🔥Hot Takes🔥

[fervent raven]

They're so focused in making a profit they make sacrifices that would probably drive sales massively if implemented instead of being thrown away

[manic elbow]

Couldn't agree more

[misty marsh]

Raspberry pi devs leave the chat

[latent grove]

Very hot take

[fervent raven]

Nah, a child could outdo them in hardware

[latent grove]

Starting to sweat from all this heat

[manic elbow]

New hot take

Automated telescopes make no sense

[fervent raven]

Zwo probably uses snake oil as thermal compound

[hearty cloud]

THIS should be the conversation closer let's be honest here

[fervent raven]

Don't even get me fvcking started on robo scopes

[latent grove]

Temperature is rising to undesirable temperatures

[manic elbow]

And I don't understand why anyone would buy one

[manic elbow]

Absolutely

[fervent raven]

2.5k and no autoPA? Easiest shit to implement at that amount of profit

[manic elbow]

Robo scopes are...

[fervent raven]

No way there's tight margins at the price of those pieces of shit

[manic elbow]

I just don't get it

[misty marsh]

$150 for full GOTO and auto pa and guiding
Guess what, no asi air support.

[hearty cloud]

Are you talking stuff like Vaonis scopes?

[latent grove]

https://tenor.com/view/resident-evil-resident-evil-welcome-to-raccoon-city-resident-evil-movie-burning-on-fire-gif-25613395

@fervent raven

[fervent raven]

Yeah but your firmware stinks worse than my toilet after Indian food

[manic elbow]

If you want to do visual, do visual. Photography then do Photography. The robo things are some weird in between that just dosent do either ritht

[manic elbow]

Yes

[fervent raven]

Yep

[misty marsh]

Gotta implement onstep

[fervent raven]

Not even hard

Only downside is no AutoPA in onstep because it's not designed for toys like the OAT

[manic elbow]

Ur paying money to be fed images you could just get off google

[fervent raven]

I can however motorise my collimation screws

[misty marsh]

At least my toy has auto pa

[fervent raven]

At least I have a real mount

[misty marsh]

Or had, RIP oat.

[latent grove]

https://tenor.com/view/stranger-things-fire-flame-gif-14920648

[manic elbow]

Oat?

[fervent raven]

Where's your terrible condition EQ5 real mount?

[fervent raven]

Open astro tracker

[misty marsh]

Open Astro tracker

[hearty cloud]

See even then, I still find that they fit into a niche market. Value is entirely subjective. To me they are a horrificly inefficient way to use your money, but there are people out there who are fine paying that sort of dough to just plop it down on their rooftop, turn it on and have some quasi decent images come in

[manic elbow]

Ah

[misty marsh]

$500 away lmfao

[manic elbow]

Yeah I get that

My issue is, there's just no point

[fervent raven]

Again though, a little R&D to make it EQ would go a long way

[manic elbow]

You could get those same images for the same work off of google

[fervent raven]

I mean I could do that shit in my bedroom

[manic elbow]

You aren't actually doing or seeing anything, and that just seems so unsatisfying

[misty marsh]

#1021002743080558642

[fervent raven]

Robo scopes are pure bullshit

[hearty cloud]

To be fair I could sell my am5, multiple scopes, asi585 and 533 and other gear and do the same

[fervent raven]

Vespera costs £2499

[misty marsh]

Unless your like wheelchair bound or something

[manic elbow]

Its so different

I think more than anything just bc processing

[hearty cloud]

Im kinda ok with the hobby being expanded into new territories, even if those territories are ludicrous to me

[native parrot]

Its like taking a helicopter instead of climbing Everest

[latent grove]

Here's a hot take: Take a great image from astrobin, crop it, rotate slightly and give it a different color tone

And no one will notice

[hearty cloud]

Ok that's a good comparison. I feel you on that.

[misty marsh]

Nina is compatible with every camera made, asi air is compatible with zwo cameras ONLY

[manic elbow]

And the ability to pick gear

Let's stop the asiair thing it's not going anywhere

[fervent raven]

Hear me out though

[misty marsh]

Ye lol

[fervent raven]

For £2.5k could they not have used anything other than a shitty small sensor?

[manic elbow]

For 2.5k, they could have put the thing on a wedge.

[fervent raven]

AutoPA based on drift would be easy to implement

[manic elbow]

Fr.

[hearty cloud]

Just drop £30,000 more and get the Hyperia with its 61mp camera. Duh.

[manic elbow]

That alone would have made it so much better

[manic elbow]

Is that alt az??

[fervent raven]

Let's you get several nights of data in rather than a few hours...

[manic elbow]

Please say it's not

[hearty cloud]

You know damn well it is

[manic elbow]

.

[latent grove]

That exists???

[manic elbow]

30k alt AZ mount that you can't change any of the stuff that you use it with

What

Could

Go

Wrong

[hearty cloud]

https://m.dpreview.com/news/4070820638/vaonis-announces-45-000-telescope-camera-with-61mp-full-frame-sensor-1050mm-optic

[misty marsh]

What the fahk

[fervent raven]

That's fvcking grim

[misty marsh]

I want to shoot my foot

[latent grove]

Come on now

[fervent raven]

Does it have a rotator?

At least?

[misty marsh]

Probably limited to 10s exposures in software

[latent grove]

mp equals everything

[fervent raven]

Please say it can avoid field rotation in some way

[manic elbow]

It's a 6 inch

[latent grove]

Also the sensor is sony

[fervent raven]

"uncompromising"

[hearty cloud]

Shoot it with the 61mp full frame sensor featured in the Hyperia™

[manic elbow]

You're spending 45k on a six inch with an alt az mount.

[misty marsh]

That’s gotta be the most retarded statement ever

[latent grove]

even though nearly every astrocam is sony

[fervent raven]

A dob with an astrocam

Will probably perform better

[manic elbow]

Bro

3k

[misty marsh]

Imagine if someone defended this piece of shit

[manic elbow]

3

[latent grove]

You can buy something from planewave or asa with the cash

[manic elbow]

K

[hearty cloud]

Is every camera in "perfect symbiosis" with the equipment though, that's the question

[manic elbow]

For a goto 16 inch dob.

[native parrot]

Bannable

[fervent raven]

Well...

If you're like me you'd go 16 inch + onstep

[manic elbow]

Spend, idk let's be super rich and say 5k on the imaging train

[fervent raven]

Save yourself a grand

[manic elbow]

8k

For a setup

That's better then the vespera thing

In every way.

[hearty cloud]

Bruh, if i had $40,000 to drop on astrophotography that shit would be top notch gear in an observatory

[fervent raven]

8k and you get a used G11, an observatory, and a 12 inch newt

Alongside a used 571 cam

[hearty cloud]

Beat you to it pal

[latent grove]

you can get a planewave rc telescope

[manic elbow]

Nah I'd get the hyperia

[latent grove]

A cdk17 with the money

[manic elbow]

It has 3 million pixels guys!!!!!

[native parrot]

I'd do the same thing like that guy with the satelite mirror dob

[manic elbow]

I'm sorry 61 million!!!@

That means images are 61 million times better!!!!

Omg buy now!!!

[fervent raven]

Meanwhile you have to crop to five pixels because of field rotation

[latent grove]

Would you rather have a cdk17 from planewave, or a

[hearty cloud]

And in two months get bored and try to sell it and end up recouping less thsn half the money ha. Meanwhile when you get bored of your cdk17 ypu know damn well there will be some uber nerd out there willing to give you much closer to full price for it

[manic elbow]

A TRIPLET

[fervent raven]

At 6" I want a newt that auto collimates

[manic elbow]

ITS A TRIPLET FOR 45K

[latent grove]

You need to emphasize the (Triplet)

[manic elbow]

Wait

Triplet means 3 pieces of glass

3x61

183 million times better

[latent grove]

https://tenor.com/view/galaxy-brain-gif-25912556

[misty marsh]

https://tenor.com/view/buy-buy-now-buy-it-now-gif-25006426

[manic elbow]

Buy now, and we'll give you a free high quality complementary light pollution filter!

[misty marsh]

Blocks 100% of LED light

[fervent raven]

You mean a halo introducer 1000

[latent grove]

the filters are 7nm

Not even 6, or 3

[manic elbow]

Idec

Why tf

Would you use mono

On an alt az mount

[latent grove]

Why would you use anything on an alt az mount

[misty marsh]

Homies got his priorities as straight as wet spaghetti

[native parrot]

bruh the irony 💀

[manic elbow]

It's got all 3

183 million of each 😎

[latent grove]

You need to release the amazing

[misty marsh]

I want to make this scope ngl. But for $500. And with a rotator. Ngl alt az is cool but harder it use.

[misty marsh]

OAT does one click imaging now.

Phunky, imagine if you supported this product one day 💀💀💀

[hearty cloud]

Listen, I'll be the Devil's advocate here and say that at least the images coming out of the thing don't look so dumpy like the stellina, is it $40,000 worth of quality? Ehhhhh, but still

[hearty cloud]

Wow, my comment right after this was bad timing eh

[misty marsh]

My untracked tarantula with $1k of equipment is more detailed

Also I got first DSO light with the 585 mate. Loving it

[native parrot]

bruh

[latent grove]

The website page seems dedicated to keeping any clueless person who purchased it not feel like an idiot

[hearty cloud]

Oh no doubt. And imagine what you could do eith $40,000 worth of equipment. I'm just saying, with the stellina it costs so much and the images are...ehhh...at least these look pretty good

[misty marsh]

100%

Here’s the pic. 2” FWHM and 60s of data with sun glow still around and full moon.

[hearty cloud]

Dude. It's so true.

[hearty cloud]

What did you image?

[misty marsh]

Tarantula nebula

[hearty cloud]

Oh shit this?

[misty marsh]

Clouds came in after lol. It’s the first cloud I’ve had in 4 months and it’s on the night my new camera arrives

Yea

[hearty cloud]

The 585 is a beast

[misty marsh]

Pretty pleased with this.

[hearty cloud]

That's only one single minute haha

Did you do any noise reduction?

Cause that looks quite clean

[misty marsh]

The amount of stars I could see live was great

[misty marsh]

Nah nothing.

[hearty cloud]

Amazing

[misty marsh]

This was just an asinh stretch

[hearty cloud]

Which is why when it's not shooting the moon or planets it resides in my guide scope

[misty marsh]

the stack lol

no calibration frames too so i guess thats what caused the noise streaks

[hearty cloud]

I'm interested to see what you do with it. I probably won't ever use it in this way so it's been fascinating to see just how far it can be pushed

[misty marsh]

i have a whole list of tiny galaxies i can shoot with it

[hearty cloud]

I still stand by the opinion of if you can't or don't want to afford a cooled astro cam, the 585 is easily one of the best cameras out there for versatility

[misty marsh]

ill cool it soon too

[hearty cloud]

You can do SO MUCH with it

[misty marsh]

it was at 31c sensor temp last night, which was actually very good seeing as ambient air was 27c

[hearty cloud]

My 8 panel moon mosaic via C8 is still waiting for me. Just need the right time

Haven't had that in months

4k per panel like wtf

[keen breach]

585 might be a future upgrade to my dslr im thinking

[hearty cloud]

Keep an eye on what @misty marsh does with it. I get the impression he will get even more people interested in that sensor once he starts dropping images eh 😬

[keen breach]

definitely

[lethal vortex]

Asiair as a product probably doesn’t make a profit, it’s too cheap for what it is, given the amount of work gone in to it. It’s for locking you in to the ecosystem so you buy ZWO cams. Which is honestly fine, IMO.

Lol Discord thread lag

[fervent raven]

They're definitely making Hella cash on the larger units, if not on the mini. The R&D would have to be 50% of the product cost to not make profit

The asiair plus is £345, 287.50 if you remove tax, that's with FLOs profit margins of what, 20%? 239.50 per asiair plus on zwos end, raspberry pi cm4 en Masse, highest tier would be about 80 per unit, call it 160, power distro other micros probably 60 absolute maximum, enclosure another 20, 80 British pounds per unit would have to go to R&D to be making no profit, I call cap on the no profit theory

[lethal vortex]

Well yeah, but that R&D is the cost of paying people. I bet they sell thousands of those, probably not even 10s of thousands. If this was in the UK that kind of R&D budget would probably cover only one software developer full-time for one year, including admin support but not including machining and hardware prototyping costs. China is obviously a lot cheaper tho.

[fervent raven]

I imagine they're into the tens of thousands

Quite easily

If we're counting regular asiair and plus but not mini

[fossil barn]

dont buy a 6 inch refractor there's no reason to

[misty marsh]

Wot

[fossil barn]

LOL

[misty marsh]

If you have the money they are worth it

[fossil barn]

ok look tell me why people get a 6 inch refrac over 8 inch newt they weigh the same

im curious

[misty marsh]

Ease of use, sharpness, no optical flaws, no need for collimation

[fossil barn]

but a newt is about 3x less money can be very sharp collimation isn't hard imo and if you dont get one from wish.com it shouldnt have flaws

[misty marsh]

A frac will always be sharper comparing pro to pro level equipment

[fossil barn]

yes

but

[misty marsh]

All newts have optical flaws. It’s in the design

[fossil barn]

💀

[misty marsh]

Wot

[fossil barn]

just changed it

[misty marsh]

Because it was mistyped. I had the idea of what I didn’t want to say

[fossil barn]

ok

newt>frac

[misty marsh]

For most yes unless cost isn’t an issue

A good frac will always outperform a newt

[fossil barn]

unless your rich*

[misty marsh]

If you want field sharpness though 100% get a smaller frac.

[fossil barn]

what i mean is more zoom than abt 700-800>

newt

better

[misty marsh]

What

You… just change your pixel size for ideal sampling then???

All scopes need to be properly sampled for maximum performance

[fossil barn]

true pixel size will help alot

[misty marsh]

…

[fossil barn]

either way refrac= mega debt newt (just as good if not better optically ) = no debt

lol

[misty marsh]

A newt is always going to be less sharp and lower contrast though.

If you want the best looking images a frac is best

If you want details on tiny stuff get a newt, because no one makes 10” fracs

[fossil barn]

didnt know about contrast but either way

[misty marsh]

It’s literally in the design

Same way mirror lenses are bad for AP

[fossil barn]

wide thats wide field

[misty marsh]

…

I said best looking

[fossil barn]

lol

[misty marsh]

Extra contrast, much better field sharpness, no optical flaws.

The pixel FWHM of a frac is always gonna be better

My Roki gets 3.8px FWHM and my 8” dob lucky imaging gets 4.2.
9” per pixel vs 0.5” per pixel.

[fossil barn]

do you even have a cc

[misty marsh]

No, sensor is small enough it’s not important

[fossil barn]

it will affect

not as much

[misty marsh]

Sure, but not much

The Roki was also a 300s sub so stars are quite large

My Roki is definitely sharper than my best though

[fossil barn]

THEN WHY WERE YOU SAYING SUB LENGTH WONT AFFECT BLOAT

[misty marsh]

That’s not even related???

[fossil barn]

roki is a dif story also its 400$ for 135mm

[fossil barn]

just saying

[misty marsh]

You are at a stupid high f ratio too

[misty marsh]

How? It’s a very cheap lens

[fossil barn]

not cheap

[misty marsh]

Wtf

It’s literally half the price of similar equipment

[fossil barn]

ok? thats as much as my current mount

[misty marsh]

And comparing focal length to cost is the most stupid thing ever

[misty marsh]

It’s a budget lens. What more do you want

[fossil barn]

not really

[misty marsh]

How

[fossil barn]

thats not budget 💀

[misty marsh]

You are just poor

[fossil barn]

true

but still i can get a heq5 for about double that lens

[misty marsh]

You can’t take images with a HEQ5 though. The HEQ5 isn’t full frame corrected. The HEQ5 isn’t f/2

[fossil barn]

and?

its not budget especially for most people starting these days

[misty marsh]

The Roki is about the cheapest astrophotography lens around. There’s nothing that is better value than it

[misty marsh]

Idk man. I haven’t been here long and I bought one within 8 months of starting astrophotography

[fossil barn]

ok?

you have money

[misty marsh]

There isn’t anything less money that’s acceptable though.

[fossil barn]

thats a little more than acceptable

being f2 and pretty crispy

[misty marsh]

2.8 full frame. It’s an extremely cheap lens.

If you go on literally any budget gear recommendation site the Roki is at the top of the list

[fossil barn]

why is it checker pattern?

[misty marsh]

Because it’s a corner analysis?

[fossil barn]

and thats all you got of it

[misty marsh]

Huh

[fossil barn]

of that image

[misty marsh]

That’s the full I believe. That might have been lmc I was doing the corner analysis on though

[fossil barn]

thats really good framing

[misty marsh]

If it was lmc that’s the full

[misty marsh]

Hence why comparing focal length to cost is completely dumb.

[fossil barn]

no

its not

[misty marsh]

How tf

A longer fl and a shorter fl scope aren’t comparable

Like I said before the Roki gets 3.8px FWHM in 5 min subs.

There’s no lens for at least 2x the rokis price that will beat that

[fossil barn]

if you want highER fl than paying 5k usd for a good 1000mm refrac is stupid when you could get a newt for so much less and still get good crispy

[misty marsh]

We aren’t talking about that bruh

[fossil barn]

thats where it started

[misty marsh]

Then you dropped the focal length = value

[fossil barn]

no

its about the value

[misty marsh]

No, that’s just plain wrong. If you want fl get a SCT.

[fossil barn]

high fl at not f/10

[misty marsh]

A 135mm lens and a big scope are completely different things.

[misty marsh]

Rasa then. Keep in mind you need the skies for longer than 900mm or so

[fossil barn]

rasa is low fl

[misty marsh]

It isn’t.

500mm ish isn’t short

It’s bloody F/1.8

[fossil barn]

rasa 8 inch is literally 400mm

f2

[misty marsh]

And?

[fossil barn]

AND BACK TO 2K

[misty marsh]

400mm is the ideal focal length

For like 95% of targets

If the Roki is such a bad deal why is it that every professional astrophotographer owns one?

[fossil barn]

this is not what its about im talking about that 5% what if you wanna image those oh, gotta buy a 3k refrac or ill just get a newt good idea

[misty marsh]

Then you buy another rig???

[fossil barn]

idc why they own one

[fossil barn]

oh so now i gotta get a whole new rig?

[misty marsh]

The newt can’t shoot the stuff the rasa can. And there’s no way either can shoot some of the stuff the Roki can

[misty marsh]

If you want to shoot 100% of targets yes.

[fossil barn]

💀 im not sure your following what im saying at all

[arctic rose]

Not necessarily

You can reuse a medium sized mount

[misty marsh]

Well yeah that’s what I meant

[fossil barn]

then say new scope

[misty marsh]

What are you saying then, do enlighten me

[arctic rose]

And guiding as well

[fossil barn]

yep

[fossil barn]

do i have to?

[misty marsh]

We were talking about scopes mate. It doesn’t take much to figure that out

[arctic rose]

Yeah but you also have to consider pixel size for cameras

[fossil barn]

not talking about cameras

[misty marsh]

…

They are related

[arctic rose]

If you have a decent pixel size, you could shoot from like 400 focal length to 800?

[misty marsh]

You can get a tighter pixel scale camera on an existing scope it can make it feel like new

But that’s down to what scope and camera etc

[arctic rose]

I'm not sure about this but I have a very good small scope, I was thinking of using a quality photography Barlow for galaxies/planets

[fossil barn]

doesnt mean the actual scopes res will be better

[misty marsh]

Tf??

If it’s sampled better of course it’s going to be better

Unless you have an absolutely awful scope

[arctic rose]

Pixel scale should be between 1-2 arcseconds per pixel is what I have heard

[misty marsh]

Yup

Not seeing limited too bad, and ez to guide

[fossil barn]

and what would that be in nm if that translates

[arctic rose]

You also have to think about crop size

[misty marsh]

It can be any focal length bruh, you calculate ideal sampling.

[misty marsh]

Ehh, pixel scale is better. Crop factor is pretty meaningless. Just mosaic.

[fossil barn]

i dont wanna its 7 am and i haven't slept

[misty marsh]

You don’t have to

It’s literally x + y = 1-2” per pixel. What’s x and y

You choose a reasonable focal length and camera

My Roki is ideally sampled at 0.6um pixels

[arctic rose]

My ideal camera for example would be a 269C that can go 340-680mm focal length, should be enough for most galaxies I think

[misty marsh]

I run it closer to 6 microns, 9” per pixel

[arctic rose]

Currently my camera has 2.4 um pixels and my scope is 348mm fl

[misty marsh]

Ofc 0.6 micron cameras aren’t a thing really so you have to run it closer to 2 um if you want good performance

[fossil barn]

LOL

i need a new camera

5.20 microns

my camera

[arctic rose]

I think that's 1.422 arcsec/pixel

The calculation is: 206.3 × (pixel size) ÷ focal length

[arctic rose]

About 540-1080 FL is ideal then

[fossil barn]

uh

well

mine is 400

💀

[arctic rose]

It's going to be undersampled 💀

[fossil barn]

Yeppp

isnt that what drizzle is for?

cause i could start experimenting with that

[arctic rose]

I used to have 600 so it was 0.825 arcseconds per pixel but I didn't see any major problems so I think going a bit beyond recommended can work in some situations

[arctic rose]

You can try

[fossil barn]

what does under sampling effect exactly?

cause my images can be pretty good at times

[arctic rose]

I think it's just when you don't have enough pixels for the stars so they can start to look a bit blocky

[fossil barn]

OH

never had that happen to me

[arctic rose]

Yeah I don't think it's that noticeable unless you look for it when it's just a bit outside the range

[fossil barn]

not that ive noticed

i want roki but i kinda want higher fl plus it would be way under sampled

[arctic rose]

What do you mean higher, how much higher?

[fossil barn]

heheh

uhh500-600 for reasons

[arctic rose]

Yeah that's not doable 🤣

[fossil barn]

why

im thinking of what you mean

idk what you mean tbh

at all

[arctic rose]

So the roki is 135mm right?

[fossil barn]

ohhhhhhhhhhhh

i mean i want a roki but i kinda want a higher fl scope also

also not much point since 5.20 micron pixel pitch idk how that would work though 18-55 work pretty good i think

[fossil barn]

yes

[arctic rose]

So you want a 600mm roki? Or a roki and also a 600mm scope?

[fossil barn]

eventually both but 600 first

[arctic rose]

Oh, yeah what I meant was that I don't think it's possible to get a camera that is not under/over sampled on either one as the roki is less than 1/4 of the focal length so even it you manage to get a camera that can do 1 arcsec on the roki, it will be over 4 arcseconds on the 600mm

[fossil barn]

well tbh i dont notice much

what does oversampling do

losing stars?

[arctic rose]

Oversampling means the light is spread over more pixels than needed to achieve full resolution thus increasing imaging time often by a large factor

[fossil barn]

ah

[arctic rose]

It's when you are below 1 arcsecond per pixel

[fossil barn]

yeah

im gonan sleep now ty for info/argument lol

[arctic rose]

Np

[fervent raven]

"no optical flaws" CA?

[misty marsh]

Diffraction, and yeah ca I guess

[fervent raven]

600mm roki would be gross

If they stick with the same imperfections they already have

[arctic rose]

Yeah, that's why I was confused

[hearty cloud]

And cost. My God does that dude know how much a good 6" refractor costs?!

[floral echo]

i dont even know if ive seen a 6" frac

[keen breach]

ive seen one

they are just absurdly expensive

https://www.opticsplanet.com/sky-watcher-esprit-150mm-ed-triplet-apo-refractor.html?utm_source=cse&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=connexity&utm_term=7a31b316472c1ec8e58bd0ae21d85f14&cnxclid=7a31b316472c1ec8e58bd0ae21d85f14&msclkid=7a31b316472c1ec8e58bd0ae21d85f14&utm_content=opticsplanet

this is the first one i found on google

[manic elbow]

I mean... the optical quality is most likely better than a 6 inch newt. That being said, it it worth thr extra 6k and ridiculous size? Absolutely not, the thing is too expensive and awful to use

[hearty cloud]

Exactly. Just get an Edge8 and call it a day

[manic elbow]

I mean... i wouldn't recommend an sct over a newt for astro but yeah-

[latent grove]

The Esprit line is great quality even rivaling takahashi

Though I would say that the 150mm version is quite costly compared to others

[hearty cloud]

Why not? Sct's are fantastic for astrophotography

[manic elbow]

Ehhh

Yes and no

[hearty cloud]

If you're looking for them tiny galaxies anyways

[manic elbow]

Generally aren't my recommendation

Yeah for super high power stuff they're great lol

[hearty cloud]

The one exception is those rasa's

[manic elbow]

Ah, rasas...

[hearty cloud]

Imagine having an 11" rasa...f/2.2.....

Newt boys wet dream

[manic elbow]

Rasas are a major trade off

It's convenience for stupid speed

[hearty cloud]

I call them one trick pony's. But man...they do that one trick very very well

[manic elbow]

What's that one trick exactly?

[hearty cloud]

Massive aperture, low f ratio wide field imaging. And.........that's about it

[manic elbow]

Also you can turn an sct into a rasa

Yeah exactly

They're also really inconvenient in general

[hearty cloud]

Bro settle down i was heading there..

That's why I'm a big fan of hyperstars and sct reducers

An edge8 or an edge 9.25 with a hyperstar is one hell of a system

[manic elbow]

But if you're doing a very specific thing they're great

[hearty cloud]

A rasa is a shit load of money for doing one single thing haha

[manic elbow]

Fr

They're also inconvenient

Can't use a filter wheel, stupid cam placement

[hearty cloud]

Tbf if you're using a hyperstar the camera is going in the same spot

[manic elbow]

Ok yeah ik

They're the same thing p much

I'd definitely go with a hyperstar sct over the rasa tho, it's not much more and more versatile

Also not to hate on scts, I love my c8. 2k fl is just a l o t

[hearty cloud]

I very much like efficient uses of equipment, especially in a hobby like this that is, let's face it, superfluous. It's the reason why I don't have a guide camera and a planetary camera for example, I just have an asi585 that does both. To me the idea of say an edge8 or c8 (or any other sct derivative) being used at native 2000mm, reduced to 1600mm or a hyperstar at the 450ish mm....all out of a single scope, is much more appealing

[manic elbow]

I do the same thing with my guide cam too lmao, dual purpose ftw

[hearty cloud]

Tbh it's also the reason I sold my Skymax 150 and bought the C8. I still kind of regret it to this day, that Skymax was incredible. Absolutely incredible. But it was kind of a one trick pony as well. Planets and the moon.

[subtle drift]

I have the ASIAIR

[floral echo]

i had to think for a while but i think ive come up with a watermelon pet-level take

equatorial mounts are overrated

[keen breach]

Kekw

I would rather use a power seeker for AP than go back to trashitude garbimuth

[floral echo]

but you can get the same thing you just need to tilt your scope?

ok continuing on a previous take of mine, "orion is overrated" its actually grown on me a lot

i still think its overrated but i get why people like it

[misty marsh]

Ngl alt az with a rotator is quite hot if executed well.

[keen breach]

That isn't how that works

[shell hatch]

too much calculation and stuff

[misty marsh]

It’s not that much more. You have software for it

[fossil barn]

eq>everything

[misty marsh]

Lmao

[fossil barn]

dont say nasa uses it

i already know

[misty marsh]

I mean, it’s better for beginners to get a hang of it. The only reason it’s better is it’s free. The UI is more confusing and it lacks a whole lotta features

Most of the stuff you learn in SiriL translates to pix a fair bit

[fossil barn]

siril or pix is better for beginners

?

[misty marsh]

Although, for big images sirils DBE is a bit faster to add points.

[misty marsh]

I would say SiriL to get a hang of it. But learning pix from the start is quite powerful

[misty marsh]

MSGR takes care of a lot of that though. I just gotta get the hang of it.

[fossil barn]

oh ok i was about to say thats not what i heard

i need noise exterminator and blurx really bad rn

[misty marsh]

SiriL has all the features you need to get a nice final image, but pix gets it that much further. Powerful denoise, masks and MSGR.

[fossil barn]

yeah

opinion on app?

i like app

[misty marsh]

I’ve heard a lot about it. Never tried it though

All the features I need I have in pix

[fossil barn]

i have and i like it its light pollution removal is godly

[hearty cloud]

If you have the dough just jump straight into pixinsight. You may as well

I've not, like elemcee said, learn on siril kn the meantime cause a decent amount of stuff will transfer over

[shell hatch]

another hot take not related to AP:

marks dont matter. memories do.

[fossil barn]

Rn for what I can do with siril it would be more worth to save for a new mount

[hearty cloud]

I totally agree

[inner aurora]

Globular Clusters are underrated

[narrow summit]

Yes, I really love them
Only problem is that they all look almost indentical

Also they're amazing to watch with a big enough scope

You can see hundreds of stars twinkling like diamonds...

[inner aurora]

I wouldn't say that the all look the same

Especially with the different star colors

Or background galaxies

[narrow summit]

Yeah sure, they're not indentical but definitely not as various as nebulas and galaxies

[keen breach]

ive only seen m13 visual

with my 5" dob it just looks like a fuzzy blob with a few stars

my observatory showed it with a 16" and it was beautiful

you could make out so many individual stars you couldnt even count\

[native parrot]

Fr first time I saw one visualy it was very surreal

[inner aurora]

I cloud see M13 through a 14" sct

And soon i can see some with my 16" dob

[floral echo]

I still haven’t seen a glob cluster but I’m going to keep trying

[inner aurora]

I think from dark sky you can see M13 with the bare eye

[narrow summit]

16"?
You lucky

[inner aurora]

I got it for free

[narrow summit]

Yes

[narrow summit]

[inner aurora]

But the Rockerbox was destroyed and i am building a new one now

[narrow summit]

HOW? I want to know how

[inner aurora]

And the mirrors especially the secondary needs to be recoated

[inner aurora]

One day i saw a Telescope for free on a platform that for yoused stuff. In the description was writen something like 400mm, i was hyped chatet instantly with the guy and then i convinced my parents to drive to Vienna to pick it up, and we did, there I picked it up (it did stand outside and the wood of the Rockerbox was completely socking. Then at home i discovered how bad the shape of the mirrors is, but i could still see a lot of objects with it. And now i am Building (my dad) the Rockerboxs and then maybe let the secondary be reacoated and then sometime the primary.

[fossil barn]

No

Disagree

Get boring fast

Though

They are the reason I got interested in starting astro

[keen breach]

come back to this statement in 3 months

maybe even 1

[fossil barn]

take: asi120mm mini is a pill bottle camera ngl

[narrow summit]

Ha what a shame that it was outside

But it's still a great deal

[inner aurora]

Yes

Not only for visuell but also for planetary or iss

And with a eq platform even deep sky lucky imaging

[fleet basin]

We don't need autofocusers and ASI airs. What makes this hobby fun is the amount of hours you spend outside frustrating over how you can't find focus or get your mount to slew and when you finally get a final image you feel like you deserved it after everything you put in

[inner aurora]

I am not a fan of the asair but I wouldn't support your take either

[hearty cloud]

Eh, I spent multiple years doing that stuff. I'm over it. At this point in time I'd rather plug everything in to my asiair and have a full imaging plan setup and rocking within 15min. Wake up in the morning to 7hrs or so worth of data.

[arctic rose]

Is the autofocuser a game changer?

[hearty cloud]

For two years I ignored an autofocuser, "meh...I have a bahtinov mask". I got one last summer on a whim cause they were in stock and I gotta say, it's a game changer.

Is it absolutely REQUIRED? No, but it is a massive quality of life improvement for sure, especislly for the cost. I paid like $230 for my zwo eaf? Get everything everything setup, hit the autofocus routine and it does it's thing. I consistently get better fwhm numbers than I was ever able to achieve with a bahtinov mask. Noticeably tighter stars.

Beyond that you can set it to run an autofocus routine depending on temperature changes (changing temps throughout the night will throw your focus off). I have mine set for every 2°c temp change. I also force an autofocus routine after a meridian flip

[arctic rose]

Damn, I don't even have a bahtinov mask, I just kind of "guess" 💀

I was supposed to laser cut one but I never got around to it

[arctic rose]

I'll probably get one later then, although I've never had problems with focus

[hearty cloud]

I said the same thing, but I am willing to bet this thing will get your focus better than you ever could tbh!

[latent grove]

NASA apod means nothing

[keen breach]

That sure is a hot take

[wind rampart]

nasa apod is cool

[floral echo]

I’m kinda with you there

I mean it would be a cool achievement but it’s not really something worth shooting for

[valid oriole]

fr it's just 2 guys with very subjective opinions

[hearty cloud]

I dont think it was ever meant to be anything more than a couple of astronomers picking cool astro pics each day?

Not sure if you're supposed to be looking into it any deeper than that, or finding any sort of meaning

[latent grove]

Reason why I said that is because sometimes, they pick badly over-processed images, and others which never deserved anything at all

[floral echo]

Or like when they didn’t choose Tom’s mars occultation

Like seriously what was up with that

Hot take: hall of fame here is more prestigious than NASA APOD

[misty marsh]

NASA apod > IOTD > HOF

[misty marsh]

If that were true I would have apod now

[floral echo]

I didn’t say apod was easier

But I think this is cooler

IOTD is cool

IOTD is APOD but if it was chosen by competent astrophotographers

[cedar maple]

IOTD > APOD

Apod has gotten meh

[strong sequoia]

not to mention, rgb filters may change the focus point so an autofocuser after the efw has changed the filter is useful

[hearty cloud]

Ahh good point!

I'm a osc guy currently so I never thought about that

In that case an autofocuser is almost required

At least to image the way I like to image (while sleeping)

[strong sequoia]

the way I've taken astro recently untracked has been watching netflix next to the camera

or wandering around the garden listening to music

[hearty cloud]

Nice. Get some cardio in

[fervent raven]

Not really

[peak drum]

@misty marsh, your gonna have a good time arguing eith this one, I'm having an argument with @fossil barn, he calls TPPA "Fake Pa" and you are not a real astrophotographer if you use TPPA. Hehe this is gonna start a war

[misty marsh]

Lmao

Why would you use the scope when you can get it far more accurate and faster with tppa

[fossil barn]

I didn’t say that

[peak drum]

You did

[misty marsh]

Although, I do use the polar scope because I’m quite wide, and TPPA doesn’t like my camera lens combo

[fossil barn]

Plus it’s better

Hejehrejrre

[fossil barn]

No

[peak drum]

You rlly did

[fossil barn]

No I said it’s fake

[misty marsh]

You’re a real astrophotographer if you enjoy the process of capture and processing. It’s all about the fun

[peak drum]

You said it ages ago

[fossil barn]

Yes

[peak drum]

Exactly

[fossil barn]

No

[peak drum]

Yes

[fossil barn]

No I didn’t

[peak drum]

You did

[fossil barn]

Lies

[peak drum]

Stop denying

[misty marsh]

It seems, watermelon, you have a hot take if nothing is working for you or you can’t afford it.

[peak drum]

Lmao

[fossil barn]

Go to lie ville

[fossil barn]

LOL

[peak drum]

This thread man

I love it

[misty marsh]

First guiding, then mono, now TPPA

[fossil barn]

fr

[peak drum]

I've convinced him of mono I think

[misty marsh]

Good

[peak drum]

He now wants a roki and 174mm

Heh

That will have issues

Prob

[misty marsh]

178 you mean

[peak drum]

Yes

Lol

[misty marsh]

Also, that camera isn’t great

[fossil barn]

Only cause I wanna get m31 gas

[misty marsh]

Get the 533mm.

[fossil barn]

No

[peak drum]

Yes

[fossil barn]

Expensive

[misty marsh]

The 178 is quite outdated

[fossil barn]

I’m poor

[misty marsh]

It has heaps of amp glow

[fossil barn]

Still poor

[misty marsh]

The well depth is less afaik

[fossil barn]

I was also thinking abt the Uranus c but idk abt that

[misty marsh]

Yeah. 15k vs 50k

That’s a massive difference

It means you won’t be able to get faint stuff as easily/at all

[fossil barn]

Full well?

[misty marsh]

Good camera yeah. But not cooled or mono

[misty marsh]

Yup

[fossil barn]

True

The 533 is like 800 I think

Nope 999

[peak drum]

@misty marsh do you reckon a 533 or 294? Idc abt Amp glow bcs darks

[fossil barn]

Read noise

[misty marsh]

Hmmm. I think the 533. But I’ll have to compare them.

[misty marsh]

Pretty irrelevant unless you are lucky imaging

[peak drum]

Yes the 533 has like slightly less read roise

[fossil barn]

Ig

[peak drum]

The 294 has more resolution and fw

And it's rectangular, which is easy to show on screens

[misty marsh]

The biggest factors are well depth (quite important) QE (quite important) and spectral response.

[misty marsh]

Hmm. What’s the fw on it

[peak drum]

61k I think

[misty marsh]

Also pixel size, larger pixels good for faint stuff. Smaller for more detail, to a point.

[misty marsh]

Ah righto, so not a huge difference but you will feel it

What about QE?

[fossil barn]

294mm

P

[misty marsh]

Thats quite decent

[peak drum]

1 = 294, 2= 533

It's actually quite close ngl

[misty marsh]

Yeah it is

Different cameras for different use cases almost

[fossil barn]

Tbh

I would just match it best to focal

Length

[misty marsh]

Smaller pixels on the 533, which is nice in some ways and worse in others

[peak drum]

Well in bin 2x2 it's 2.9 or something on 294

[misty marsh]

You’ll be well sampled with the max focal length you’ll use generally.

[peak drum]

And the camera is native 2x2 bin

[misty marsh]

Ahh

[fossil barn]

Yeah he’s at 350 fl tho

Pretty low

[peak drum]

But I might get a newt

1200mm

[fossil barn]

True

[peak drum]

Or a rc

[misty marsh]

Depends if you want fainter stuff or more detail

[fossil barn]

Both

[peak drum]

Ow that's hard

Ig the 294 is fainter ay?

[fossil barn]

No

[misty marsh]

1200 you’ll be sampled well enough. I’m oversampled slightly with 2.9um. Bin 2 and it’s well sampled

[fossil barn]

Wait

Yes

[misty marsh]

I’m not sure if it’s hardware binning or what. They list bigger pixels with the same qe

Probably best to ask someone with more knowledge lmfao

[peak drum]

Lmao ok

[fossil barn]

[misty marsh]

I’m a bit retarded with comparing good camera to good camera, much better knowledge on “should I use my phone or buy a asi6200mc”

[peak drum]

Lmao

[fossil barn]

I just know how to take a picture tbh 😂

[peak drum]

Omg in the server list ur at the top rn

[fossil barn]

Often

[peak drum]

King

Lol

[fossil barn]

Idea

[peak drum]

Lmao

[fossil barn]

I’m the best Protostar

[peak drum]

There is only 6 online and one of them is a bit

Bot

[fossil barn]

A bit yeah

[peak drum]

I need to sleeppppp

[candid river]

imaging the sun is underated

those solar flares are beautiful

[river marten]

Diffraction spikes are just the price you pay of a newtonian. Better to have diffraction spikes than chromatic aberration. Imagine spending 10k on a telescope that gets outperformed in every way by a 1k 10 inch newtonian. I blame my bad images on the light pollution, bad camera, and bad post processing ability

[river marten]

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap221122.html THIS got APOD. It's a good photo but it's not outstanding. I see new outstanding photos every day.

[patent vale]

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1260926?fbclid=IwAR2YhQg6gAeTeblz4GIq8g7J8iLOLhl4n6IliEY5ceXxL_nsbk2L2Xqkh9g

[patent vale]

There is also a star spike mask to remove them

[inner aurora]

w opinion and w name

[arctic rose]

You also pay in weight and movability (to darksites)

[hearty cloud]

Not to mention that newtonians feature their own optical issues like coma or having to deal with collimation

Every piece of equipment has pros and cons

[river marten]

HUGE misconception. an APO with the same resolution will be heavier than the Newtonian. Compare a sky watcher quattro 200p to their esprit 150 APO

[river marten]

a good coma corrector will get rid of coma and add minimal chromatic abberation

[hearty cloud]

Hmmmm

And a good triplet or petzval all but eliminates ca...

See what I mean?

[river marten]

with a refractor you need at least 3 opical elements to reduce the chromatic aberration, then a field flattener, then you get to the camera

[hearty cloud]

Everything has pros and cons, one being inherently better than the other is kind of a false idea

[river marten]

Ok well here is a big con. price

for the cost of a 6 inch APO you could get a 20 inch newtonian

a 20 inch newtonian will outperform a 6 inch APO in every way

[arctic rose]

I almost went for a 10inch but the 71 refractor I got instead is so small and versatile

[river marten]

that's like saying I wanted a boeing 747 but got a cessna citation and the cessa citation is so small and more versatile

a 10 inch newtonian can resolve smaller objects

[hearty cloud]

Put it this way, go take a look at what the vast majority of astrophotographers use....

Gonlook at "best telescopes for astrophotographery" lists...

[arctic rose]

It does everything I want it to do

[river marten]

that's not to say you made the wrong choice but you have to compare things based on one common goal

[hearty cloud]

Acting like refrsctors are inferior in anyway is silly

[arctic rose]

Plus the 747 needs a longer runway (larger mount)

[hearty cloud]

They're the go to piece of equipment for a reason

[river marten]

Just as the people who buy the cessna citation aren't interested in bigger cargo capacity, you aren't interested in the higher resolution and faster imaging times of a newtonian

[hearty cloud]

If you're up to 10" of aperture why would you use a friggin newtonian though? Get an sct like a boss at that point

[river marten]

for the cost yes.

SCT's are slow

RASA's have too big of an obstruction

[arctic rose]

Can we agree, reflectors planetary and galaxies, refractors wide field deep space and a bit of galaxy

[hearty cloud]

Hell no. An sct or a mak for planetary. Waaaayyy ahead of a newtonian

Get that focal length baby

[arctic rose]

Scts have mirrors?

[river marten]

an SCT resembles a newtonian more than it does a refractor

[river marten]

at the back. the lens is just to correct problems that their spherical mirrors have

RC is the best for planetary. JWST is a RC

[arctic rose]

I mean there is a reason that camera lenses are made from glass not mirrors

[hearty cloud]

? I'm just saying an sct or mak is superior for planetary over a newtonian

[river marten]

because small mirrors are bad

[arctic rose]

But also a reason why NASA uses reflectors

[river marten]

mirrors are better because they are easier to make big

[arctic rose]

Exactly

[river marten]

I'll admit refractors fo perform better for a given size but little else

[hearty cloud]

Newtonians are great if you don't have the money for a cassegrain or reflector, I'll give them that. Good bang for your buck

Can't beat them at that

[river marten]

why not get a long newtonian. If it's long than coma is a non issue, and there is nothing to blur the image since it is so long it doesn't need a coma corrector or barlow lens

[hearty cloud]

I've not seen a newtonian that's 3000-4000mm without a barlow

[arctic rose]

You can't just say that Newtonians are better tho, a decent 6 inch plus coma corrector will perform similarly to a small ed scope in most situations

[hearty cloud]

Cassegrains are nice and compact

[arctic rose]

I have, it was weird

Super looooong

[hearty cloud]

And probably homemade or so.ethjng using a sonotube

[arctic rose]

Yeah

[hearty cloud]

Exactly

[river marten]

I will make one the moment I get a grinding kit

[hearty cloud]

Haha

[river marten]

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/590964-first-light-125-f100-newtonian-dob-planet-killer/

[hearty cloud]

Yeah that's silly

And not at all practical for 99% of people

Or commercially available

Pretty cool though

I'd love to try grinding my own mirrors one day

It looks kinda zen, calming

[arctic rose]

Only until you get interrupted and mess up

[hearty cloud]

Zen mode ----- DELETED

Rage mode --- activated

[peak drum]

Ik I'm a little late but a hyperbolic mirror is best, no coma, no CA, can be fast and slow, it's perfect, and if you don't like diffraction then yes use the spike mask *** A N D R E M O V E T H E M ***

Basically I'm saying an RC is probably the best

[river marten]

Wait no coma on hyperbolic mirrors?

[peak drum]

Nope

[river marten]

I want to grind my own mirror someday but the biggest obstacle seems to be finding mirror blanks with a cheap price

And testing the mirror

If I will grind it I'd grind it hyperbolic

[peak drum]

And RC's don't have back focus or anything, so as long as you don't add in a reducer you can have as much camera gear as your mount can take

[peak drum]

Cool

Grind down a peice of glass, the once in the shape you want coat it with aluminum and coat over that with a hydrophobic clear paint prob

Making a mirror cell might be the hardest part ngl

Well for short fl a petsvalt refractor is best, but for longer fl an RC is best

[inner aurora]

Newtons > Scts and all because there cheaper and you get a nice F Ratio (resulting that Newtons are the best for Deep sky lucky imaging)

[arctic rose]

Tollen's reagent

You have to be careful tho, it's apparently very difficult to do it

[latent grove]

The weight should be a factor

I would say that refractors are one of the highest quality instruments in their respective aperture/weight

The 20” you were talking about may be much larger, but the optical quality you could get with a similar priced refractor would crush the newtonian.

[misty marsh]

Ehh, everyone uses newts for a reason. No one makes a 16” SCT.

And the extra glass and mirrors in SCTs could quite possibly degrade the image quality lower than the equivalent sized newt

[latent grove]

Aren’t the best telescopes by the ~14”+ range usually taken over by dall kirkhams and ritchy chretien telescopes?

So not scts, newts or refractors

[misty marsh]

Yeah

Except 16” dobs. The ideal amateur planetary telescope

[latent grove]

Imagine lugging that beast outside

[misty marsh]

Imagine the images from that bad boy

[latent grove]

Fitting it into the garage must be a whole different story

Can’t have the car and the dob in the same garage

[peak drum]

Yeah I didn't realize HOW BLOODY HUGE a 16" dob is until yesterday

Nearly a car tire in diameter

In that same room, a 6000/300mm refractor

[hearty cloud]

Wtf

[river marten]

APOs are heavier

[latent grove]

A 20” newt would weight likely 5x of its refractor counterpart

[river marten]

For the aperture but not for the weight. The sky watcher esprit 150 weighs almost as much than the Quattro 250p. Despite this extra heft it has a slower focal ratio and costs 10 times as much. Great scope but if I had 10k to spend on a scope I'd spend 1k on a newtonian and move than 8k toward the mount and the camera.

[river marten]

A reflector with the same resolution as the equivalent refractor will be lighter

[river marten]

I once looked through a 36 inch and I had to climb a ladder to look through it. This thing was nearly as big as the pickup truck that carried it.

Nathan I'm not saying refractors are bad, it's just there are so many misconceptions like "they are lighter" or "good for beginners"

Refractor are good for good performance in a tiny package

[latent grove]

Focal ratio and aperture play a large role, but isn’t all to what makes a telescope great. A 100mm takahashi would dominate a 20” newtonian in artifacts, field flatness and others even though it is significantly smaller

[river marten]

To me it's like asking which is better, a Honda Jet or an Airbus A380 and the Honda Jet buyers say theirs is better to the A380 buyers because they use a smaller runway

[latent grove]

I was making a comparison towards the 6in refractor and 20”, otherwise 100% agree

[river marten]

Fair enough. I brought that up mostly to give an idea of the cost. I'd understand why someone who wants portability and performance regardless of cost would get a refractor.

[peak drum]

This thread needs to change from "Hot Takes" to "Debaiting"

Lol

[river marten]

But I kept on getting told don't get a reflector as a beginner. I bought a reflector and I love it, I blame my bad photos on light pollution, bad camera, and bad post processing

[latent grove]

Must be due to the collimation

[hearty cloud]

Like I said above, there's a reason astrophotographers tend to lean towards refractors eh....

[hearty cloud]

Nothing worse than bad advice, or when people make collimation out to be worse than it is

[river marten]

Collimnation is EASY. The biggest lie ever told is collimnation is hard. Big refractor doesn't like their market share being eaten by Issac Newton's new invention so they run smear campaigns and target vulnerable beginners.

[latent grove]

Big refractor

[hearty cloud]

Haha

[latent grove]

You caught us, me and phunky were hired by the three letter agency to smear newton

[hearty cloud]

I mean to be fair, a short focal length refractor is a fsr superior scope to recommend a beginner. It's just way easier to manage

[latent grove]

The agency is called APO

[hearty cloud]

I'm agent CA, this is my partner NoCollimation. We need to have a word about your obsession with newtonians

[river marten]

Sometimes 800mm is annoying because of the cheap mount I'm using but I'd rather have a scope that is big and bulky and cumbersome but performs equally well than one that seems easy and manageable but I eventually want a bigger one for the high resolution.

[misty marsh]

When the 250mm f/4 refractor drops I’ll consider one

[latent grove]

You need hulk arms to carry that

My 120mm weighs 30lbs already

[misty marsh]

Lol

[latent grove]

Counterpoint: Spiky stars are hideous

[misty marsh]

It really depends how you integrate them

[river marten]

Bloated stars are even uglier

[latent grove]

All instruments suffer from bloat

[river marten]

When I used a kit lens at 70mm F4

[misty marsh]

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/2301/ConeNebula_Dieterich_1370.jpg

Todays apod. Very nice spikes

[latent grove]

Horrible image

[misty marsh]

So are you

[latent grove]

Absolutely disgusting

[misty marsh]

[river marten]

Ngl the internal reflections are bad, but not THIS bad

[latent grove]

Stars aren’t plus signs

[river marten]

DSLR with kit lens at 300mm

[latent grove]

Big reflector is lying to you

[river marten]

Why didn't they just grind a 5 meter wide lens for JWST?

[hearty cloud]

I mean that's a personal thing in the end, but I agree for the most part. The spikes look cheesy to me

[latent grove]

They used hexagons

Can’t count that as a newt

[river marten]

Sorry, 5 5 meter wide lenses because you need to correct chromatic aberration, then you need to correct the uneven field without introducing any more aberration.

[river marten]

It's a Ritchey Cretien

[latent grove]

Ritchey invented it, not Newton

[river marten]

Why isn't the extremely large telescope in Chile not just a 35 meter wide magnifying glass

[river marten]

Mirror vs lens, same debate

[latent grove]

I was debating about newts vs refractors

Reflectors 100% win in larger apertures

[subtle drift]

[inner aurora]

Newts. are best because there easy to upscale...

[lethal vortex]

https://tenor.com/view/oh-snap-ohsnap-gif-18271233

[narrow summit]

Newts are definitely better for beginners that don't want to spend a lot of money
For 200€ you're gonna have a 130mm dob with which you'll see plenty of DSOs and reasonable details on planets while for the same price, you'll have a 70mm refractor full of ca with a shtty mount and it's probably gonna discuss a lot of people from astronomy

Of course I'm talking visual

For beginners in ap I really think there's no right answer

Both have their pros and cons

And when you can spend more money, refractors tend to be better for rather wide fields and reflectors are kinda the only option for higher fl

[brazen wedge]

Newts are better in general. Even for widefield you buy a 150/600 newt and a starizona 0.75x reducer. Here you go you have a 450mm f3 scope

And still cheaper than f5 apo with this focal lenght

[strong sequoia]

I think refractor vs reflector comes down to different strokes for different folks

reflectors are cheaper but more cumbersome and refractors are smaller but more expensive

[river marten]

as an owner of a newtonian I disagree about widefield. refractors with 8mm focal length are common these days

You cannot get a newtonian with a 8mm focal length

[river marten]

More cumbersome is a bad argument against newtonians because for a given resolution a newtonian will always be lighter

Refractors are good for if you want the best images in a tiny package no matter what the cost

One of the best views I have ever gotten was in a 6 inch astro-physics refractor at a star party

Only the largest of dobsonians could beat it for planetary views

As for deep sky the benifits of a larger aperture were clear

[river marten]

In this picture, you can see issac newton, the inventor of the newtonian giving the first ever anti refractor lesson

[river marten]

On the left side you see a prism to mock the chromatic aberration, a bloated star right above it. On the left side you see the moon which is somehow even smaller than the star because in a refractor it would be bloated so much. You also see the water is nice and clear, everything on the refractors side is blurry

[brazen wedge]

I mean. That is more of a camera lens. I thought we were talking only about telescopes

[river marten]

refractor = lens

[brazen wedge]

Yeah. But not a telescope haha

[river marten]

time to put an eyepiece on a fisheye lens and see what happens

will I be able to see behind me?

[brazen wedge]

There is a nikon lens that lets the camera see behind itself

[river marten]

refractor users ^

[river marten]

how?

[brazen wedge]

The most mature refractor user

[brazen wedge]

I think it is something like 6.5mm for full frame. It has something like 200° fov

[river marten]

Ok here is my hot take

M42 is a useless thread size

too big for 1.25 inch telescopes, too small for 2 inch ones

m48 fits nicely with 2 inch eyepiece barrels

Most coma correctors are made with M48 threads

It was so annoying having to find an M48 canon adapter when they are all T2

I want M48 because the T2 blocked too much light and I could not get the backfocus right

[inner aurora]

Weakest Newton user...

[lethal vortex]

“You see, when you shine light through glass you get chromatic aberration”

[river marten]

It's the inventor roasting refractors

[fossil barn]

No

[fossil barn]

Fr

[fossil barn]

CANON>NIKON

HEHEHEHA

[floral echo]

I think that entire debate is stupid. They both have perfectly good cameras for ap, by the time you get to the top of the line models you might as well use a dedicated camera instead

[misty marsh]

Nah

Canon is miles behind Nikon in sensor tech

A 10 year old Nikon will definitely outperform the equivalent priced 10 year old canon

Even modern canon is still 10 years behind

My 10 year old D750 is better than the latest canon in a lot of ways

[brazen wedge]

Disagreed. Canon was not behind 10 years ago but it is 100% behind now

[misty marsh]

They have always been lesser imo

[brazen wedge]

Imo they are behind now because they still have their sensor in the meanwhile everyone else is starting to use the super sexy sony ones

[misty marsh]

I want an IMX wife

[brazen wedge]

Our childer gonna be named imx533

[river marten]

To be fair most of that is from lifting the newtonian onto the mount.

[inner aurora]

I have not problem carrying my 16" and I am 15

[river marten]

If you can afford a canon camera good enough for AP you could easily do better with a mono camera and lrbg filters which would have the same colors too.

[brazen wedge]

Now tell me what mono camera with lrgb filters i can get for 500 eur. That will beat modded canon 6d

[fervent raven]

Cap

[inner aurora]

No (it is like 36kg)

[floral echo]

Yes we get it you’re big and strong

[inner aurora]

No i just want to get the news away that newts are heavy

[floral echo]

Newts are heavy

Not all newts are heavy but large newts are definitely heavy

[river marten]

The sensor will be smaller. Also your talking about the 500 euro range when DSLRs can cost more than that

[narrow summit]

Nah, large scopes are heavy

The light gathered / weight ratio is definitely better with newts

[inner aurora]

The size weight factor mostly goes down, the bigger the newt gets

[floral echo]

Yes I know that but saying that any large telescope isn’t heavy is silly

[brazen wedge]

But after you pay more than 500eur you will not see much of a improvement

[hearty cloud]

imo if you're paying 500+ you should just forget dslr's and get a proper astro cam ffs

If you're only looking to spend 100-200 yeah fine whatever, dslr it up. That's probably all you can do anyways

[brazen wedge]

Agreed. If you will spend more than 500 you should just save up for 183mc

[sudden shore]

wait till you're 16

[lethal vortex]

Wait till you're 40

[cedar maple]

andromeda is really ugly. but fun to shoot.

[narrow summit]

I half agree

[latent grove]

Hot take: Solar astrophotography

[fossil barn]

kit lens>roki

[inner aurora]

Visual Astronomy is underrated

[fossil barn]

it can be cool not gonna lie

[misty marsh]

you are dumber than i thought

[fossil barn]

no kit lens just better

[arctic rose]

Depends on what the kit lens is 💀

[misty marsh]

how

[fossil barn]

it has 18-55 mm 🤯

[misty marsh]

zoom is horrible

[fossil barn]

and f/4-5

ish

[misty marsh]

its the worst possible thing for astrohphotography

[fossil barn]

not for widefield astro

[misty marsh]

well duh

[fossil barn]

uh no a phone is worse

[misty marsh]

the roki isnt for shooting milky way

actually

[fossil barn]

its better

[arctic rose]

Sure better for portraits

[misty marsh]

the new pic in #🏆-hall-of-fame was with a roki

[misty marsh]

are you dumb

[fossil barn]

ok and????

[misty marsh]

because im showing they are for milky way idot

[fossil barn]

yes

but one shot

not mosiac

[misty marsh]

if you want to shoot milky way, get the rokinon 24mm or the sigma 40 1.4

[misty marsh]

thats like saying a car makes a bad plane because it has no wings.

[fossil barn]

or use the 18-55 which is good

[misty marsh]

it is horrible at the lower focal lengths

and its a zoom

[fossil barn]

hmmm so gud

[misty marsh]

zoom is the worst thing.

[fossil barn]

it requies skillz\

[misty marsh]

im convinced you just call anything you cant afford thats over $10 "bad"

[fossil barn]

no sgp 400 and its the best

eq6r the awesome

[misty marsh]

mate

we are talking about how you said a kit lens is better than a roki

[fossil barn]

cem25 - 120 great

[fossil barn]

its true

[misty marsh]

...

roki is 2 stops faster