11 replies to this topic

[Highburymark]

I have had the coatings fail three times now on two Baader Sundancers. Baader seems to have a real problem with these not inexpensive filters, so I’m just about to return mine for a third time. And this, I thought, was a more reliable option than Quarks, which have disappointed me in the past. Now I’m wondering if Daystar is achieving greater consistency with the Chromosphere Quark?
I’d be interested to hear first, any feedback on Quarks bought in the past year or two. And second, how well older Quarks are holding up? I was always a bit concerned that they didn’t seem very robust as a long term option.

[BYoesle]

While not necessarily a large sample:

 

Measurements by Christian Viladrich of multiple Quarks and a PE. I had the same experience with my PE.  

 

Review of a Daystar SE etalon telescope, which has the same quality specification as the Quark.

[Highburymark]

While not necessarily a large sample:

Measurements by Christian Viladrich of multiple Quarks and a PE. I had the same experience with my PE.

Review of a Daystar SE etalon telescope, which has the same quality specification as the Quark.

Thanks Bob. Interesting measurements, suggesting things are as inconsistent as they were in the past. I’d already had the misfortune of reading the 127 horror story.

[minhlead]

Thanks Bob. Interesting measurements, suggesting things are as inconsistent as they were in the past. I’d already had the misfortune of reading the 127 horror story.

My friend just got a Quark, against my recommendation and sure enough, the non uniformity is there, even worse than the one that I currently got.
It's not a representative sample size but no, I don't think the QC improve. Why would they? Even with the bad reputation, they still sells the Quarks by the thousands. Currently, there is simply no equivalent.

[Trevor Durity]

I was in touch with TS about this last week and was told that that non uniformity meant that flats were required for quark imaging so I guess the problem still exists.

[AstroTafelberg]

Greetings!

So far my Sundancer II still delivers after 3 years...can't say that about the Quark Chromosphere, which you have to sent back for service after two seasons, if bad luck maybe already after one year.

So, I don't see a quality improvement on Daystar Quarks - you get what you pay for.

Edited by AstroTafelberg, 20 April 2025 - 01:52 PM.

[briansalomon1]

I've had a quark chromosphere for about 3 years now and am using it with NP101is and a 2X TV powermate installed after the diagonal for f10.8.

 

It's uniform across the FOV but there are what I'd call "speckles" which look like dust motes in the view. Compared to my 60mm Lunt etalon which is mounted on the front of the same telescope and with a lunt blocking filter, the quark doesn't show nearly as much detail on the surface of The Sun but does show more detail in the prominences.

 

The quark might do better with a longer focal length telescope, but I like the simplicity and performance of the Lunt system so much I should probably sell the quark.

Edited by briansalomon1, 20 April 2025 - 05:58 PM.

[BYoesle]

...using it with NP101is and a 2X TV powermate installed after the diagonal for f10.8 ...
the quark doesn't show nearly as much detail on the surface of The Sun but does show more detail in the prominences.

Is the Powermate located ahead of the Quark and it's internal 4.2 telecentric or is it a Quark Combo without the telecentric?

This is a good description of having a larger bandpass. More continuum from the photosphere leaks through on the disc, decreasing the contrast of details of the chromosphere. The wider bandpass also allows more off-band Doppler-shifted prominence light to bee seen.

The Lunt has a narrower bandpass, and therefore more disc contrast, but less Doppler sifted prominence light...

Edited by BYoesle, 20 April 2025 - 10:21 PM.

[davidpitre]

While I might roll the dice on an entry level Daystar that could be returned to a third-party distributor, I think it would be fool hardy to spend a substantial amount of money on a Daystar.

Baader’s Sundancers were made by SolarSpectrum. Mark had a bad run of coatings. In general, though, I wouldn’t hesitate to purchase one of his higher quality etalons. I own both a RG18 Ha and a CaK. While neither etalon Is perfect, they both perform very well. 

[vineyard]

I'm pretty happy with my combo and CaH quarks (some recent sample images below):

 

 

 

More on the astrobin if you click through.

 

I did ask for - and the vendor agreed to provide - sample images with the specific quarks (w the acquisition and PP details)  before I bought though!

[Durkinphd]

My answer to your question is "no!"

 

https://www.cloudyni...r-buyer-beware/

[Highburymark]

Thanks for responses, and sympathies to those with continuing problems.