Antares_Paul Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 OK so it's new telescope time I love widefield but am wanting more resolution on the nebula areas so the choice is either a fast newt (10" Quattro) or a larger frac (Equinox ED120). Mount comes into the equation of course - will an HEQ5 handle these 'scopes at imaging level? I'm aware of constant collimation with the newt and, being a frac lover, am leaning towards the ED120 Opinions sought ... Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAZ Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I would have thought the Newt would give you better views of nebula's as it has a far greater light gathering capacity. I know from personal experience that my 12" Dob shows DSO's a lot better than my 127 Frac. Simply because it gets in more light. My 127 is great for Lunar, Planets and Stars, but I find even simple DSO's difficult to locate compared to the Dob. Hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares_Paul Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 Yes indeed Martyn. Aperture will always win so the newt is perhaps the sensible option. I suppose I should have said 'a little more resolution on nebula' than what I actually wrote. That statement keeps alive the frac option I also wish I had kept hold of my MAK 127 for planetary stuff, now. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedledee Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 HEQ5 load capacity = 16kg Quattro 10 steel OTA = 15.3kg Quattro 10 Carbon Fibre OTA = 14kg Equinox 120 OTA = 6.21kg So the Quattro 10 steel would be on the upper limit of the HEQ5 when loaded up with heavy camera tackle but the carbon fibre should be ok. Equinox is 900mm focal length at F7.5 about £1400.00 Quattro is 1000mm focal length at F4 about £580.00 steel, £880.00 carbon. For wide field the focal lengths are very similar so image scale is effectively the same. Quattro has 4.3 x the light gathering power of the Equinox and is much faster. Cost wise Quattros are substantially cheaper. For grab n go portability go for the Equinox, otherwise I think the fast Quattro will see far deeper. I love playing with the numbers. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedledee Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I think you should still get better resolution with the larger aperture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glider Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Aperture isn't necessarily king when imaging. You take longer subs. You can't do that with your eyes when observing.. Download CCDCalc and run your various camera/scope options through it for a range of objects. Check FOV and arcsec/pixel. Factor in things like spending money having to buy a focal reducer, etc. Me, I'd get the ED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glider Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 If you could compare say an f5 120mm refractor to an f5 200mm reflector they would both have the same light grasp and equal length subs would be just as 'bright'. However, the 200mm reflector would have the better spacial resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedledee Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 You would also need to fork out for a good coma corrector for an F4 newt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares_Paul Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 Thanks again all. I've been doing FoV calcs etc and I'm happy with the ED120/reducer option. I have the rotatable focuser on the 80 and it's nice to have. Not sure it's 'nice' to the tune of a couple hundred extra buying the Equinox so it's the 120 DS PRO/reducer for me. Once I get paid, that is ... Regards. You would also need to fork out for a good coma corrector for an F4 newt. Yes Pete I was just looking at those Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kheldar Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Aperture isn't necessarily king when imaging. You take longer subs. You can't do that with your eyes when observing.. Download CCDCalc and run your various camera/scope options through it for a range of objects. Check FOV and arcsec/pixel. Factor in things like spending money having to buy a focal reducer, etc. Me, I'd get the ED. This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedledee Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Just want to clarify that I'm not an imager. So not qualified to advise in this area. But hope the numbers might be of use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Graham Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Hi there. Well for my 2 cents worth I have both a 127 Helios frac and a 200 Helios newt. I have tried the imaging with the frac and was well pleased. Due to the weather only been able to have a couple of goes with the newt on the same targets. The newt wins hands down so far. Even to the extent of getting both M81 and 82 in the same shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glider Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Is that f8 6" vs an f5 8"? Approximately same FOV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Graham Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Interesting as I have never managed to get both in the frame with the frac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glider Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I ran the setups through CCDCalc, practically identical FOV's. Unless I've cocked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Graham Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I trust your calculations you got both scopes spot on. Maybe the frac needs collomating. Maybe I just need a new set of eyes. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caldwell 14 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 I'm a refractor man so I'd always go with the frac... quality over quantity. I've had newts, I just don't want another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brantuk Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 I'd go for an MN190 - but that's only cos I allready got some fracs lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now