M42 Fluorite vs. ED

[FOOTPRINT]

Hi All,
I finally scored a small Fluorte scope (Vixen FL70S) to compare with an ED glass Scope, my results (first go) herewith, both Pix. were 5 Exp. at ISO-800, added, DF removed, guided on an LX200 + MX7C, the Fluorite looks sharper in detail, colour different to the ED, but im still working on it to get some results I can really compare, the weather has not ben kind though, I thought this might be of general interest and maybe someone else has some Pix. for comparisons.

cheers......Jim

[rogerg]

Interesting. Would you mind posting JPG versions of the RAW files so we can compare pre-processing alterations?

It's plain to see from the 2 pics posted so far that the APO is sharper. It's the difference between a great image and a tac sharp great image.

I've often wanted a Vixen APO, they make nice stuff.

:thumbsup:

[gbeal]

Good comparison, but one which often gets me. I can never make the same conclusions when I have to open one, look at it, then close and open the other. I often feel it would be better to have both open at once, is this possible?
Gary

[RB]

Just click on each image without closing them. Resize each window and place side by side.

:)

[ballaratdragons]

or you can do this :lol:

The APO does seem to show more very faint stars, but also, the ED does look a tad out of focus. :shrug:

Either way, nice pic :thumbsup:

[seeker372011]

Yes the apo certainly looks good on this comparison doesn't it, but is it as Ken suggests to do with better focusing on the apo image?

[FOOTPRINT]

Hi All,
Many thanks for all the comments, and Roger herewith 1 of each CRW "RAW" frame (resized & JPGd) from each picture (new ED M-42 attd. w/sharper focus & Raw Frame is CRW-5925), CRW-0075 is the Fluorite one, hope to get some more testing done if/when the weather ever clears, Exposure time for this M42 Pix. was 6 Min. also, (6 x 6 Min. Exp. DF removed.)

cheers.....Jim