antares vs celestron focal reducer

Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1100 Learn More. (Note: Using the simple equations above, the focal length of this reducer can be estimated to be about 350mm). With spring galaxy season here, I decided to pick up a couple more to compare in a head-to-head shoot out. I was originally hoping to do this with a made in Japan Celestron, but ended up with a newer China version but thats probably better in the end since it is the version now available, with the Japan ones rarer and only available used. Your mileage may vary. Learn more about extra solar planets imagery, 3D Star rendering, observation planning, telescope control, multiple-panel printing, and much more. Never noticed any anomalies with this unit. Thank you so much for the informative article, I now understand better how to integrate my reducer into my system to get better performance. The Antares is supposed to be pretty comparable. I have a made in Japan 6.3 R/C and a made in China 6.3 R/C. The lens that the ZWO comes with give a perfect wide angle image of what is in front of it. Manish Panjwani has been an active amateur astronomer since before Halley's Comet last flew by our neighborhood. That was fun. First, I wanted to compare the actual reduction provided by these competitors, as many threads here cite different ideal spacing from the reducer to eyepiece focal plane to achieve the correct f/6.3 result. Because of their distinct optical design, slower Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes (SCT) with focal ratios of f/10 require a different design of focal reducer compared to refractors. Again, swapping back and forth for a couple of hours on M44, M35, and several brighter stars, I examined the shape of specific stars near the edge of the field with both correctors. In both cases will end with a similar tfov. Many reducers, such as the Celestron HD focal reducer mentioned above, and many focal reducers for apochromatic refractors, are meant to be used within a few millimeters (or less) of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. As one increases, the other decreases. In practice, it's important to remember that you will rarely operate at the exact working distance and at the exact reduction factor that is specified. Its a good thing I have the super lube handy or my neighbors wont be happy with me.come to think of it, Im sure the small mammals here wouldnt be thrilled either! If a stronger level of focal reduction is used, say 0.5x, then the image circle may be too small to fill the sensor of larger cameras. The amount of reduction is simply the percentage by which a reducer shortens the effective focal length of a telescope and is calculated as (1 Reduction Factor) x 100%. Figure 7 shows an example of an image of the Dumbbell Nebula taken with a 1.25" GSO focal reducer at a reduction factor of 0.63x with an 85mm f/7 refractor and a QHY5III-290M camera with a sensor with a 6.4mm diagonal. With this telescope and this focal reducer, it does not help to move to a 2" eyepiece and a 2" diagonal as the visual view will be akin to looking through a porthole within the larger apparent field of view of the eyepiece. Benefits limited to hardware and conditions? We only send interesting emails and will never sell your data. EclipSmart solar products feature Solar Safe filter technology providing the ultimate protection from harmful solar radiation, including both IR and UV light, and filters 99.999% of visible light. A longer effective focal length leads to higher magnification with a given eyepiece for visual observers. Several functions may not work. However, the China 6.3 R/C has noticeable internal reflections that I haven't figured out yet. The telescope side of the barrel is often threaded with an M48 x 0.75 thread for standard 2" astronomy filters. Upon close inspection, it was clear that the housing of Antares assembled in Canada version was a little more substantial than the Celestron. The Buyer's Guide To Eyepieces at the top of the Eyepieces forum has a column for this spec. Sign up to get exclusive deals, observing tips, and new product announcements. Unique focal reducer and field corrector lens accessory, Reduces the focal length and f/ ratio of your Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope by 37%, Provides a dual focal ratio instrument, without sacrificing image quality, Compatible with all Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes (see compatible list in description). This innovative software solves the time-consuming problem of trying to pinpoint the North Celestial Pole. With the Celestron Reducer/Corrector Lens, thats precisely what you get. I think there may be some confusion here, because Antares makes a variety of reducers for eyepieces and scopes in addition to this SCT R/C but this definitely is a reducer/corrector. No small animals were harmed in making these observations. So Celestron buyers like Celestron, Meade buyers like the Meade and Antares buyer like the Antares. You cannot, for example, use a 0.63x focal reducer intended for a standard Celestron or Meade SCT and use it on a Celestron Edge HD or a Meade ACF. It also leads to larger (although fainter) images of extended objects like the Moon or planets for astrophotographers or visual observers. Wow, that is a very detailed discussion! However, I noticed immediately that the Antares had a bit more of an heft to it, giving it a solid feel the Celestron didnt possess. Because I have not heard any complaints about the made in China R/C. Still not sure what is the right gear for you? Equation 6 & 7 item two & three does not make sense, both say increase its reduction (one should say reduce its reduction?). It must be in stock at the time of Price Match for us to make a guarantee. Based on Test 1 and Test 2, I think there is perhaps more validity to opposing statements here in these forums that the Antares and current China-made Celestron do, indeed, have exactly the same optics just with different housings and branding. He received his first telescope at the age of 5 and completed his first university course in astronomy at the age of 12, eventually receiving a master's degree in the subject. The easiest way to use a focal reducer is to make sure you place it at the specified working distance in front of your camera or eyepiece. Many focal reducers are meant to be used within a few millimeters of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. Start here to find the perfect telescope for you! Looking forward to the day when I can do a shoot-out between a Japan and China Celestron, just for kicks. Nowadays I tend to use the Celestron more with my refractors for imaging and viewing. The author finds differences in throughput and color balance, but then says he thinks the lenses are identical and he reaches his conclusions based on very long observing session. I'd favor the Japanese Celestron version over the others that are commercially available. Can you tell me about the use of reducers in Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes? If I had to guess, the difference is maybe 10-15 grams. Meade does not make an equivalent line of focal reducers for the ACF scopes, although some models of Meade ACF are already at f/8, faster than the f/10 ratio of Celestron Edge HD scopes. For example, a 0.8x reducer placed at the working distance provides a reduction of (1 0.8) x 100 = 20%. Generally, views through the Antares seemed a little more transparent and brighter. Focal reducers for many SCTs and their flat-field equivalents usually have a back-focus distance of 105mm. It covers the basic optics and design specifications of a focal reducer, and goes through some practical factors to consider when selecting and using a focal reducer. A couple of tiny dust particles between lens elements, uneven lens edge blackening, very minor coating blemishes, or even a very small fine lens scratch or two are very common in this Antares product and must be accepted as normal for this item. That includes, for example, a 1.25" eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 68 and a focal length of 24mm (eg. Your wishlist has been temporarily saved. But the diameter of the image circle decreases by a factor of 0.63 to about 24mm. I wonder whether, for example, Antares focal reducer for SCT belongs to the latter category. They both are great and I doubt my eyes could detect a difference in any one of them including the Japan version. In many cases, the answer is yes, especially for electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA). In terms of reduction and correction - which are what reducer/correctors are supposed to do - both are superb. JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. I have the Antares and am not unhappy with it, but for AP I would want more back focal distance if those numbers are accurate. Now It only focuses near things, like some kind of macro zoom. Newtonian reflectors will seldom be able to accommodate the in-focus travel demanded by focal reducers. The reducer is we might presume designed to correct to some as yet un-measured extent, the image of a standard SCT. I have Hirsch focal reducer, which is yet another clone of the Celestron reducer. No negative issues to report. Imagine having two telescopes in one a long focal length instrument for lunar and planetary work and a short focal length scope for deep sky observing and astrophotography. Explicitly designed for Celestron Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes, this unique lens reduces your telescopes focal length and f/ ratio by 37%, turning your long focal length telescope into a fast, short focal length instrument. I read another thread in a different forum about F6.3 reducer correctors and one amateur posted an image about glue coming out of an astromania f6.3 reducer which he planned to return. What is likely is that fatigue sets in, and also that as the targets move toward or a way from the meridian there will be changes for that reason alone. This is a. ED glass is specially formulated and contains rare-earth compounds that greatly reduce a visual defect called chromatic aberration. I've never found my 0.63 reducer causing CA when used with my SCT. No idea what the issue is. If used before or beyond the working distance, unwanted image distortion may result, especially when using cameras with larger sensors. The visual back must be removed first. But I am rusty, can you condense a bit for me please? What an enjoyable read and detailed comparison. 800-483-6287 Stock focusers in an SCT move the mirror of the scope to change the position of the focal plane, and they have sufficient travel to accommodate a focal reducer.

Knox Community Hospital Birth Announcements, How Much Does Takeover Boost Attributes 2k22 Current Gen, Manner Of Living Where Some Ways Are Now Unbecoming, Ford Max Recline Seats For Sale, White Watery Discharge Before Period, Articles A