90 replies to this topic

[56S]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

[Doug Culbertson]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

I hope so, as long as it has a larger sensor. Even better would be a 100mm, but I doubt that will happen. 

[jgraham]

It's inevitable, but as per usual better is the worst enemy of good enough.

Heh, heh, way back when I bought my first computer (Apple II+ with 48k of RAM) I purposely quit reading computer magazines 'cause I knew that 'better' wasn't very far away. I had a magical couple of years discovering what I could do with it before I got back in the loop.

Enjoy each day.

[RedLionNJ]

An EQ mount (which requires user alignment in multiple dimensions) doesn't sound like it would fit the "SeeStar mindset".  One of the SeeStar's selling points is that you can plop it down on any reasonably level surface, at any (upright) orientation and it will autonomously figure things out and point to a specified target, then track it adequately for the align/stack functionality to produce a pretty impressive image.

 

As soon as you try to introduce EQ mode as a feature, that's going to put the cat among the pigeons, unless EQ tracking (i.e. RA only) is a feature which is "off" by default and has to be explicitly enabled by the user.  But since tracking is inherently inaccurate, you'd still be using many short exposures to build up and image. All you'd gain would be the minimization of field rotation.

[Digital Don]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

Technology constantly advances.  The next model will probably be better, lighter, and have more features for the same amount of money or some variation of that theme. 

 

When THAT comes out should you wait for the NEXT version because it will undoubtedly be better as well?

 

The real question is will you be here to enjoy the next version?  

 

Don

[BrentKnight]

My question is what do you expect to be better in an S80?  I would think the options would be better views of smaller targets or better views of larger targets. 

 

An additional 30mm won't make much difference in fine details or fainter targets when most rigs are seeing limited.  Much larger aperture coupled with a longer focal length and longer exposures would help there. 

 

Better views of larger targets would require a larger sensor.  A larger sensor could introduce curvature and vignetting and the effects of field rotation would be worse - they also get more expensive very quickly. 

 

This is the situation most of us find ourselves in - optimizing a rig for a particular type of target.  This is why many of us have multiple cameras and multiple telescopes.  I don't think a single S80 could provide better small targets while also providing better wide-field.  So...if adding 30mm to the front of the device gets you very little by itself (except for a bigger and heavier device), what is the incentive to upgrade?

[sevenofnine]

+1 on Brent's post. My Seestar is like a cell phone camera for the night sky. So easy and portable that anybody can use it  

[carver2011]

I think going to 80mm would defeat one of the main attractions to a Seestar s50. It's portability. Seestar has designed a great package that takes really good images, with an app that works well. The Seestar and tripod, in it's case can fit at your feet on an airplane, making it truly grab and go. I don't believe there would be enough of a gain to be going to 80mm. If a person is really that interested in astrophotography they should move up to a dedicated refractor, and equatorial mount. Going to 80mm with a Seestar wouldn't elmiinate field rotation. Any improvement I would like to see would be in new app functions, and documentation. Otherwise don't fix what ain't broke! Leave my Seestar s50 alone! 

  JMHO

     Ed

[Starmix]

Adding an S80 to the lineup would be great. A more capable scope is always welcome. S50 for most and an S80 for those who want a better even if it is less portable smart scope.

[RedLionNJ]

Assuming we keep the same f/5 focal ratio, an S80 would be a MUCH bigger beast.  Not just a little bigger.

 

The aperture diameter would increase by 60%. So then would the "front to back" length of the overall package, as would the width, as would the height.  We'd be moving more mass around, too - so the motors would need to be larger & more powerful.  This would, in turn, require a bigger battery.  Total volume & weight would likely increase by a factor of around four (1.6 cubed).  While some may consider that still a "relatively small device", and definitely still a portable one, the per-unit cost would also likely increase by a factor of at least four.

 

Then, if you're also expecting better tracking (given the better potential resolution), that would likely move us into the need for guiding vs tracking, adding a second lens, second sensor and all the associated electronics/software.  I would expect such a beast to sell in the $3-4k range here in the US.

[Dbsnottm]

Assuming we keep the same f/5 focal ratio, an S80 would be a MUCH bigger beast.  Not just a little bigger.

 

The aperture diameter would increase by 60%. So then would the "front to back" length of the overall package, as would the width, as would the height.  We'd be moving more mass around, too - so the motors would need to be larger & more powerful.  This would, in turn, require a bigger battery.  Total volume & weight would likely increase by a factor of around four (1.6 cubed).  While some may consider that still a "relatively small device", and definitely still a portable one, the per-unit cost would also likely increase by a factor of at least four.

 

Then, if you're also expecting better tracking (given the better potential resolution), that would likely move us into the need for guiding vs tracking, adding a second lens, second sensor and all the associated electronics/software.  I would expect such a beast to sell in the $3-4k range here in the US.

Totally agree, I love the fact the s50 is so compact doesn't require a shed to store it, so easy to take anywhere. As a result of this it gets used for more often than my larger scopes.

Edited by Dbsnottm, 02 April 2024 - 08:47 AM.

[brooklynlou]

It's inevitable, but as per usual better is the worst enemy of good enough.

Heh, heh, way back when I bought my first computer (Apple II+ with 48k of RAM) I purposely quit reading computer magazines 'cause I knew that 'better' wasn't very far away. I had a magical couple of years discovering what I could do with it before I got back in the loop.

Enjoy each day.

Ran a fully kitted out Atari 800 from 1983 till Windows 3.1 came out in 92. Not only should you enjoy each day, but you should extract every last ounce of value from a thing till its generational leap replacement appears. Wake me up when the Seestar S 5000 appears ...

[Regulus 1.36]

I am eagerly anticipating the next version of the Seestar, particularly a model with a higher-resolution camera, whether that's the S50 Pro or another variant with some advanced software features. I utilize mine as a much smaller and lighter alternative to some of my visual astronomy equipment. I'm content with a binoculars view of the planets because it allows me to observe a wealth of galaxies and nebulae instead.

 

However, the current S50 doesn't perform as well when observing the moon, which is my only real criticism of the product.

[carolinaskies]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

I'd expect rather a S-Mak perhaps 127/150 given Origin will be breaking the ground on a fast-wide smart scope.  The reason being an S80 doesn't offer an extensive change in other than 30mm more aperture but rather similar pixel scale.   ZWO has lots of options, and they could opt to even produce a Duo model guide/main camera sensor on the AM5 model with a 150mm Mak.  Then we'd have the first true Smart Scope with planetary capability.   

 

[PJBilotta]

I'm not sure there is much to be gained in increasing the aperture of the S50. 50mm is plenty for beginner-to-intermediate APO. The biggest advancement will be a larger, higher resolution sensor. That will be the bees knees - higher res and wider field in an equally compact and convenient shell. Why double the physical size when you can achieve the same thing with tech improvements? Personally I'd much rather have a better sensor in my bread-loaf sized SeeStar S50, than a bread-box sized S80.

Note that PCs and laptops haven't gotten larger. They are actually smaller, with vastly superior technology.

Edited by PJBilotta, 10 April 2024 - 02:08 AM.

[Bob W4]

Judging by the vast amount of time and expense ZWO continually appears to be putting into the Seestar S50 software, I have a suspicion they have a bigger, more capable smart scope on the horizon.  With sophisticated software already perfected, it would just be a matter of tweaking and installing it into the new dream machine. The fun can only get bigger and better.

[jprideaux]

Judging by the vast amount of time and expense ZWO continually appears to be putting into the Seestar S50 software, I have a suspicion they have a bigger, more capable smart scope on the horizon. With sophisticated software already perfected, it would just be a matter of tweaking and installing it into the new dream machine. The fun can only get bigger and better.

I agree. Software development cost a lot and a lot of what they already developed for the S50 could also be used for a better scope. I expect to see a new ZWO smart-scope version coming out in the next few months (or year). It would even be exciting if they came out with another 50mm smart-scope but one that totally automated polar alignment for equatorial use.

[LDW47]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

Don't hold your breath, lol !

[rmollise]

Seems to be a natural progression since the S50 is so popular. $799.00 if similar features to the S50 or $999.00 with an EQ mount and more goodies.

Anyone else think this may happen?

Maybe. Not now. Would you sabotage the SeeStar sales with a new model?

 

Don't expect something else until the sales of the S50 drop off and/or their development costs are paid.

[TJF stars]

Please excuse a question from a novice, but do you actually need an EQ mount to eliminate rotation in stacked images?  Could software use time differences to rotate individual images during processing?  Or map images to the ongoing resultant stacked images?  The resulting image would not be a perfect rectangle; it would have  combination of rectangle and arcs.  Could this work, or am I missing something?

Tom

[jprideaux]

Please excuse a question from a novice, but do you actually need an EQ mount to eliminate rotation in stacked images? Could software use time differences to rotate individual images during processing? Or map images to the ongoing resultant stacked images? The resulting image would not be a perfect rectangle; it would have combination of rectangle and arcs. Could this work, or am I missing something?
Tom

The alt-az smart-scopes do rotate the individual frames to handle field rotation. The limitation is that the individual frames must be short enough where the within frame rotation is not that noticeable. Also as the individual frames are rotated, you end up losing the corners and over time (in the limit) you will end-up with just a round image -you won’t keep the full rectangle. For alt-az mounts a square sensor would actually make more sense (although most sensors are rectangular in shape). The other option with an alt-az mount is to have a sensor de-rotator. The only Smart-telescope that does that do far is the Stellina.

[chrisecurtis]

Please excuse a question from a novice, but do you actually need an EQ mount to eliminate rotation in stacked images?  Could software use time differences to rotate individual images during processing?  Or map images to the ongoing resultant stacked images?  The resulting image would not be a perfect rectangle; it would have  combination of rectangle and arcs.  Could this work, or am I missing something?

Tom 

All stacked astrophotographs have to be aligned to each other (registered) before being "stacked": integrated into a single image. There will inevitably be differences between each image no matter how good the mount (and it is good practice to "dither" - offset images from another slightly - as this means that any defects in the image will not be in the same place relative to the stars and so will be "cancelled out" when they are integrated). We have very good software these days, that will scale, rotate and translate (move horizontally and vertically) images to line them up very accurately. It is this that has allowed Alt-Az mounts to be used for astrophotography. Provided you keep exposures short enough not to see noticeable trailing, it is easy to align a large number of images, each with the object in a slightly different position and orientation.

 

Building equatorial mounts or mechanical derotators that don't vibrate and track the rotation of the earth to within a few microns while moving several kilos of telescope and camera is possible, but very definitely not easy and certainly not cheap. It's much easier to position something in alt-azimuth using stepper motors and using the camera to check and correct positioning and then do the "derotation" in software afterwards - sophisticated and highly capable software is not cheap either, but much cheaper than mechanics.

 

The issues arise with image rotation in alt-az set-ups, because exposures have to be kept short and because some parts of the field get less exposure than others as the frame rotates. Less exposure is more noise and less detail. You can often see encroaching corners on such images representing the parts of the field that "rotated out" of view. If you have enough pixels on the sensor, you can crop those parts out (zooming in), or make mosaics to ensure all parts of the field are covered well enough. This can be done by software inside the scope (e.g. Vaonis live images appear to "zoom in" as they build up) or in post-processing. 

 

Like everything, it is a compromise. 

Edited by chrisecurtis, 21 April 2024 - 03:49 AM.

[AGrayson]

A reply to a comment on a YouTube video titled "Seestar- the astronomical observatory at your fingertips" made by zwo states they are working on a new version. The person who posted the comment mentioned how they would love a new version, zwo replied with "our R&D department will work hard to bring the new version, so stay tuned."

So yes, looks like a new version is in the works.

[Ray Rankins]

The ZWO rep I spoke with at NEAF today indicated that a couple other sizes of the Seestar are in the works, at least one of them a larger aperture. 

[eyeoftexas]

The ZWO rep I spoke with at NEAF today indicated that a couple other sizes of the Seestar are in the works, at least one of them a larger aperture. 

Tell them to get mosaic mode working first!