35 replies to this topic

[Maximum Astronomy]

The Celestron Origin sure is a fun treat! I won't lie, it is one of the most exciting astronomy products I have looked at in a long time. But it is not for everyone and I will be the first to admit that. The Origin is the perfect telescope for clubs, schools and people who are interested in EAA. It is the perfect balance of portability, capability and overall performance for a decently small profile. It is nowhere near as big as my C9.25 with an EQ mount, cameras, Hyperstar, yada yada yada, but it is still the largest of the smart telescopes out there. The Origin has wonderful optical quality, really good tech and super convenient features for everyone at any skill level.

Click here to view the article

[urright4me]

If you would like to see the difference in your Seestar vs Origin, image the same object with both and then heavily crop into the object of interest. The noise free detail in the Origin will show you what that extra $3500 got you.  If the quality of image is important to you, the Origin might make more sense to you. 

[Bearcub]

Its good, maybe celestron will keep pushing for innovation.

[genehunter29009]

I would not trade my Origin for all the other smart scopes combined. Its perfect for me. 

[Hexley]

To your point, the SeeStar (and similar scopes) at $450-500 is the issue for this product. If Celestron can get the Origin down to a clean $2500 (which is just a little more than a HyperStar'd Evo 6 + a nice one shot color astro camera would cost), it's a MUCH more compelling buy.

 

Once an hobby item is priced north of $3000, the number of people in the world with that amount of disposable income drops off a cliff. At $4000, I'd expect it to equatorially align and be taking longer subs.

[pratapnaik@gmail.com]

Very informative post, thank you for sharing!

[JMP]

Thanks for this review, very thorough. I know several folks locally enjoying the Seestar. Don't know anyone with an Origin.

[TicoWiko]

To me, the main question of the price tag is not so much that there are cheaper options, but that putting all that money into a single no fuss black box limits who this is for. If you're not drowning in cash, have no idea what you're doing, and are fine keeping it that way, then you get a Seestar. If similar but with cash, then the more expensive smart scope options become appealing. But if you so much as remotely know what you're doing or don't already but want to learn, you're much better served putting that 4k into a custom rig. It's just so much more fun and satisfying. Smart scopes, at least as I understand them, are about the lack of fuss : buy it, turn it on, and you don't even have to point it yourself after that.

 

That doesn't mean the Origin will necessarily fail. In fact if you put a gun to my head and made me choose a premium smart scope the Origin might be my top pick because unlike a lot of the other offerings its optics aren't at all underwhelming and I would expect great things from it. More if it were an EQ mount, but that might be asking too much. And I think, though I'm not a mind reader, that this is their angle. Their advertising keeps insisting on the RASA optics, at least on Astroshop, so maybe they're trying to capture both the "outsider" market of the non initiated and seduce a few seasoned astrophotographers and/or EAA enthusiasts into grabbing one as an actually optically decent ready made setup to try out RASA optics without the fuss of starting from scratch. Sometimes the build is half the fun, and sometimes it's a headache. Time will tell if that's a winning bet.

[m1thumb]

Nice Review.  I'd be interested in a 6" RASA as a stand alone product.

[RichA]

The 41% is the diameter of the obstruction.  The area of obstruction is different.  Going from a 30% obstruction to 41% only represents a small area increase an a minor increase in light loss, a fraction of an f-stop..  But, it puts a lot more light into the diffraction rings of the diffraction image so even though image brightness is barely impacted, contrast is impacted noticeably.  

[mikelinen]

Question: how does the Origin do with planets? Does it show details like the stripes and spots on Jupiter? The detailed rings of Saturn? I have the Seestar S50, and it's useless for planets. Is the Origin a good solution for planet viewing?

Thank you!

[Sebastian_Sajaroff]

Question: how does the Origin do with planets? Does it show details like the stripes and spots on Jupiter? The detailed rings of Saturn? I have the Seestar S50, and it's useless for planets. Is the Origin a good solution for planet viewing?

Thank you!

335 mm focal length is too little for planets. You need at least 1200 mm.

[SandyHouTex]

So the fundamental difference is the cost of the OTA.  A 6 inch RASA, if sold seperately would probably be $1500.  The 50mm (?) APO, probably $400.  The sensor is 4 times the pixels of the Seestar as well.  The mount for the Origin needs to be much bigger and better to handle the 6 inch RASA, compared to basically moving around a finder scope.

 

I have the Origin and love it.

 

Great review by the way.

[DyDyMT]

I am on the fence - I've come into some $'s and deserve a treat.  I have the SeeStar 50 (preorder on the 30).  I have no post processing skills other than Photo, but do enjoy some EAA from the couch when it's sub zero.  Something I've noticed about my SeeStar was that the real-time is not as good as when I first got it.  That is disappointing to have to denoise to see the objects clearly.  

 

Questions: How does the Origin fare in zero temps?  (the SeeStar will frost/freeze if the humidity is there even with dew shield). I've read the Origin has fans - will those operate properly in those temps?

 

I'm assuming OTA needs temp. acclimation as well? Do you store it as a single unit, or remove from the tripod?  It's as big as a scope - so I'm just thinking about storage.  

 

With my base-processing skill, would I really notice the difference with images?

 

Thanks for any input/advice

[Dwight J]

A fine review!  Celestron is the better of the high end smart scopes and would be my choice if money was no object.  An issue that stands out for me is the overall size factor.  Smaller smart scopes form factor has them very portable especially in view of carry on luggage or family vacations.  You have a complete setup that takes up little space and weight.

[astroCPA]

While I know the smart scope market is still in its infancy, and waiting to see how the market flushes out with them, as a Seestar owner myself, my primary use of it....as I expect is with most...is a cool, convenient, quick, portable, compact, easy way to get some good images for public events, showing neighbors and friends, and general enjoyment. The Origin may have overall better image quality and lower noise, but the smart scope market is not meant to be for serious imaging. All, kudos to Celestron for this product, but no way am I, or most likely most other buyers, going to spend $4,000 on this kind of scope. Especially when for about $500, they can get a mostly equally quality option. As a big Celestron fan, I am just thinking..good luck with this one. Time will tell....

[SpitzA3P]

I recently saw a review of the detail (resolution) available in the Origin vs Seestar and Unistellar.  For the life of me, I can not recall where, but the data from the Origin was much larger (more pixels or something.)

 

So there is a difference, a very notable one.

 

Does anyone else recall seeing the review I mention above?

 

Thanks for the very thorough review, which obviously took a lot of time to write up.

[SpitzA3P]

PS,

 

One reason for smart astrographs is that they make it possible to image deep sky objects even in light polluted skies like mine (Bortle 7-8).  Of course, much better images are made in Bortle 3-4 skies which are available in the eastern US within a 2 hour drive of most cities.

 

I am not sure what serious imaging means.  If it gets one excited, if it fits the bill for an amateur, that is seriously appropriate, even if the image obtained is not any where near the quality of top o the line astronomical imaging.

[SpitzA3P]

Question: how does the Origin do with planets? Does it show details like the stripes and spots on Jupiter? The detailed rings of Saturn? I have the Seestar S50, and it's useless for planets. Is the Origin a good solution for planet viewing?

Thank you!

AT f 2.2 this is not a scope for planets or the moon.

[RichA]

Very good rundown on the scope.

Is there anything else going through the cable aside from signal?  Reason I asked is that they could probably have made the camera battery power in the body and wifi/bluetooth capable, thus eliminating the cable.  Unless the camera uses a lot of power.  After all, consumer digital cameras have used batteries forever and most have been wifi compatible for the last 10 year or so.

[JosephATL]

I'm curious how you got the camera off.  Is it mounted using standard 42mm threads?

[Mike Franzyshen]

Thanks for taking the time to write a very detailed review!!

The fact the camera is not cooled is a big deal, especially at this price point.  This is not a beginner's scope and I think many imagers will want a cooled camera option.  What happens when a new camera comes out?  Will Celestron allow you to upgrade the camera? The camera is arguably one of the most important aspects to this scope.

[Stargazingawe]

335 mm focal length is too little for planets. You need at least 1200 mm.

You are correct.  The Origin does not do planets well.  I have one and have tried.

[Stargazingawe]

I love my Origin too.  Here are some comparison images of the Horsehead nebula, between my Origin and my Unistellar eVscope2:  https://www.cloudyni...60-comparisons/

 

Different tools for different jobs... I'm keeping both!

[starpicturesmiami]

Can you swap out the camera for say a ZWO 533 or 2600?