Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos
If you want to look at it from that respect then a smaller rig can catch up to a larger one, you just have to put more exposure time in to get there.
Just look at all of the images that get done with small refractors, take the FSQ106 as the perfect example!
|
Yeah I didn't go the good old FSQ route but went with the Esprit 100 and don't regret it - not that I have a frame of reference though! A fast-ish 4" is readily portable, but these apos grow up fast
Of course, that's what got me thinking about imaging newts, despite not being a big fan of diffraction spikes...but I wouldn't be looking to go above, say, 8" otherwise the practicality with an EQ6 goes flying out the window.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raymo
Did you mean that the larger objective would have twice the area of
the smaller one, or twice the diameter? If twice the area, the improvement
in resolution probably wouldn't be particularly obvious, but if twice the
diameter, fine detail, such as small craters on the moon would be better shown.
raymo
|
raymo, objective twice the area originally, although twice the diameter is another interesting data point!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir
Dunk, I think that for a portable setup a small fast refractor combined with a camera with small pixels can yield very pleasing results. That's why I got an f/6 4" triplet and matched it with a Riccardi, so I now have a neat and lightweight f/4.5 imaging tube that should work nicely with ICX814 and 3nm filters. Was quite busy with other commitments, but hoping to put an image together in the coming weeks (school holidays!), so will see if it is a worthwhile path. Could try to go faster with AP's 0.72x Quad Telecompressor Corrector, but it would be a more pricey option than a Riccardi and would need to check if that would work with a smaller refractor. I didn't go the well established FSQ path becuse I like a somehow longer FL of an f/6 4" triplet that gives me a second option of imaging with just a flattener and at a higher resolution.
|
And this is the crux of my inquiry, Suavi. With a nice compact apo and small pixels, how much am I _really_ sacrificing compared with, say, a fast imaging newt? My hunch is that I might lose out to the bigger scopes an excellent night, but how many of those come along on the east coast of Australia
Btw, I'd be keen to hear how you get on, not least with your Riccardi...