, a good astro-photo will require a substantial integration, even with a very fast system.

 

For example this image took me just over 200 hours of integration with f/4.5 telescope (some fainter areas were collecting only about 1 photon per hour of exposure at f/4.5). I also have been using SGP for many years and filter changes plus temperature compensation for focusing was easy, quick and effortless.

 

With three f/6 telescopes, from the same location and with same cameras, the same SNR would require 120 hours of exposure, while one f/2 telescope would require only 40 hours of exposure.

 

It actually takes three f/4.5 telescopes to equal in speed one f/2 telescope. So, if you are really set on a multiple scope/camera setup, I suggest as fast telescopes as possible waytogo.gif



#18 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 20 October 2020 - 02:19 AM

There’s no reason you can’t other than money and having a mount to handle them. I wouldn’t want to mix and match scopes if you did that and would want everything identical.

I do think about one day adding a second to mine. Three would be pushing it

I am not planning for three, but if i might buy a third cooled camera then one day no doubt i will feel like why not three instead of two, but i will try just to stick with one or two mostly, going with three will take time and efforts, later once i manage how to use two nicely then i can think if a third is possible, but i will make sure my mount can handle it or i have to add mount.



#19 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 20 October 2020 - 02:24 AM

I understand, this was just a suggestion of an alternative. Ultimately, a good astro-photo will require a substantial integration, even with a very fast system.

 

For example this image took me just over 200 hours of integration with f/4.5 telescope (some fainter areas were collecting only about 1 photon per hour of exposure at f/4.5). I also have been using SGP for many years and filter changes plus temperature compensation for focusing was easy, quick and effortless.

 

With three f/6 telescopes, from the same location and with same cameras, the same SNR would require 120 hours of exposure, while one f/2 telescope would require only 40 hours of exposure.

 

It actually takes three f/4.5 telescopes to equal in speed one f/2 telescope. So, if you are really set on a multiple scope/camera setup, I suggest as fast telescopes as possible waytogo.gif

If people managed to do with slow scope and only one, imaging what it can be done with F3.6-F5 three of them, the possibilities is BIG, and to be honest, that will be even better than F/2 single scope, imaging you shoot with F/2 for one hour, you have to force yourself to finish 3 filters in 1 hour respectively, while with three scopes, i can do them all in 1 hour, for LRGB this is possible, i don't know how can you shoot 3 Narrowbanding filters all together in 1 hour means each will take 20min while you shoot each for 1 hour in 1 hour, regardless about the signal or data it can be with f/2 vs. f/5 for example.



#20 Suavi

Suavi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 563
  • Joined: 05 May 2017
  • Loc: 20.25 deg South of the Equator

Posted 20 October 2020 - 02:47 AM

If people managed to do with slow scope and only one, imaging what it can be done with F3.6-F5 three of them, the possibilities is BIG, and to be honest, that will be even better than F/2 single scope, imaging you shoot with F/2 for one hour, you have to force yourself to finish 3 filters in 1 hour respectively, while with three scopes, i can do them all in 1 hour, for LRGB this is possible, i don't know how can you shoot 3 Narrowbanding filters all together in 1 hour means each will take 20min while you shoot each for 1 hour in 1 hour, regardless about the signal or data it can be with f/2 vs. f/5 for example.

 

SNR reached within one hour of exposure with three separate cameras and three telescopes at f/5, so one hour per each filter, would only need 28 minutes and 48 seconds of total exposure with one f/2 telescope, or 9 minutes 36 seconds per filter, assuming everything else stays the same. So within the same hour only one f/2 telescope with one camera would allow to go deeper and reach a better SNR as opposed to 3 separate f/5 telescopes.

 

I don't want to come across as pushing this idea, it was just an alternative that could be cheaper and simpler. Personally I would not like an f/2 telescope for a range of reasons, but would be very happy with one 10" f/3 really well build Newtonian for imaging.



#21 TareqPhoto

TareqPhoto

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 5,995
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Ajman - UAE

Posted 20 October 2020 - 03:26 AM

SNR reached within one hour of exposure with three separate cameras and three telescopes at f/5, so one hour per each filter, would only need 28 minutes and 48 seconds of total exposure with one f/2 telescope, or 9 minutes 36 seconds per filter, assuming everything else stays the same. So within the same hour only one f/2 telescope with one camera would allow to go deeper and reach a better SNR as opposed to 3 separate f/5 telescopes.

 

I don't want to come across as pushing this idea, it was just an alternative that could be cheaper and simpler. Personally I would not like an f/2 telescope for a range of reasons, but would be very happy with one 10" f/3 really well build Newtonian for imaging.

Honestly speaking, i tested that 135mm lens at F/2 and i didn't save time with it at all really, it was faster no doubt, but i was trying to shoot Ha LRGB, it took me like 3 nights to finish it all, because changing filters and checking out each filter focuser and re-cooling every time i change/checkout took me a while every night, and the target was running fast, it was like only 2 hours in the sky for best results, so that made my mind that having F/2 optics didn't help me really, even if it will give me better SNR the setup itself with one scope and changing filters and using SGP all killed me, now there are many options, and i already have 2 filters sets, so i was thinking which is more cheaper for me, F/2 setup or 2 scopes setup, already have 2 cameras now and filters, high quality filters, so i think having dual system will do it for me.

 

Starizona brought 0.65x reducer, sounds very nice one, if i use it with a scope of F/6 it will go to F/4, i do have 6" F/4 Newtonian, there is 0.73x reducer for Newt somewhere, that will put my Newt to F/2.92, i don't know how good or bad that will be, many keep saying about correcting and collimating, well, i saw one video about how to collimate Takahashi Epsilon f/2.8, was a headache for sure, but astrophotography is all about challenges and experimenting, i don't assume all members here or in the world all of them will just go and buy f/2-f/2.8 scopes, and i have to buy according to my budget according to me efforts according to my conditions and whatever, if someone is happy with F/2 and can afford it and accessories/extras with it that is fine, i don't have SCT so Hyperstar is out of my plan, RASA the smaller one is expensive, and with it i have to buy specific adapters and maybe F/2 highspeed filters, i prefer to use Astrodon/Chroma over highspeed filters actually, and i did see people have issues with RASA/Hyperstar, and fixing those issues also cost more, so to me it is like in all sides or options it will cost me money and time no matter what, now i go with what i started, RASA wasn't around when i started and that time i already went with like 2 filters sets so it was like fate to bring me to dual system over F/2 scope, and i still have 135mm and can't add another lens of f/2, also have 300 f2.8 lens and 85mm f1.8 and 50mm 1.4 & 1.8 already.




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