194 replies to this topic

[TelescopeGreg]

My few questions are:  Which flattener do you recommend? Do any of you use the SFFX-2 and swap for the SFFR-.72 for a wider FOV? I believe I read that Stellarvue will be manufacturing their own reducers and flatteners soon, and idea when?  Is a 2600mm pro and adequate camera for this scope or would I benefit more from a full frame?  I tend to image mostly nebula and an occasional galaxy.  BTW, do any of you have an idea of the image circle provided by this scope?  I am considering a ZWO duo camera in the future, but I'll need larger filters, so it will be a while until I get that far along.

  Any other things you think I should be aware of?

A couple of thoughts...

 

I have the SVA130EDT scope and ASI2600MC camera, and use them without a reducer / flattener.  Yeah, the stars aren't perfect in the corners, but with my overloaded AVX mount and not so great Seeing in general, the damage is fairly minimal.  You might consider doing that first, then get the reducer / flattener later as funds allow.  It's not absolutely required.

 

That said, my longer term plan is to get the reducer, if only to have a bit larger field of view for shooting nebulae.  They tend to be larger than galaxies, and at 910mm focal length the field of view is pretty tight.  I can just get the full Moon in; M31 doesn't fit.  The California Nebula runs from about Redding to a little past Fresno.  And going from f/7 to f/5 can only help the imaging speed.  The down-side is that the extra weight would push my mount past its rated limits, so it will have to wait for a ground-up rebuild of the system.  I presume I'd go with the reducer / flattener made by Stellarview, to be sure of its compatibility and quality.

[LPA]

As mentioned above, I use the SFFX-2 with a Nitecrawler + ASI6200MM and get excellent results - corners have round stars with no color distortions. BTW, plate-solving shows the FL with the SFFX-2 to be 950mm, slightly longer than the scope's 938mm FL. I have tried the SFFR-.72 with that setup but the corners show elliptical stars. Hopefully an SV designed and produced FF/FR will perform as well as the SFFX-2 with a full-frame camera. In the meantime, if I want a wider FOV, I use my SVX80T + ASI2600MM also with excellent results.

 

Larry

[Sunpilot]

As mentioned above, I use the SFFX-2 with a Nitecrawler + ASI6200MM and get excellent results - corners have round stars with no color distortions. BTW, plate-solving shows the FL with the SFFX-2 to be 950mm, slightly longer than the scope's 938mm FL. I have tried the SFFR-.72 with that setup but the corners show elliptical stars. Hopefully an SV designed and produced FF/FR will perform as well as the SFFX-2 with a full-frame camera. In the meantime, if I want a wider FOV, I use my SVX80T + ASI2600MM also with excellent results.

 

Larry

I have been thinking about getting a second scope for a wider FOV.  I'll keep that option open, although it will drain the bank even more!  Hell, what these days doesn't?  I guess I'll be putting some gear up for sale in the next few days.  Time for a major upgrade... exciting times ahead

[Oberon510]

I have been thinking about getting a second scope for a wider FOV.  I'll keep that option open, although it will drain the bank even more!  Hell, what these days doesn't?  I guess I'll be putting some gear up for sale in the next few days.  Time for a major upgrade... exciting times ahead

Keep in mind that a full frame camera will give you a lot more FOV and may help mitigate buying a new scope or reducer - but again it is based on what you want to image. Below is a quick comparison I did with an SVX130T, ASI6200, ASI2600 w/wo reducer.

 

Good luck,

Ken

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[LindAstronomer]

Hello all,

 

Just found this discussion. I have enjoyed reading through it. You might say I am a Stellarvue junkie. I have three - SVX130, Raptor 105 and an SV 85 LOMO (my first APO). Just to add to my mix I have a Tak FC100-D. The 130, nicknamed the Big Girl, is a wonderful scope. She sits on a DM-6. I do only visual observing. Thought I would share a pic.

 

Regards,

LindA

 

 

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Sctom]

Here is a heavily compressed image taken through my SVX 140T on an AM5 and TC 40 tripod. I was lucky there was no breeze for the time I was imaging this. I am more than impressed with the quality of this scope. I am looking forward to when I can actually take it out on my Losmandy G11G.

NGC281, Pacman 2 hrs total (12x300 sec Antlia ALP-T dual band HaOiii + 12x300 sec no filter) ZWO 2600MC Duo.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[SpaceBug]

This beauty arrived today.  And yes, it is on an AM5 and TC40.  That's where it will reside while i run it through initial trials.  I plan on balancing the counterweight and scope as best I can mostly for increased stability on the TC40.  I'll probably tie the tripod legs to some stakes too.  But want to play with it a bit before deciding on the final mount/tripod.  And just to be clear, its my new SVX140T-R.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by SpaceBug, 24 April 2024 - 10:02 PM.

[Sctom]

Very nice!
I hung a 1 gallon windshield washer jug that was emptied then filled with little pebbles. It weighed about 14 pounds. 1 gallon of washer fluid or water weighs less, but it would also work.  I bought a coupler and an eye hook from the big box store and connected the coupler to the thread sticking out underneath the hand knob on the tripod. Then used a piece of rope to hang the jug about half an inch above the ground. This put the weight as low as possible. I was still somewhat uneasy about a flip over after this, but it did cut my stress level down to maybe 25% from before. 
Keep us posted on how stable it all is in a bit of a breeze.

 

[Sunpilot]

This beauty arrived today.  And yes, it is on an AM5 and TC40.  That's where it will reside while i run it through initial trials.  I plan on balancing the counterweight and scope as best I can mostly for increased stability on the TC40.  I'll probably tie the tripod legs to some stakes too.  But want to play with it a bit before deciding on the final mount/tripod.  And just to be clear, its my new SVX140T-R.

Very nice.  As soon as I sell off some of my equipment I'm ordering the SVX 140T also.  I'll probably get the metal version because I'm old school  LOL 

Enjoy the new scope and let us know how it is.  BTW, is that the standard Stellarvue 3" focuser?  Did you get a flattener with it?  Which one?  Will you use it with your 2600 camera?  Curious here!

[SpaceBug]

Very nice!
I hung a 1 gallon windshield washer jug that was emptied then filled with little pebbles. It weighed about 14 pounds. 1 gallon of washer fluid or water weighs less, but it would also work.  I bought a coupler and an eye hook from the big box store and connected the coupler to the thread sticking out underneath the hand knob on the tripod. Then used a piece of rope to hang the jug about half an inch above the ground. This put the weight as low as possible. I was still somewhat uneasy about a flip over after this, but it did cut my stress level down to maybe 25% from before. 
Keep us posted on how stable it all is in a bit of a breeze.

I like that better than using stakes to tie down the legs.  I could hang a gallon jug of pebbles from each leg.  I also started looking at dumbell weights.  Maybe a 40 pounder in the tripods weight holder (whatever that's called).
 

[SpaceBug]

Very nice.  As soon as I sell off some of my equipment I'm ordering the SVX 140T also.  I'll probably get the metal version because I'm old school  LOL 

Enjoy the new scope and let us know how it is.  BTW, is that the standard Stellarvue 3" focuser?  Did you get a flattener with it?  Which one?  Will you use it with your 2600 camera?  Curious here!

Yes, I went with the standard focuser and the SFFX-1 flattener.  Vic was very helpful!

 

My plan is to use my Asi2600 MC Duo if it ever gets here.  Telescopes.net sent me an email saying it was shipped, but then they took six days before handing it off to UPS!  Supposed to be here tomorrow.

[SilverLitz]

I expect the 3" focuser and SFFX-1 would be fine on APS-C, but if you plan on full-frame, go for 3.5" FT and SFFX-2.

[jmarin]

I've had my SVX140T for over 2 years now, and I love it. I am 100% imager, so I ordered it with the Nitecrawler; I use an ASI 6200MM Pro with OAG and EFW. Here are two of my last shots taken with it, both from Bortle 8/9

 

https://www.astrobin.com/ltb9k8/

 

https://www.astrobin.com/pn5lwm/

 

 

I have the SFFX-2 flattener and the SFFR-.72 and as mentioned the first one produces great results on full frame but the reducer shows very elongated stars in the corners. It should be fine for APS-C but I haven't tried that combination

[SpaceBug]

jmarin, those are great photos!  Someday I hope I can come close.

[LPA]

I'll second that - very nice images jmarin, beautiful colors and great detail.

 

Larry

[LindAstronomer]

This beauty arrived today.  And yes, it is on an AM5 and TC40.  That's where it will reside while i run it through initial trials.  I plan on balancing the counterweight and scope as best I can mostly for increased stability on the TC40.  I'll probably tie the tripod legs to some stakes too.  But want to play with it a bit before deciding on the final mount/tripod.  And just to be clear, its my new SVX140T-R.

Sure is a beauty! Congratulations!

 

I just bought an AM5 with the TC40. Leary about putting my SVX130 on it because of balance issues. I will be interested in how you make out in the balance department with your SVX140T-R.

 

Regards,

LindA

[SpaceBug]

Sure is a beauty! Congratulations!

 

I just bought an AM5 with the TC40. Leary about putting my SVX130 on it because of balance issues. I will be interested in how you make out in the balance department with your SVX140T-R.

 

Regards,

LindA

I'm working on some ideas.  Unfortunately, I'm not really going to be able to do anything until the end of May due to travel plans.  I was going to wait until after I was back to order the SVX140 but Vic made me an offer I couldn't refuse.  Its going to be torture for me knowing it is waiting for me back home.

[Sunpilot]

I've had my SVX140T for over 2 years now, and I love it. I am 100% imager, so I ordered it with the Nitecrawler; I use an ASI 6200MM Pro with OAG and EFW. Here are two of my last shots taken with it, both from Bortle 8/9

 

https://www.astrobin.com/ltb9k8/

 

https://www.astrobin.com/pn5lwm/

 

 

I have the SFFX-2 flattener and the SFFR-.72 and as mentioned the first one produces great results on full frame but the reducer shows very elongated stars in the corners. It should be fine for APS-C but I haven't tried that combination

I love those images you posted, especially the Rosette Nebula.  The detail and the depth you got out of that image are incredible.  They are certainly a testament to the quality of the SVX, and your processing/imaging skills.

 I looked at your catalog on Astro-Bin and it is very impressive.  Are there any examples of the SVX 140T using the SFFR-.72 reducer posted? I am curious to see the star fields in the corners.

Edited by Sunpilot, 27 April 2024 - 07:40 AM.

[Elusivephotons]

Just a heads up, Dark Ranger's youtube channel just posted a video review of the SVX140T. He really went into some good detail in it.

[Polyphemos]

Just a heads up, Dark Ranger's youtube channel just posted a video review of the SVX140T. He really went into some good detail in it.

Link?

[Space_Race_T.J.]

Link?

https://www.youtube....h?v=xIn6sdO5QKw

[Polyphemos]

https://www.youtube....h?v=xIn6sdO5QKw

Thanks, T.J.  This is by a large margin the best review of a telescope I’ve ever watched. I enjoy Ed Ting’s reviews for their entertainment value, but he doesn’t go into anywhere near the detail this reviewer does.

 

The SVX140T he tested is also objectively extraordinary, which is great for their owners, but based on the reviewers methodology and thoroughness I’m confident that had their been any negatives, which there were not, Ryan would have detailed them. Watching Ryan’s review was time well spent.

[peleuba]

Thanks, T.J.  This is by a large margin the best review of a telescope I’ve ever watched. I enjoy Ed Ting’s reviews for their entertainment value, but he doesn’t go into anywhere near the detail this reviewer does.

 

The SVX140T he tested is also objectively extraordinary, which is great for their owners, but based on the reviewers methodology and thoroughness I’m confident that had their been any negatives, which there were not, Ryan would have detailed them. Watching Ryan’s review was time well spent.

 

 

First, I know the SVX140 is a very nice scope - two of my friends own them.  They seem excellent bot for photo and visual.  So, please no one start the silly anti-SV bias as that's not the case, here. 

 

But Jim, I totally disagree and I am disappointed with this.  The "review", up through about the 7:45 point, is basically, a word salad of different terms - especially when testing an inhouse manufacturing are discussed.  I came away with the impression the reviewer has no idea what it all means and why its important.  Pro Tip: If one does not understand what a word means, don't pretend otherwise!   You lose credibility with those of us who do.  As an example, the reviewer seems to think that a "double-pass autocollination tool"  is all about lens alignment.  Uh, no.  And I am not making this up - see the 3:39 mark.

 

The reviewer does bring up a good point at the 6:58 mark in the video when discussing available options compared to StellarVue he says:  "...At the 80mm and 90mm (apertures) I was very surprised to see that SV was priced pretty close to some of the mass manufactured mainstream options..."  Yes, indeed.  The reason for this is that these are ALL the same lenses, no matter what you'll hear elsewhere.

 

The reviewer also went on to imply that if a test report is not provided you'll have no idea how good or bad the scope will be...   This is simply not true - Roland and Yuri and Takahashi have made a living selling top line stuff without providing a single test report...  

 

A word to the wise for all of the Youtube wannabe "influencers":  If you publishing a video that dives deeply into a particular area, make sure you've mastered the subject matter.   Otherwise its just looks foolish to the people who have.

 

I came to this video to learn something.  Instead, watching to the end, I find out its a company sponsored "review", see 25:38 and thereabouts.

Edited by peleuba, 27 April 2024 - 05:24 PM.

[Polyphemos]

First, I know the SVX140 is a very nice scope - two of my friends own them.  They seem excellent bot for photo and visual.  So, please no one start the silly anti-SV bias as that's not the case, here. 

 

But Jim, I totally disagree and I am disappointed with this.  The "review", up through about the 7:45 point, is basically, a word salad of different terms - especially when testing an inhouse manufacturing are discussed.  I came away with the impression the reviewer has no idea what it all means and why its important.  Pro Tip: If one does not understand what a word means, don't pretend otherwise!   You lose credibility with those of us who do.  As an example, the reviewer seems to think that a "double-pass autocollination tool"  is all about lens alignment.  Uh, no.  And I am not making this up - see the 3:39 mark.

 

The reviewer does bring up a good point at the 6:58 mark in the video when discussing available options compared to StellarVue he says:  "...At the 80mm and 90mm (apertures) I was very surprised to see that SV was priced pretty close to some of the mass manufactured mainstream options..."  Yes, indeed.  The reason for this is that these are ALL the same lenses, no matter what you'll hear elsewhere.

 

The reviewer also went on to imply that if a test report is not provided you'll have no idea how good or bad the scope will be...   This is simply not true - Roland and Yuri and Takahashi have made a living selling top line stuff without providing a single test report...  

 

A word to the wise for all of the Youtube wannabe "influencers":  If you publishing a video that dives deeply into a particular area, make sure you've mastered the subject matter.   Otherwise its just looks foolish to the people who have.

 

I came to this video to learn something.  Instead, watching to the end, I find out its a company sponsored "review", see 25:38 and thereabouts.

Hi Paul, I agree that the review isn’t perfect, but only that it’s far superior to essentially every other telescope review I’ve ever watched, or read for that matter. Admittedly it’s a low bar, but I think Ryan did a good job independent of comparison.

 

I didn’t get the sense that Ryan’s an expert in the field, nor did he claim to be. I took him as an enthusiastic amateur who is interested enough in his hobby to share his experiences with the public, and I learned something from his review. As to his criteria for categorizing candidates, that’s subjective and I have no major disagreement with his personal choices if that’s what works for him.

 

I did cringe once or twice at some of Ryan’s word choices, but I didn’t find his gaffs off putting in comparison to my own. All that said, if you have a source of authoritative reviews of telescopes and astronomy gear I’m all ears. I do really enjoy Ernest’s reviews on his website Astro-Talks, but much like your own they come far too infrequently 

[peleuba]

I didn’t get the sense that Ryan’s an expert in the field, nor did he claim to be. I took him as an enthusiastic amateur who is interested enough in his hobby to share his experiences with the public, and I learned something from his review. As to his criteria for categorizing candidates, that’s subjective and I have no major disagreement with his personal choices if that’s what works for him.

 

 

I know - and I do understand your point.  My beef is not with you, at all.  Perhaps I am picking nits, but this was a well rehearsed presentation and words mean something - especially when it leads to improper conclusions.  As an example, the uninformed viewer, after watching the video, now thinks that Autocollimation is a preferred tool to judge alignment and color correction.   I understand the confusion - Autocollimation sounds similar to Newtonian collimation and lens collimation which are processes that ensure alignment of a mirror or lens.  Autocollimation is a test method - and not an actual test - that simply means "double-pass".  The actual test was a Ronchi screen used in Autocollimation and its primarily to judge spherical correction and surface condition.  I also understand how one thinks it is an arbiter of color correction since the test is usually done at a specific wavelength - for SV its green.  

 

I guess I expect better.  I mean if someone  goes to the trouble of producing and posting a well rehearsed video, I expect that it should be correct.   If not, why go to the trouble?