BabyQ vs FLT110

[pmrid]

Weather was closing in and I had time for 90 minutes - so I ran luminance only on these 2 scopes - A BabyQ FSQ85EDX at f5.3 with an SXVR_H16 Astrodon filter on a Titan vs WO FLT110 at f7 with ATIK LE4000 (same sensor as the SX) with Astronomic filter on a G11. Both used OAG with Lodestar or equivalent.
The WO did the Witches Head with 10 min subs and the BabyQ did the Pleides in 5 min subs.
CCD Inspector says the Baby Q is as flat as a tack but the WO has a little tilt but both are well collimated.
The night before I had done some runs on M33 with the same setup but doing full LRGB. The results are iteresting.
I love the BabyQ but am pretty darned happy with the WO as well.
Peter

[Larryp]

All the images look excellent, Peter. Both are good scopes, aren't they?:)
I think I prefer the larger image of M33-there is more detail in the core.

[RickS]

Good work, Peter! I expect you'd see a significant difference between the scopes with a larger sensor.

Cheers,
Rick.

[pmrid]

Thanks Laurie, Rick.
You're right about the larger sensor Rick, but the balancing factor, for me,has been that I can use a 7-slot FW with this sensor and 1 1/4 inch filters - keeping the weight and cost way down. I am going to press on for a year or so with this image scale and do the best I can with it. Perhaps I will switch up again in time but for now I'm at a sweet spot.

Peter

[Ross G]

All good looking photos Peter.

Ross.