296 replies to this topic

[jprideaux]

A smart telescope is defined here as an all-in-one telescope, mount, camera, and software that you purchase as a single unit and control with a mobile app. These all work for Deep Sky Object imaging by stacking lots of short single exposures. So far they all use Alt-Az mounts although the Dwarf2 will work oriented equatorially.

 

As of 11/2023, there are four main manufacturers of smart telescopes.  More may be coming.

1. Vaonis   (A French company)   https://vaonis.com
   1. ​The Stellina is an 80mm F5 refractor using the Sony IMX178 sensor. It has a built-in light-pollution filter, dew-heater, and sensor de-rotator.  The Stellina’s price has been around $4000.   It can take an external solar white-light filter.  It has some limited ability to take mosaics.
   2. The Vespera is a 50mm F4 refractor and uses the Sony IMX462 sensor.  It does all de-rotation in software but has a nice mosaic feature which allows for a very large imaging area.  Its price is around $1500.  2” proprietary light-pollution, dual-band, and solar filters can be purchased separately add added to the front.  Some people have found a way to use 3rd-party night-time filters.  There is also the option to activate an internal dew-heater with the purchase of a hygrometer sensor.  A new feature is that darks can now be taken.
   3. The Vespera-pro is an announced but not-yet released 50mm F5 refractor that will use the bigger Sony IMX676 sensor. It will support the more traditional astrophotography steps of taking darks, flats, and offset files.  This has a pre-order price of around $2000.
   4. The Hestia is a 30mm aperture add-on lens with supporting mobile app for your smart-phone so it uses your phone’s camera and can magnify the image 25x.  The Indiegogo price, depending on accessories is around $200. 
2. Unistellar  (A French company)   https://www.unistellar.com
   1. ​The EvScope1 and Equinox1 are 114 mm (F4) Newtonians with an IMX224 sensor at prime-focus at the front of the scope.  3rd-party 1.25” filters can be added if you reach your hand inside the spider at the front.  The Evscope has an electronic viewfinder “eyepiece” whereas the Equinox left that part off. These models retail when not on sale for around $2000.
   2. The EvScope2 and Equinox2 are optically the same as the version 1 models but uses a larger IMX347 sensor.  The Evscope2 also has an improved electronic eyepiece.  the Equinox2 does not have an electronic eyepiece.  Depending on accessories, these models may run around $4000 to $5000.
   3. Although not yet announced, expect Unistellar to come out with additional offerings.
3. Dwarf Lab  (A Chinese company)   https://dwarflab.com
   1. The Dwarf2 is a 26mm F4 refractor that was designed for both terrestrial and astronomy usage.  It can focus as close as 8.5 feet all the way to infinity.    It has 2 lens each with its own sensor.  A wide-angle lens is there mainly as a finder-scope and a telephoto lens paired to the Sony IMX415 sensor.  It can take 1.25” light-pollution or solar filters in front of the main objective.  There are lots of manual control options.  The price is only $460.  It can take stills as well as video in both astro and terrestrial mode. It can be used oriented equatorially.
4. ZWO  (A Chinese company)    https://www.zwoastro.com
   1. The Seestar S50 is a 50mm F5 refractor which (like the Vespera) uses the IMX462 sensor.  It has an internal light-pollution filter that can be rotated in and out.  It can also take an external solar filter.    It can take stills as well as video.  There is a limited scenery mode but it can’t focus any closer than around 63 feet.     The SeeStar S50 is currently selling for around $500.  The initial software release is somewhat limited but ZWO says that they will be making available a "pro-version" of the software soon with more manual control features and possibly their own mosaic mode. It is unknown at this time whether this will be a free software upgrade or a purchased add-on.

There have also been at least a couple failed Kickstarter efforts by some minor players in which the developers apparently ran out of money and gave up.  For example the Hiuni and the Mirrosky. So use good judgement in deciding to invest in Kickstarter. 

 

This list remains fluid and will be updated as more models are introduced.

 

Feel free to make new posts in this thread if you have additional useful information about these scopes, tips for their use, any corrections for what you see above, questions about using these models, or any new smart-scope offerings.

 

We can then use these follow-up posts to maintain the above up-to-date list of all the smart-scope offerings as new information comes in from Cloudy Night members.

Edited by jprideaux, 02 November 2023 - 02:25 PM.

[John59]

I believe that Dwarf lab is now advocating using the Dwarf II in EQ mode/position.

In their last live stream/video announcing the upcoming software update the unit was in EQ.

I know I use mine in EQ all the time and get longer stacking without field rotation.

[GSBass]

I’ll be running more experiments with dwarf 2 in the coming weeks…. It’s starting to mature with new software and shows some promise.. I think it still falls in to the category of for folks that like to tinker but that’s not a bad thing, it’s practically an open source robot so what it morphs in to is wide open. 

I believe that Dwarf lab is now advocating using the Dwarf II in EQ mode/position.

In their last live stream/video announcing the upcoming software update the unit was in EQ.

I know I use mine in EQ all the time and get longer stacking without field rotation.

[citiesmace]

Do any of these work better than others at planetary photography? Are there any consensus on strengths and weaknesses for any of these?

[GSBass]

It’s a fair statement to say none of them do planetary well, just too small of aperture and focal length, about the best you can do with any of them us tell that Saturn has rings or to make out two undetailed bands on Jupiter ….. several of the companies are working on auto stacking planets, however you can’t defy physics, they will still be poor

———

weaknesses that stand out

1)seestar - Field of View

2Vespera- lack of manual focus/exposure

3)stellina- under powered computer 

‘4Dwarf- under developed software /aperture

‘5unistellar-design

 

stengths that stand out

1 seestar - price

2 vespera- covalens

3 stellina- resolution/physical derotator

4 dwarf- manual control/eq

5 unistellar -none come to mind

Do any of these work better than others at planetary photography? Are there any consensus on strengths and weaknesses for any of these?

Edited by GSBass, 05 November 2023 - 07:26 AM.

[jprideaux]

As of 11/2023 I personally have the Vespera, Dwarf2, and the SeeStar but not the EvScope/Equinox(1 or 2) nor the Stellina so I won't comment much on scopes that I don't have. If anybody can fill in gaps in my knowledge about anything below, add a comment and I can edit/correct this posting.

 

I agree that none of these scopes were designed for planetary due to their small aperture and focal-lengths.  Based on nothing but aperture and focal-length from the specifications, I would think the EvScope2/Equinox2 would work the best for planets but the general recommendation would be to get an additional scope for planets that has a much larger aperture and focal-length.

 

Comments on consensus about how these scopes compare is difficult for the following reasons:

1. Very few people have more than one of these scopes for first-hand comparisons
2. The images from all of these scopes benefit from post-processing and when people look at post-processed images, it is hard to separate the native ability of the telescope from the prost-processing skill of the person doing the post-processing.
3. Different people value different features differently.  
4. Each person has their own cost-benefit analysis with different measures of benefit and cost.

With those caveats, the following are my impressions as of 11/05/2023:

 

1. A desire to capture wide-field views.  for example, getting all of the following with a little area around them:  Andromeda galaxy, Orion and Running Man, Horse Head and flame, etc.
   1. The Vespera and Stellina have the CovalENS (mosaic) feature which allows the telescope to natively take a mosaic of a user-defined larger area (up to a certain limit)  than the native field of view (FOV) of the telescope/sensor.  I've read that due to processor limitations, the Stellina's version of the mosaic may not perform quite as well as the Vespera's implementation.
   2. The Dwarf2 has the largest native FOV of any of the smart telescopes at this time and can natively go about as wide as the Vespera with the CovalENS mosaic.
   3. The SeeStar as of this writing does not have a mosaic feature but it may get one in the future.
   4. I don't think the Unistellar scopes (EvScope/Equinox)) natively support a mosaic mode.
2. A desire to capture smaller DSO.  this will mainly be focal-length driven.
   1. the Stellina and EvScope/Equinox(2nd models) have the longer focal-length paired with higher resolution sensors so would do better on the smaller DSOs 
   2. The SeeStar with its 250mm FL would do a bit better on the smaller DSOs than the Vespera with the same sensor but only 200mm focal-length.
   3. The Dwarf2 with its modest 100mm focal-length will be less effective on the smaller things.
3. A desire for complete ease-of-use
   1. The Vaonis Singularity app used for the both the Vespera and the Stellina is now very mature and is optimized well for complete ease-of use of the scope.  After choosing your pre-defined observing location, there is just a one-button initialization step, then you choose your target.
   2. The SeeStar's app is almost as easy to use.  There is a focus step that you have to remember to do.  There are some early release software bugs on finding the sun and moon that they should be able to work out with upcoming software releases.
   3. I've read that the EvScope/Equinox scopes are also easy to use and people like their software.  The Unistellar scopes don't have auto-focus.  You have to manually turn a focus wheel. 
   4. The Dwarf2 due to all its manual controls forces you to set-up a lot of things correctly before getting good results.   Thus it is not as easy to use as the others.  Dwarf Lab is coming out soon with a new major software release and its ease-of-use will then need to be re-evaluated. 
4. A desire for manual control
   1. The Dwarf2 from the first launch had its user-interface open to all sorts of manual control which pleases people who like to tinker with settings to optimize performance.  
   2. The Stellina/Vespera main menus insulate the use from manual controls but there are other menus a click or two away that can let you control sub-exposure time and gain settings while taking images in manual mode.  There is no manual focus option in Stellina/Vespera but the auto-focus works well.
   3. The initial SeeStar software only has two manual control features:  a gain setting and a way to manually focus.  They do plan on coming out with a "pro-version" of the software but nothing is known about that as of this time.
   4. I don't know enough about the EvScope/Equinox to comment on any manual control features they may have.
5. A desire to post-process raw files
   1. The Stellina/Vespera offers two raw file options
      1. Saving a single stacked but un-stretched TIFF file.  This is then very convenient to import into you favorite image-editing program to edit.  Some people will take TIFFs from a couple different nights and stack them together for even better results.
      2. Saving individual FITs files for each frame.  Then stack them in 3rd-party software to produce a single resulting raw file to then continue to process.
   2. The Dwarf2 similarly has two raw offerings
      1. outputs a single stacked and stretched PNG file which you could further post-process in another program.
      2. outputs individual raw sub-frames in either FIT or TIFF format (you choose before hand) which you can then stack and further process in 3rd-party programs.
   3. The SeeStar also gives the following raw options for post-processing:
      1. A single FIT file that contains all the frames.  I've been able to take this file and convert it to a TIFF and directly post-process it for a final image.
      2. An option to save individual FIT files.  I have not activated this option but apparently you can then stack all the FITs in your favorite 3rd-party software.
   4. Since I don't have a EvScope/Equinox scope, I don't know for sure its ability to give access to raw files.   I've read that you can get access but it is a bit more complicated.
6. A desire for live-view and/or EAA
   1. The SeeStar offers a true live-view of the image before you start the stacking.  For most DSO, this will result in a mainly black screen but it is useful for getting a live-view of the moon since the moon is so bright.  For example, you could point it at the moon and live-view all night long without ever actually saving off a picture.  For DSOs, the SeeStar will show you the results of the stacking on the screen with only a gain slider to control.
   2. The Dwarf2 offers a histogram (curves) screen when stacking where you can draw your own "s-curve" to optimize what you are seeing in the screen as the frames stack.  No other smart-scope offers such a histogram in the provided software.  For bright objects like the sun and moon, the dwarf2 can also be used in modes other than DSO stacking and view them that way. 
   3. The Stellina/Vespera only shows the object while you are collecting data that being saved to disk - thus no pure live view.  Although, while you are collecting data you can see the results of the stacking and any other stretching and enhancing that the internal software is doing for the images it displays here.  The Stellina app does not provide any controls, though, to manipulate what you see on the screen while it is stacking other than an option to see a quick time-lapse of the stacking progression.
   4. I'm not sure about what features the EvScope/Equinox has for live view-view or EAA control while stacking.  I think I remember that there is a true live-view options and then you can activate stacking.
7. Desire for daytime photography and/or video
   1. The Dwarf2 was designed as a hybrid scope for both general daytime photography and videography as will as astronomical use.  It has a second wide-angle "finder-scope" which is very useful for finding objects.  This wide-angle finder-scope lens/camera only works, though, to take still images and the image quality is not all that great but it works fine as a finder-scope.  The Dward2 can take video as well.  It can focus as close a 8.5 feet away all the way to infinity.  I've enjoyed using mine remotely to take pictures of birds or dragon-flies.
   2. The SeeStar also have a scenery-mode that can be used in the daytime but I find that less useful.  It is hard to find the objects without a wide-angle "finder-scope" and it cannot focus all that close.  I was not able to closer any closer than about 63 feet way.  
   3. Neither the Stellina nor Vesera has a daytime scenery mode
   4. I'm not sure about the EvScope/Equinox
8. Desire to use filters
   1. The Stellina has internal (always in place) general light-pollution filter and can take an external solar filter
   2. The Vespera has an internal (always in place) IR-block filter and can take the following three proprietary 2" filter accessories:  general light-pollution, dual-band, and solar.  These proprietary filters are keyed so the software knows they are in place and can optimize or turn on features appropriately.  Some people have tricked out their Vespera to accept 3rd-party filters.
   3. The EvScope/Equinox can take 3rd-party 1.25" filters by reaching your hand inside the front of the scope and screwing the filters into filter-threads in front of the sensor.  I'm not sure if this include solar.
   4. The SeeStar has an internal mini-filter wheel that can rotate in and out the following:  light-pollution filter (not sure if true dual band or not), IR-filter, or totally blocking dark.  The initial software just gives you control to turn on or off  "filter"  so I think that just toggles between the ir-cut and the light-pollution filters.  The future pro-software may give you more control. I'm not sure if no filter will be an an option. The SeeStar also can take an external solar filter.
   5. The Dwarf2 can take external 1.25" filters that screw into a magnetic filter-holder that attaches over the the two lens.  For solar you need to screw 2 solar filters into this magnetic filter holder to protect both lens.  The Dwarf2 also has the option to internally rotate in our out its ir-block filter.
9. Equatorial use
   1. the Dwarf2 can be used equatorially mounted (usually with 3rd-party tripod) and the Dwarf2 software can still be used to track the image.  The main benefit of this is to remove field-rotation as you collect images.  The software still only supports relatively short individual subs.  
   2. The Stellina has an internal field de-rotator which allows you to select the field orientation before starting collection as well as compensate for the field rotation while the collection is underway.  This de-rotation is not good enough, though, to allow for longer subs but it does eliminate "loosing the corners" of your final image.
   3. The Vespera cannot to my knowledge be used equatorially mounted.  It can, though, with the mosaic offering, allow you to pre-determine the framing of the object and then compensate for field-rotation for this user-defined rectangle as the collection continues.  You pay for this in extra imaging time.
   4. I don't think the EvScope/Equinox can be used equatorially mounted. 
   5. I have not yet heard anybody saying whether there is a way for the SeeStar to be used equatorially mounted.  
10. Some interesting design decisions
    1. The Stellina has a flat mirror in its design and the sensor is located in one of the fork arms.  This allows for the length of the middle scope-section of the Stellina to be shorter.
    2. The Vespera uses a 4-element Petzval optical design with 2 lens up front and 2 at the rear.
    3. The Dwarf2 uses a periscope optical design with a prism up front that directs the light 90 degrees to the rest of the optical train inside the scope.
    4. The SeeStar uses 2 flat mirrors in its design which makes it a folded refractor. 
11. Bugs and quirks - some of these are subjective and/or can be fixed with future software releases.
    1. the SeeStar with its initial software release has some problems finding the sun and moon although they have a way to find these objects manually.  Hopefully a future software release can solve this problem.  The SeeStar also as of this writing has some issues with its internal stacking and stretching if it had paused collection for a while and then resumed.  The image will then have a noticeable brighter rectangle.  Although perhaps not technically a problem, it is somewhat distracting when viewing unedited images.
    2. The Dwarf2's initial software was a bit buggy with the program sometimes getting into a state where you have to turn it off and back on to recover.  Hopefully their upcoming new software release will improve this.  I also don't like that with the Dwarf2 you have to pre-decide how many frames before you start collection.  I know with the Vaonis and ZWO offerings, you can decide how long to stack after you start.  For example, if the night remains clear, you can just then decide to go longer.  With the Dwarf2, you have to make that decision up-front.
    3. The Singularity app for the Stellina and Vespera is now fairly mature and I can't think of any out-right bugs.  I'm sure some people could find things that they wished it could support.  One nuisance on the Vespera is the bright blue light for when at star-parties when no bright lights are wanted.  I'm always wishing I had some tape to put over it.  I may add tape to my travelling kit. Another small issue is the magnetic power-connector.  It sometimes attracts dirt and will need to be cleaned from time to time. 
    4. I don't know enough about the Evscope/Equinox to comment about it bugs and quirks.  Some people think that the electronic eyepiece on the EvScope varieties are a bit of a gimmick since you should not be touching the scope when it is collecting data.   
12. Using them with laptops.    (New item I just added).  Although all of these were designed to be used with mobile devices (IOS or android), some people have found some ways to set-up a laptop to run software monitoring the collection folders from the smart-telescope.
    1. SeeStar - the collection directory shows up as a drive on your laptop when the USB-c cable is attached.  Some people have said you could then run SharpCap on that directory during live capture and have SharpCap do live-stacking and take advantage of the SharpCap features.  I think these people said that the other directories that SharpCap will use also end-up being on the SeeStar.  I have not done this personally.  When I briefly tried it, the SeeStar app immediately got out of the imaging mode and said "connected to computer" when I connected the USB-cable so therr must be some additional steps necessary.
    2. The collection directory for the Dwarf2 also can show-up as a drive if you turn MTP mode on.  In some quick experimenting, though, I have not seen the directory auto-update on my laptop after taking a picture.  Although, If I disconnect and re-connect my cable, I see the directory update.  So it might be possible.   Perhaps there is a step I don't know about to cause the directory on my laptop to update the file-listing. I don't know 
    3. The Vespera allows only FTP access to the collection directory.  Perhaps some scripting running an FTP program could periodically check the directory and fetch files.  I have not tried this.  
    4. The Stellina has a USB cable that might allow access to the files.  since I don't have he Stellina, I'm not sure what is possible.
    5. I'm also not sure of the EvScope/Equinox capabilities for this.
13. Value for the money.  This is partly subjective about what features are important to you and how much you are willing to spend.  The Dwarf2 and SeeStar are priced a lot lower than the Vespera/Stellina/EvScope/Equinox scopes.  Part of this is due to the internal cost of materials.  There are more plastic parts in the Dwarf2/SeeStar.  Part is due to that it costs less to manufacture things in China than in France.  If you cannot justify spending more than about $600 then that rules out some offerings.  For any choice, just look at the features that you want, what you are willing to spend, and make your own decisions.

Edited by jprideaux, 05 November 2023 - 03:41 PM.

[GSBass]

Excellent review Jeff, found it accurate and helpful

 

As of 11/2023 I personally have the Vespera, Dwarf2, and the SeeStar but not the EvScope/Equinox(1 or 2) nor the Stellina so I won't comment much on scopes that I don't have. If anybody can fill in gaps in my knowledge about anything below, add a comment and I can edit/correct this posting.

 

I agree that none of these scopes were designed for planetary due to their small aperture and focal-lengths.  Based on nothing but aperture and focal-length from the specifications, I would think the EvScope2/Equinox2 would work the best for planets but the general recommendation would be to get an additional scope for planets that has a much larger aperture and focal-length.

 

Comments on consensus about how these scopes compare is difficult for the following reasons:

1. Very few people have more than one of these scopes for first-hand comparisons
2. The images from all of these scopes benefit from post-processing and when people look at post-processed images, it is hard to separate the native ability of the telescope from the prost-processing skill of the person doing the post-processing.
3. Different people value different features differently.  
4. Each person has their own cost-benefit analysis with different measures of benefit and cost.

With those caveats, the following are my impressions as of 11/05/2023:

 

1. A desire to capture wide-field views.  for example, getting all of the following with a little area around them:  Andromeda galaxy, Orion and Running Man, Horse Head and flame, etc.
   1. The Vespera and Stellina have the CovalENS (mosaic) feature which allows the telescope to natively take a mosaic of a user-defined larger area (up to a certain limit)  than the native field of view (FOV) of the telescope/sensor.  I've read that due to processor limitations, the Stellina's version of the mosaic may not perform quite as well as the Vespera's implementation.
   2. The Dwarf2 has the largest native FOV of any of the smart telescopes at this time and can natively go about as wide as the Vespera with the CovalENS mosaic.
   3. The SeeStar as of this writing does not have a mosaic feature but it may get one in the future.
   4. I don't think the Unistellar scopes (EvScope/Equinox)) natively support a mosaic mode.
2. A desire to capture smaller DSO.  this will mainly be focal-length driven.
   1. the Stellina and EvScope/Equinox(2nd models) have the longer focal-length paired with higher resolution sensors so would do better on the smaller DSOs 
   2. The SeeStar with its 250mm FL would do a bit better on the smaller DSOs than the Vespera with the same sensor but only 200mm focal-length.
   3. The Dwarf2 with its modest 100mm focal-length will be less effective on the smaller things.
3. A desire for complete ease-of-use
   1. The Vaonis Singularity app used for the both the Vespera and the Stellina is now very mature and is optimized well for complete ease-of use of the scope.  After choosing your pre-defined observing location, there is just a one-button initialization step, then you choose your target.
   2. The SeeStar's app is almost as easy to use.  There is a focus step that you have to remember to do.  There are some early release software bugs on finding the sun and moon that they should be able to work out with upcoming software releases.
   3. I've read that the EvScope/Equinox scopes are also easy to use and people like their software.  The Unistellar scopes don't have auto-focus.  You have to manually turn a focus wheel. 
   4. The Dwarf2 due to all its manual controls forces you to set-up a lot of things correctly before getting good results.   Thus it is not as easy to use as the others.  Dwarf Lab is coming out soon with a new major software release and its ease-of-use will then need to be re-evaluated. 
4. A desire for manual control
   1. The Dwarf2 from the first launch had its user-interface open to all sorts of manual control which pleases people who like to tinker with settings to optimize performance.  
   2. The Stellina/Vespera main menus insulate the use from manual controls but there are other menus a click or two away that can let you control sub-exposure time and gain settings while taking images in manual mode.  There is no manual focus option in Stellina/Vespera but the auto-focus works well.
   3. The initial SeeStar software only has two manual control features:  a gain setting and a way to manually focus.  They do plan on coming out with a "pro-version" of the software but nothing is known about that as of this time.
   4. I don't know enough about the EvScope/Equinox to comment on any manual control features they may have.
5. A desire to post-process raw files
   1. The Stellina/Vespera offers two raw file options
      1. Saving a single stacked but un-stretched TIFF file.  This is then very convenient to import into you favorite image-editing program to edit.  Some people will take TIFFs from a couple different nights and stack them together for even better results.
      2. Saving individual FITs files for each frame.  Then stack them in 3rd-party software to produce a single resulting raw file to then continue to process.
   2. The Dwarf2 similarly has two raw offerings
      1. outputs a single stacked and stretched PNG file which you could further post-process in another program.
      2. outputs individual raw sub-frames in either FIT or TIFF format (you choose before hand) which you can then stack and further process in 3rd-party programs.
   3. The SeeStar also gives the following raw options for post-processing:
      1. A single FIT file that contains all the frames.  I've been able to take this file and convert t to a TIFF and directly post-process it for a final image.
      2. An option to save individual FIT files.  I have not activated this option but apparently you can then stack all the FITs in your favorite 3rd-party software.
   4. Since I don't have a EvScope/Equinox scope, I don't know for sure its ability to give access to raw files.   I've read that you can get access but it is a bit more complicated.
   5. A desire for live-view and/or EAA
      1. The SeeStar offers a true live-view of the image before you start the stacking.  For most DSO, this will result in a mainly black screen but it is useful for getting a live-view of the moon since the moon is so bright.  For example, you could point it at the moon and live-view all night long without ever actually saving off a picture.  For DSOs, the SeeStar will show you the results of the stacking on the screen with only a gain slider to control.
      2. The Dwarf2 offers a histogram (curves) screen when stacking where you can draw your own "s-curve" to optimize what you are seeing in the screen as the frames stack.  No other smart-scope offers such a histogram in the provided software.  For bright objects like the sun and moon, the dwarf2 can also be used in modes other than DSO stacking and view them that way. 
      3. The Stellina/Vespera only shows the object while you are collecting data that being saved to disk - thus no pure live view.  Although, while you are collecting data you can see the results of the stacking and any other stretching and enhancing that the internal software is doing for the images it displays here.  The Stellina app does not provide any controls, though, to manipulate what you see on the screen while it is stacking other than an option to see a quick time-lapse of the stacking progression.
      4. I'm not sure about what features the EvScope/Equinox has for live view-view or EAA control while stacking.  I think I remember that there is a true live-view options and then you can activate stacking.
6. Desire for daytime photography and/or video
   1. The Dwarf2 was designed as a hybrid scope for both general daytime photography and videography as will as astronomical use.  It has a second wide-angle "finder-scope" which is very useful for finding objects.  This wide-angle finder-scope lens/camera only works, though, to take still images and the image quality is not all that great but it works fine as a finder-scope.  The Dward2 can take video as well.  It can focus as close a 8.5 feet away all the way to infinity.  I've enjoyed using mine remotely to take pictures of birds or dragon-flies.
   2. The SeeStar also have a scenery-mode that can be used in the daytime but I find that less useful.  It is hard to find the objects without a wide-angle "finder-scope" and it cannot focus all that close.  I was not able to closer any closer than about 63 feet way.  
   3. Neither the Stellina nor Vesera has a daytime scenery mode
   4. I'm not sure about the EvScope/Equinox
7. Desire to use filters
   1. The Stellina has internal (always in place) general light-pollution filter and can take an external solar filter
   2. The Vespera has an internal (always in place) IR-block filter and can take the following three proprietary 2" filter accessories:  general light-pollution, dual-band, and solar.  These proprietary filters are keyed so the software knows they are in place and can optimize or turn on features appropriately.  Some people have tricked out their Vespera to accept 3rd-party filters.
   3. The EvScope/Equinox can take 3rd-party 1.25" filters by reaching your hand inside the front of the scope and screwing the filters into filter-threads in front of the sensor.  I'm not sure if this include solar.
   4. The SeeStar has an internal mini-filter wheel that can rotate in and out the following:  light-pollution filter (not sure if true dual band or not), IR-filter, or totally blocking dark.  The initial software just gives you control to turn on or off  "filter"  so I think that just toggles between the ir-cut and the light-pollution filters.  The future pro-software may give you more control. I'm not sure if no filter will be an an option. The SeeStar also can take an external solar filter.
   5. The Dwarf2 can take external 1.25" filters that screw into a magnetic filter-holder that attaches over the the two lens.  For solar you need to screw 2 solar filters into this magnetic filter holder to protect both lens.  The Dwarf2 also has the option to internally rotate in our out its ir-block filter.
8. Equatorial use
   1. the Dwarf2 can be used equatorial mounted (usually with 3rd-party tripod) and the Dwarf2 software can still be used to track the image.  The main benefit of this is to remove field-rotation as you collect images.  The software still only supports relatively short individual subs.  
   2. The Stellina has an internal field de-rotator which allows you to select the field orientation before starting collection as well as compensate for the field rotation which the collection is undergoing.  This de-rotation is not good enough, though, to allow for longer subs but it does eliminate "loosing the" corners" of your final image.
   3. The Vespera cannot to my knowledge be used equatorially mounted.  It can, though, with the mosaic offering, allow you to pre-determine the framing of the object and then compensate for field-rotation for this user-defined rectangle as the collection continues.  You pay for this in extra imaging time.
   4. I don't think the EvScope/Equinox can be used equatorially mounted. 
   5. I'm have not yet heard anybody saying whether there is a way for the SeeStar to be used equatorially mounted.  
9. Some interesting design decisions
   1. The Stellina has a flat mirror in its design and the sensor is located in one of the fork arms.  This allows for the length of the middle scope-section of the Stellina to be shorter.
   2. The Vespera uses a 4-element Petzval optical design with 2 lens up front and 2 at the rear.
   3. The Dwarf2 uses a periscope optical design with a prism up front that directs the light 90 degrees to the rest of the optical train inside the scope.
   4. The SeeStar uses 2 flat mirrors in its design which makes it a folded refractor. 
10. Bugs and quirks - some of these are subjective and/or can be fixed with future software releases.
    1. the SeeStar with its initial software release has some problems finding the sun and moon although they have a way to find these objects manually.  Hopefully a future software release can solve this problem.  The SeeStar also as of this writing has some issues with its internal stacking and stretching if it had paused collection for a while and then resumed.  The image will then have a noticeable brighter rectangle.  Although perhaps not technically a problem, it is somewhat distracting when viewing unedited images.
    2. The Dwarf2's initial software was a bit buggy with the program sometimes getting into a state where you have to turn it off and back on to recover.  Hopefully their upcoming new software release will improve this.  I also don't like that with the Dwarf2 you have to pre-decide how many frames before you start collection.  I know with the Vaonis and ZWO offerings, you can decide how long to stack after you start.  For example, if the night remains clear, you can just then decide to go longer.  With the Dwarf2, you have to make that decision up-front.
    3. The Singularity app for the Stellina and Vespera is now fairly mature and I can't think of any out-right bugs.  I'm sure some people could find things that they wished it could support.  One nuisance on the Vespera is the bright blue light for when at star-parties when no bright lights are wanted.  I'm always wishing I had some tape to put over it.  I may add tape to my travelling kit.  
    4. I don't know enough about the Evscope/Equinox to comment about it bugs and quirks.  Some people think that the electronic eyepiece on the EvScope varieties are a bit of a gimmick since you should not be touching the scope when it is collecting data.   
11. Value for the money.  This is partly subjective about what features are important to you and how much you are willing to spend.  The Dwarf2 and SeeStar are priced a lot lower than the Vespera/Stellina/EvScope/Equinox scopes.  Part of this is due to the internal cost of materials.  There are more plastic parts in the Dwarf2/SeeStar.  Part is due to that it costs less to manufacture things in China than in France.  If you cannot justify spending more than about $600 then that rules out some offerings.  For any choice, just look at the features that you want, what you are willing to spend, and make your own decisions.

 

[bphaneuf]

Very much agree!  Thanks Jeff!  Now we need some EvScope/Equinox(1 or 2) and Stellina users to weigh in....

-b

[mdowns]

I'll try to fill in a few of the unknowns about the equinox in relation to the OPs post.

 

1. The equinox has no true widefield options,in fact the fov is pretty narrow( just a little more than the full moon's diameter).You have 3 basic fov options with the software,08x,1x and 3x. 1x is the default setting though I often use .08x,depending on the target.

 

2. You can in fact target smaller DSOs because of the 450 mm fl

 

3. The equinox is very easy to use once you've learned the program. Collimation can in fact be very difficult though I've only had to do so once,when initially setting the scope up,new out of the box. That was 10 months ago.You have to use a bahtinov mask to manually focus but that is not really difficult to do.That's part of my normal start up routine each evening.

 

4. Getting the FITs involves first uploading your images to Unistellar,then downloading them once they notify you they are available. I do not do any processing so I have never done this though I know two fellows that do this.According to each of them,it's fairly straight forward.

 

5. You can view the live view of your target with the equinox.Also,you can in fact edit the lighting in the stacking process,manually reducing the brightness and contrast as needed. I often reduce the brightness by 70+% and the contrast by 45% when picturing something like a glob,so as not to over expo the core

 

6.I have never viewed a daytime object with my equinox and can't really speak to that.

 

7.The equinox uses software that's very effective to filter light pollution.From my bortle 5.5 backyard I have confirmed 17.5 mag targets thus far.There is a slip on solar filter available from unistellar.

 

8. There is no eq mode with the equinox

 

10. There have been a number of software upgrades due in part,to buggy performance issues.That being said, users(myself included) have found work arounds typically before the next update release that fixed whatever the issue was.As far as quirks,the equinox is an f4 newt,coma is inherent.Stars seem much sharper and the fov flatter,in the refractors of the other offerings.Still the light grasp and longer FL goes a long way in boasting the user's experience.In the 10 months I've been using the equinox I have viewed over 1500 DSOs (includes many multiple DSOs in a single image).I consider mine a real 'hoot' to have and use.I'm always looking forward to the next clear night!

 

12.Though I use my phone ,two of my friends with equinox's, use their computers to control their scopes and store their images.

[Joshua Roth]

Hello CN friends! I do sidewalk astronomy in urban and inner-ring suburban settings, using my ST-80 or Tak FS-60C, an 8-24mm zoom eyepiece, and correct-view diagonals. I recently witnessed an urban outreach event with a small reflector and a CCD or CMOS camera showing real-time images of DSOs and thought that would be cool to do ... if I could carry it in one hand, or a duffel bag, like I do with my little refractors. It seems that the Dwarf II and Seestar may be in this league (and comparably priced). Does anyone have an opinion as to which would be better for showing DSOs in real time to people, in the presence of light-pollution? No post-processing, no interest in FITS files, just passing an iPad around and extending the sidewalk experience to things that wouldn't be too faint for my little refractors except for the light pollution. (I also am not particularly worried about digital sidewalk astronomy on the moon or planets, for the simple reason that those targets can be enjoyed at the eyepiece of my refractors even in the presence of light pollution.) Thanks for any experience you may be able to share! Clear skies - Joshua Roth, Boston

Edited by Joshua Roth, 05 November 2023 - 09:42 PM.

[nic35]

Joshua:

 

I have the Seestar and it works fine for what you suggest. In fact, used it last night for just this purpose.

 

I have no experience with the Dwarf, but the larger diameter of the Seestar objective would push me in the Seestar direction.

 

But, what mount do you use ?  If you've got one that can be computer controlled, You might think about combining an ASIAir mini with a decent astrocam and your Tak.  Not quite as simple as either of the all in one systems, but quite capable of doing what you want.  And, expandable into the future.

 

j

[jprideaux]

I've done public outreach with both my Vespera and Dwarf2.  I've not yet had a chance to do public outreach with my SeeStar yet.  If skies are clear, I will have a chance next weekend.

 

Any of these (or the other models as well) would work fine for public outreach.  

the following are a few of my observations.

 

1. I have mainly used my Vespera for public public outreach because it can go wide and some of the real crowd-pleasers like the Andromeda galaxy need a wide view.  Except for solar, the Vespera has an initialization step that won't complete unless it is dark enough so you can't set-it up earlier before it gets dark enough. 
2. Although I have used the Dwarf2 for public outreach, I sometimes have problems using it (software locking up or other problems) and tend to just favor my Vespera.  Some of my difficulties are probably user error and if this was the only smart-scope I had, I would have probably taken the time to work through the usability issues.  I do consider the Dwarf2 to be more "fiddly" than the other scopes I have and sometimes for public outreach you want something you don't have to fiddle with.  Although, the Dwarf2 does have that nice histogram you can live-adjust and it can go wide.
3. I've found the SeeStar to be easy to use.  I've set-it up to show some friends without any issues.  I've found the displayed image not quite as vibrant as the image shown on the same screen with the Vespera.  Perhaps the Vespera does a little more object-specific (or object type) optimization for what it shows for the stacking.  Also for public outreach I sometimes like to project what my tablet sees on a larger monitor or projection screen.  The SeeStar app only currently has portrait mode and things look better in landscape mode when projecting or showing on a larger monitor.  I think there are some apps that can be used to allow the presentation of portrait-only apps to be rotated 90-degrees.  I may try those out before my next public outreach with the SeeStar.  I also like the SeeStar for its live-view of the moon. 

[citiesmace]

You all the best! Does anyone have any experience with these in cold conditions?

[Joshua Roth]

Joshua:

 

I have the Seestar and it works fine for what you suggest. In fact, used it last night for just this purpose.

 

I have no experience with the Dwarf, but the larger diameter of the Seestar objective would push me in the Seestar direction.

 

But, what mount do you use ?  If you've got one that can be computer controlled, You might think about combining an ASIAir mini with a decent astrocam and your Tak.  Not quite as simple as either of the all in one systems, but quite capable of doing what you want.  And, expandable into the future.

 

j

 

Thanks to you, and to all here who kindly shared real-use experience! To address your question:  I have no motorized or computerized mounts. Stellarvue M1 and Bogen/Manfrotto tripods! (I have toyed with the idea of getting an iOptron or some such for the baby refractors, to keep them pointed at planets when I am working a larger crowd. But I haven't gotten around to it.) Clear skies all - JR

[jprideaux]

You all the best! Does anyone have any experience with these in cold conditions?

I've had the Vespera for about 13 months and have used it quite a number of times in temperatures a little below freezing.

 

My Dwarf2 and SeeStar are newer for me and I haven't had enough cold-weather experience with them.

 

My hunch is that since they all use lithium batteries, that they all will have about the same cold-weather limitations due mainly to the lithium battery chemistry.

Cold weather affects how well the batteries will perform.  In cold weather, the batteries may not last as long as they would in warmer weather. 

Some people have said it is not a good idea to connect external batteries in very cold weather.  I'm not a battery expert, though.

[jprideaux]

A new limited edition entry by Vaonis is the Passenger edition of the Vespera.

 

Vaonis apparently took 222 Vesperas (or the parts there-of) and swapped out the IMX462 sensor with the IMX585 sensor to give it a larger FOV.  

Due to the usable image-circle defined by the optics, they were not able to fully utilize all of the IMX585 sensor so they in software have it only perform at a slightly reduced region-of interest of 2880 x 2160 (6.2 MP) and up to 24 MP with CovalENS.

Besides being bigger, the IMX585 sensor has some other advantages although it has the same pixel size (2.9um) as the smaller IMX462 sensor.

They also gave the passenger model more memory.  I don't know if they changed anything else.  Optically, it is still running at F4 with 200mm focal-length.

I don't know if these 222 are just a one-time opportunity for this particular offering.  Perhaps they will just wait and see how much people want the wider FOV offering.

[Psion]

Yesterday I took pictures with the Seestar at an outside temperature of -1°C and I didn't notice any problem with charging the battery at this temperature.

[GSBass]

I don’t know the cut off but Vespera will disable charging below a certain safe temperature, I would assume zwo has that safety feature built in also…. Seestar owners should definitely find that out and get guidance …. Just because you can charge does not mean you should charge

Yesterday I took pictures with the Seestar at an outside temperature of -1°C and I didn't notice any problem with charging the battery at this temperature.

[Psion]

The eVscope disables charging below 10 °C and cannot be charged or powered, which means that if the battery runs out, the device cannot be operated in any way. The battery heats up when charging, but the eVscope does not measure this; the sensor is on the electronics board, and this is wrong. I started charging the Seestar battery at a temperature higher than 10 °C, and the charging continued at an outside temperature of -1°C, but that does not mean the battery was at that temperature.

[Psion]

Information directly from the manufacturer:

 

Seestar S50 rechargeable battery temperature: -10℃-45℃; operating environment temperature: -10℃-40℃;
Battery high temperature alarm temperature: 57℃. It will automatically shut down when the battery temperature is 60°C, and there will be no alarm limit at low temperatures.

[nic35]

Information directly from the manufacturer:

 

Seestar S50 rechargeable battery temperature: -10℃-45℃; operating environment temperature: -10℃-40℃;
Battery high temperature alarm temperature: 57℃. It will automatically shut down when the battery temperature is 60°C, and there will be no alarm limit at low temperatures.

Saw your question and reply on the ZWO forum.  I asked some follow-on questions, as their reply seems correct only under certain conditions.  But I'm no battery expert - just trying to be cautious.

 

Here are my questions:

 

Many on-line references (https://batteryunive...ow-temperatures) suggest that charging below 0C is advisable only with special circuitry. Does the Seestar include special low temperature circuitry ?

If a separate power source is connected to the Seestar, does that power the device, and charge the battery, or does the use of the power source disconnect the battery from the power circuit.

[GSBass]

It would be really good if you could get someone like one if the beta testers to chat with zwo and have a better understanding, asking questions like this in forums is bound to give tons of different answers and speculation…. But obviously important to know, I don’t know the exact temperature Vaonis disables charging but think it’s well below freezing, I have not had issues but can’t speak to whether it has been detrimental charging that cold

Saw your question and reply on the ZWO forum.  I asked some follow-on questions, as their reply seems correct only under certain conditions.  But I'm no battery expert - just trying to be cautious.

 

Here are my questions:

 

Many on-line references (https://batteryunive...ow-temperatures) suggest that charging below 0C is advisable only with special circuitry. Does the Seestar include special low temperature circuitry ?

If a separate power source is connected to the Seestar, does that power the device, and charge the battery, or does the use of the power source disconnect the battery from the power circuit.

[nic35]

@GSB
I should have been clearer. I actually asked those questions on the official ZWO forum. Not looking for answers from CN folks

John

[psychwolf]

I'm a leader over at the Milwaukee Astronomical Society, and we have had two Unistellar eVscopes at our observatory, and they are wonderful engagement tools that combat increasing light pollution as well. In fact, I've given talks on how they help engage the public at the top of a funnel, and then beyond that they go a step further by engaging members as they get more and more involved by introducing NASA-partnered citizen science via the UNITE project, and other AAVSO, minor planet, or related  research. So long story short, I think the Unistellar eVscopes are worthwhile to point out in the sticky that they are SETI.org affiliated, which is a big deal since it allows our members, high school students and general public to participate in a connected telescope citizen science initiative and engage directly with researchers, which is something the other scope manufacturers are not actively doing. This also drives community college curriculem initiatives, and other benefits. As a connected telescope, we're uploading to SETI servers every night when members charge the scope, and researchers are finding ways to go for funding to ping this network of citizen scientists all using the similar designs of the eVscope 1 / eVscope 2 or Equinox telescopes. 

 

In discussions of smart telescopes, I kind of cringe when I see the comparisons miss this important element of the eVscopes. This is a very important criteria to educational institutions and non-profits obtaining grant funding to go toward these telescopes, and the Unistellar Seti-affiliated company uses a democratic model of including contributors in their peer-reviewed research. 

[Psion]

@GSB
I should have been clearer. I actually asked those questions on the official ZWO forum. Not looking for answers from CN folks

John

Reply from a ZWO forum member.

 

charging of S50 stops when reaching 0.
Those -10 are operating , not “charging” temperature limit. So, when battery T below 0, S50 will work, but not supports charging