25 replies to this topic

[25585]

https://techtelegrap...4199-price-tag/

 

Price apart, a 3 might be better still, when it comes. Price considered, what improvements would be worth waiting to check for the next model?

 

I am regarding this as an EAA ground-up portable user-friendly instrument, not as a substitute for any other digital set-up. Absolute beginner for digital astro anything, and cheaper than a NVD.

[jprideaux]

At some point one of the smart-scope manufacturers will come out with a version that will have the ability to optically change focal-length by rotating in and out some extra lens (or otherwise some optical zoom feature). If the technical details could be addressed within the constraints of what is expected (and needed) for these types of smart-scopes, that may allow these scopes to perform better for objects that need more magnification like planets. As it is now, a customer of these types of scopes really needs to also buy a second scope to better see planets or the moon up close. If a version-3 had such an ability, it would be nice.

If that is too hard to pull-off, some other features they could add-in for a version 3 would be any of the following:
Auto-focus
Mechanical de-retator
Ability to save TIFs (for those that want to post-process themselves)

There are some that sometimes comment that they are waiting for a larger aperture smart-scope. My personal preference is to keep thing smaller for portability reasons, but perhaps going up to a 6” (150mm) would be attractive to some people (since Unistellar likes working with Newts).

So far Unistellar has physically kept with the same basic scope and just changed other things like which sensor, whether or not or which digital eyepiece, some changes in on-board computer power/storage/battery. It will be interesting to see if a version 3 continues with the same base scope as well…

[Itarrow]

I think that the really good thing happening is that we have options.

I also think that it’s up to each one of us to learn, experiment and decide what to do next: it’s kind of hard to simply trust advice without experimenting.

I am saying this based on my experience.

I bought a Nexstar Evolution 9,25” in 2018. I realized that from where I was living, looking at DSOs was a dream. I also realized that portability and my laziness would prevent me to bring the scope to darker skies.

I bought a dolly, to make it easier to move it from home to garden, and fought a hard battle with wife to allow me to keep the scope assembled in a room.

I bought an astrocamera (a ASI 294) and then started fiddling with Sharpcap to do some EAA and see some DSOs.

Nice and fun, but setting up the PC and the scope each time I wanted to do some astronomy was quite long. I bought an ASIAIR to at least rely just on the scope and a smartphone, without needing a PC etc.

In any case, this entire setup was bulky and cumbersome and it was still quite impossible to travel with it.

Saw the Stellina and then the Unistellar.

Sold everything and preordered an eVscope 2, because even if it’s fake, I want the eyepiece.

Now if somebody would have told me years ago to forget about the C9,25” and wait for some robotized solutions, I would not have listened.

I had to learn by doing.

Maybe now I will use the eVscope 2 for few years and I will realize I am missing something else, and I will go back searching for other stuff.

The nice thing is that today I have more options than what I had few years ago.

Have fun !

[scoale]

I think that the really good thing happening is that we have options.

I also think that it’s up to each one of us to learn, experiment and decide what to do next: it’s kind of hard to simply trust advice without experimenting.

I am saying this based on my experience.

I bought a Nexstar Evolution 9,25” in 2018. I realized that from where I was living, looking at DSOs was a dream. I also realized that portability and my laziness would prevent me to bring the scope to darker skies.

I bought a dolly, to make it easier to move it from home to garden, and fought a hard battle with wife to allow me to keep the scope assembled in a room.

I bought an astrocamera (a ASI 294) and then started fiddling with Sharpcap to do some EAA and see some DSOs.

Nice and fun, but setting up the PC and the scope each time I wanted to do some astronomy was quite long. I bought an ASIAIR to at least rely just on the scope and a smartphone, without needing a PC etc.

In any case, this entire setup was bulky and cumbersome and it was still quite impossible to travel with it.

Saw the Stellina and then the Unistellar.

Sold everything and preordered an eVscope 2, because even if it’s fake, I want the eyepiece.

Now if somebody would have told me years ago to forget about the C9,25” and wait for some robotized solutions, I would not have listened.

I had to learn by doing.

Maybe now I will use the eVscope 2 for few years and I will realize I am missing something else, and I will go back searching for other stuff.

The nice thing is that today I have more options than what I had few years ago.

Have fun !

You are going to be very glad you got the eVscope2 with the Nikon eyepiece.  The eyepiece did NOT influence my purchase decision, but now that I have looked through it, I can tell you that it FAR exceeded my expectations.  I'm keeping my C11, and my 5" APO, but I really like the simplicity, grab & go portability, remote observing capability, 5-minute setup time, and satisfactory image quality of my eVscope2.

[scoale]

https://techtelegrap...4199-price-tag/

 

Price apart, a 3 might be better still, when it comes. Price considered, what improvements would be worth waiting to check for the next model?

 

I am regarding this as an EAA ground-up portable user-friendly instrument, not as a substitute for any other digital set-up. Absolute beginner for digital astro anything, and cheaper than a NVD.

I bought an eVscope2 and am pretty happy with it.  My use case was grab & go portability, very fast setup to image time, ability to control the scope from inside the comfort of my home, low learning curve, acceptable image quality, and/or let it do its thing while I'm observing with my C11 or refractor(s).  It checks those boxes very nicely.  The combined scope/tripod is 19lbs, I'm imaging in 5 minutes!, there was ZERO learning curve, the images far exceed what I can see with my C11 - even with my night vision intensifier - and I can manage it all indoors when desired.

 

The 3 will be substantially better if Unistellar does nothing more than outfit it with the latest Sony cameras with 2x the light grasp.

 

Now to price.  My astro club has many very proficient AP/EAA members and last night's discussion revolved around "New Year Gear" (LOL).  The amount of time and money these guys spend on their setups dwarfs an eVscope2 - and they are candid enough to admit it.  If I wanted to build my own setup it would be in pursuit of better and faster imaging, or a desire to do planetary imaging, and/or because I enjoyed building my own setup - not because I thought I was going to save money.

[Thermodynamics]

You are going to be very glad you got the eVscope2 with the Nikon eyepiece.  The eyepiece did NOT influence my purchase decision, but now that I have looked through it, I can tell you that it FAR exceeded my expectations.  I'm keeping my C11, and my 5" APO, but I really like the simplicity, grab & go portability, remote observing capability, 5-minute setup time, and satisfactory image quality of my eVscope2.

Part of me wishes I have spent the extra $$$ and gotten the eVscope2, but I decided to just dip my toe in (the Equinox wasn’t cheap, so maybe it was a whole foot dip) in case I didn’t like the experience. I will commit to using it for the next year while I wait to see if:

 

1. The eVscope3/Equinox2 off whatever comes next is something I am up for.

 

2. Celestron/Sky Watcher/Orion/somebody comes out with their own version, which I would almost certainly buy (if you are listening Celestron PLEASE put it i a classic orange tube).

[Bob S.]

I was excited the day they announced the eV2scope in France and had one ordered in September 2021, 11 hours after the announcement. Unfortunately, Unistellar charged my charge card that very day and I had to wait until December 1, 2021 to receive my scope. The first night experience was a bit variable due to having to learn the software interface that first night and I captured 3 images. I found the views through the eyepiece to be not that exciting for my tastes. Having had a long history with image intensifiers and MallinCam astrovideo cameras, I was expecting more quality of visual resolution in the Nikon eyepiece. On the second night's attempt a few days later, the battery was dead. I don't know if it was user error or a bad battery because I had charged it up a second time after my first use.

 

I got kind of spooked and decided to send the unit back to Unistellar under the 30-day return policy. Unfortunately, they were only taking returns back in San Francisco, CA and apparently do not have their other distribution sites up yet and it cost me over $300 to return the scope from Florida back to California. Communication was a bit fragmented at times and I just did not have the confidence that they have worked out all of their operational bugs at this time. Having to ship an entire scope back for possible repair was not to my liking and I decided to ditch the effort on this new type of platform. I have been hesitant to write this publicly because I did not want to hurt the viability of this evolving technology. 

 

This was kind of my last gasp playing with astronomical equipment after a wonderful 20 year run with some of the finest equipment available at the time and so I am pretty confident that I have done my last astronomy equipment purchase and will likely remain out of active astronomical activities. I have lots of other fun things on my plate of fun things to do and time continues to get shorter for us aging boomers.

Edited by Bob S., 18 January 2022 - 09:16 AM.

[MSWcdavis]

Impressions on my Evscope 2: 

 

This is an excellent scope to complement my three other scopes (120ed refractor, 60mm Lunt solar, 16.5” Starmaster Dob).  I would argue for a four scope solution after using this - one refractor, one dob, one solar, and one robot scope like this.   Alternatively, I could live with just this scope, given constraints of time and dark skies.

 

I can view from the white zone where I live and get satisfactory images / views of nebulas and galaxies.

 

I owned a PVS-7 (from a batch of supposedly high spec tubes) and the views were unnatural and scintillating - I was grateful to sell it.  Of course, these filmless white phosphor new tubes are on another level, but there are still trade-offs.

The ease of use of the Evscope is a major selling point.  It’s a true grab-and-go.  I love viewing out of my Starmaster but at some expense of time, effort, and driving.

 

In first light without any effort at all I was able to get great views of M31, M33, M42, the Flame, Horsehead, Running Man, and quite a few others.

 


The Evscope quickly gives competent astrophotography views.  While I mostly view nebulas and galaxies with the Evscope I do enjoy “enhanced views” of the clusters also.

 

The Nikon eyepiece adds a sheen to the view which gives it a bit of a real-life viewing quality.  Overall, I could not do without the eyepiece. 

 

Overall, I think it was an easy purchase at 4300 since this is just the scope I’ve always been looking for.  I see the price has gone up, and I can still recommend it at 5200. 

 

The Evscope just makes it too easy while still seeming like a traditional telescope, upgraded.  I’m glad I held off on the Televue nightvision package for now.

Edited by MSWcdavis, 08 February 2022 - 11:21 AM.

[hdavid]

Many thanks for the review.  I've enjoyed my eVscope, and will almost certainly upgrade to a subsequent version at some point. I wonder when the next version of the eVscope is due.

 

And I like your four-scope solution.  I'm set on my Dob, looking to upgrade on the refractor (to a larger refractor or maybe Mak-Cass), and upgrade the eVscope eventually.  I don't have a solar scope.  I just use a filter on the refractor.  That may change when I upgrade.

 

For Moon and planets, should I go with a 5- or 6-inch refractor or a 7- or 8-inch Mak-Cass?  I wonder if either will give me significantly better views than my 4-inch doublet.  But that's another thread.

[Tfer]

Many thanks for the review.  I've enjoyed my eVscope, and will almost certainly upgrade to a subsequent version at some point. I wonder when the next version of the eVscope is due.

 

And I like your four-scope solution.  I'm set on my Dob, looking to upgrade on the refractor (to a larger refractor or maybe Mak-Cass), and upgrade the eVscope eventually.  I don't have a solar scope.  I just use a filter on the refractor.  That may change when I upgrade.

 

For Moon and planets, should I go with a 5- or 6-inch refractor or a 7- or 8-inch Mak-Cass?  I wonder if either will give me significantly better views than my 4-inch doublet.  But that's another thread.

Resolution comes with aperture. That’s why I use a C11.

 

8” Mak.

[MSWcdavis]

Super sharp ED or Apo Refractors are kind of like owning jewelry if you are using them for visual.  It is wonderful to have such a sharp image of the brighter stuff in the sky, planets included, and it's easy to bond with such a solid and well made telescope with the incredible piece of glass.  

 

But I'd take the Evscope over a 4" or 5" refractor to start with (if we are talking visual).  I'd have a solar scope, a dob, and an Evscope before going with something like a Takahashi 120, unless I were serious about astrophotography.  Refractors really don't show you much from brighter skies and in my perspective are suited best for astrophotography unless you got a mount and the willingness to deal with a giant refractor, which is about as cool as it gets (7" or more).  Dobs can be killers on planets - depends on collimation and your mirror of course.    

[hdavid]

Good advice.  Other than the EVSCOPE, I'm strictly visual.  So I think you're right.  The 4-inch refractor will do for now.  It gives pretty sharp images at low power.  And skies here are only about half-way to true dark.

 

Thanks again for the review.

Edited by hdavid, 09 February 2022 - 07:17 AM.

[alder1]

I have an eQuinox. After looking at many images over on the Facebook group, I can’t say that the image quality of the eV2 is noticeably better. It seems that the eyepiece is excellent, however, and for many that’s the determining factor. For visual I have a nice collection of binoculars and a 90mm refractor for lunar and planetary. (I sold my 8” SCT to buy the eQ) To be honest, I haven’t used anything but the eQ since I got it. Ive been exploring the night sky n ways I’ve never been able to before and it’s quite thrilling. I will probably upgrade when Unistellar has a major design change. In the meantime, they’re planning software improvements which should make a real difference. 
To the poster above who returned his: it did take a few nights for me to get mine dialed in properly and learn the app, also, getting really good images is a learning curve. You get acceptable images right out of the box, but learning to use some post production techniques really makes a difference. 

[stanislas-jean]

I do not share the test given at the beginning acting the fact of average -poor images got with the evscope.

Having one v1.5 now, this is quite depending of focus settlement and the collimation.

When done carefully, esthetic images come with, pinpoint stars are there, even at the corner and this is helping to acquire more than m16 stars.

The images come more rapidly than a classic acquisition chain, an apo of 4", reducer and a similar cam.

What can be subject to discussions is the no possibility of filter insertion, a cls as the minimum, but sloans.

The aperture of 4,5" allows to acquire most of the deep sky events easily, quickly and under a file format usable (at last .png files are compatible to lot of software, including astrometry-photometry).

This easy way to acquire makes me to use it frequently sothat the classic dso picturing remains left at the corner mostly.

For a follow-up, raw images are rather needed, not fully treated, so.

1,7" limit resolution would be better, a reasonable target would be 1", preferable for such design.

Last point the unistellar website is proposing the survey of events, accessible to his scope... No special hunting of data to see what is interresting to achieve on a night.

The electronic eyepiece stays useless from my opinion, except may be during star parties.

 

Hereafter the picture of ngc2761 where a recent sn was there: this shows the scope limits, no enough focus length for a m16 sn.

 

 

Now C/ 67P, seems to fade significantly in four days, and the presence of a "star" near the node, may be a coïncidence.

 

 

 

 

[stanislas-jean]

 

[stanislas-jean]

 

For a conclusion, the scope is more a tool for making easily surveys.

Indeed the raw pictures can be treated in your favorite survey for enhancing the pictures.

Stanislas-Jean

[Brollen]

I recently received the Unistellar evScope 2. I am very impressed with attention to detail, level of integration and overall the quality of the product. Tracking is excellent and the field detection feature is amazing, really. Documentation is excellent, the app works exceedingly well - its integration with the evScope 2 is excellent - and the backpack is extremely well built. I have the Nikon eyepiece which is very nice - but I do have 2 gripes: (1) the eye relief could be better and (2) the focus knob is very difficult to "acquire" with one's fingers as it is so small and almost flush. The entire package is very light.

 

I've had mine out now for 2 sessions and it really is quite a paradigm shift. But I am highly encouraged, especially when it comes to viewing in my extensively light polluted city that leaves my other scopes gasping for photons.

 

Attached are two photos - one of M31 and the other of the Double Cluster. The Double Cluster shot was taken prior to my adjusting focusing via the Bahtinov mask.

 

Overall, I am floored, now pondering what this "shift" means to me and my current equipment. I am greatly looking forward to more time spent with this telescope.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

Edited by Brollen, 10 February 2022 - 12:24 PM.

[scoale]

Part of me wishes I have spent the extra $$$ and gotten the eVscope2, but I decided to just dip my toe in (the Equinox wasn’t cheap, so maybe it was a whole foot dip) in case I didn’t like the experience. I will commit to using it for the next year while I wait to see if:

 

1. The eVscope3/Equinox2 off whatever comes next is something I am up for.

 

2. Celestron/Sky Watcher/Orion/somebody comes out with their own version, which I would almost certainly buy (if you are listening Celestron PLEASE put it i a classic orange tube).

The next round of scopes will definitely be better. I bought this scope knowing I am an early adopter and knowing this technology will only get better.

[Itarrow]

I recently got my EVScope 2, I could use it for just one session, and I’ve been similarly impressed by the overall quality of the product and its integration with the app.

 

It is really about maximizing the time spent observing.

 

DSOs are a pleasure to be observed and imagined, but I was also nicely surprised about what is possible with such a “small” scope with live view (no stacking).

 

Here’s a cropped (high resolutions helps), zoomed in on Mizar and Alcor done in light view, adjusting manually the settings and without too much time spent focusing and no collimation: I think all 4 stars can be distinguished, and this surprised me.

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[alphatripleplus]

Are you certain that the image on the left is Alcor? Alcor was only discovered to be a double star in 2009 with a separation of 1 arcsec between the mag 4.0 primary (Alcor A) and magnitude 8.0 red dwarf secondary (Alcor B). Here's a CN discussion on the topic.

 

The relative brightness of the two stars in the image on the left doesn't look like a difference of 4 magnitudes, and I think the separation of the two stars on the left is considerably more than 1 arcsecond.

[Itarrow]

Are you certain that the image on the left is Alcor? Alcor was only discovered to be a double star in 2009 with a separation of 1 arcsec between the mag 4.0 primary (Alcor A) and magnitude 8.0 red dwarf secondary (Alcor B). Here's a CN discussion on the topic.

 

The relative brightness of the two stars in the image on the left doesn't look like a difference of 4 magnitudes, and I think the separation of the two stars on the left is considerably more than 1 arcsecond.

Hmmm so I am sure the big ones are Mizar, as it had been tracked by my EVScope 2… I was assuming the second one would be Alcor by reading about Mizar… now that you ask, I am less sure…

 

Here is the picture in enhanced view and with full infos, with same relative position of the 2 main stars as the previous oicture, considering however that the other picture is zoomed and cropped and taken with just live view (no stacking).

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by Itarrow, 13 February 2022 - 05:06 PM.

[Watch&Learn]

On paper, this looks like a very interesting concept; however, looking into the specs, I am a bit puzzled. Maybe experienced users can help me understand:

 

1. The manufacturer claims that this scope can "punch above it's weight category" (after all, the aperture is only 114 mm) and produce clear / colorful images of DSOs by taking long exposures (several seconds or several tens of seconds). Which is fine, but ... (Hubble-images-based advertising materials set aside), how does this scope take long exposures without a polar aligned equatorial mount?  I understand it has tracking but, being an alt-az mount, field rotation should be noticeable quite quickly and long exposures should produce elongated images of stars (while multiple short exposures would not gather enough light to get a usable image, no matter how much post-processing is applied). The manufacturer's documentation does not even bring up the topic and I am a bit too old to believe in magic.

 

2.  The resolution advertised by the manufacturer in the (detail poor) documentation exceeds (sometimes by far) the resolution of the SONY sensors that (according to the manufacturer) are being used to capture the images. I understand that stacking multiple images can enhance the resulting image's equivalent pixel count, just wondering if I am missing something here.

 

3.  How stable is the setup from the mechanical standpoint? Considering that the OTA is more then 3x the weight of the tripod; the latter has no spreader / stabilizer shelf and the legs look pretty thin ... unless some special material is used to make those legs, based on the looks, I would expect them to start shaking at the lightest touch or breeze, resulting in unusable images.

 

4.  Despite the relatively short focal length, the "magnification" is quite high (and the FOV quite reduced), probably due to the small size of the imaging sensor.  How does that line up with DSO viewing? How can one get a full view of the Orion Nebula (85 x 60 arc-minutes) with a scope that has an advertised FOV of 34 x 47 arc-minutes?  Taking multiple images and stitching them together?

 

I don't mean to be negative, just trying to understand how this setup works and the aspects listed above are kind of standing in the way.

Edited by Watch&Learn, 17 January 2023 - 02:43 PM.

[steveincolo]

On paper, this looks like a very interesting concept; however, looking into the specs, I am a bit puzzled. Maybe experienced users can help me understand:

 

1. The manufacturer claims that this scope can "punch above it's weight category" (after all, the aperture is only 114 mm) and produce clear / colorful images of DSOs by taking long exposures (several seconds or several tens of seconds). Which is fine, but ... (Hubble-images-based advertising materials set aside), how does this scope take long exposures without a polar aligned equatorial mount?  I understand it has tracking but, being an alt-az mount, field rotation should be noticeable quite quickly and long exposures should produce elongated images of stars and multiple short exposures would not gather enough light to get any usable image (no matter how much post-processing is applied). The manufacturer's documentation does not even bring up the topic and I am a bit too old to believe in magic.

 

 

Star trailing from field rotation isn't an issue until, typically, about 20 seconds or so (depending on the position of the DSO, you can find exact formulas on the Internets).   Total integration time (i.e. number of sub exposures x sub exposure length) is more important than long exposure times for a single sub, particularly in light polluted skies.  

[Brollen]

I use my eVscope2 on a 4th floor balcony from a city location. Often times it is windy up on my balcony, so much so that the eVscope2 will complain during image capture.

 

That said, eVscope2 tripod is beautifully designed and very rigid and stable when deployed. The whole system is very well thought out and works beautifully out of the box. The eVscope2 drops into the open socket at the top of the tripod and two large “capture” screws secure the scope atop the tripod. Image acquisition is bang-on, as is tracking. I’ve attached some images taken. I’m sure if I was on solid ground doing this, some of the shakes - from me walking around on the balcony - would not be seen in the images. Large FOV nebulae are an issue, but through further experimentation or future software upgrades, I would not be surprised if they could be acquired.

 

I do know that this scope is showing me faint fuzzies and DSOs that my mega-aperture scopes never could! Amazing…

 

Clear skies!

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[Paleoc]

3.  How stable is the setup from the mechanical standpoint? Considering that the OTA is more then 3x the weight of the tripod; the latter has no spreader / stabilizer shelf and the legs look pretty thin ... unless some special material is used to make those legs, based on the looks, I would expect them to start shaking at the lightest touch or breeze, resulting in unusable images.

The legs are quite robust 1 inch bottom to 1.5 inch top, thick walled, tubular aluminum. I estimate that the legs account for about a third of the weight of the whole scope. These are not thin, tinny aluminum legs. Extending the legs out to a 3 foot leg height (two sections of the three sections fully extended), I can shake the scope slightly with my hands (far more effort than a light breeze) but it almost immediately dampens. I doubt a light breeze would affect it at all.