antares vs celestron focal reducer

Opticstar F6.3 Focal Reducer / Corrector. There may have been an almost imperceptible difference, but the Antares and Celestron were producing precisely the same reduction. This also resulted in the clear aperture of the Antares being about 39-39.5mm, versus the Celestrons 41mm. Today, our world-class team of optical and electronic engineers continues to push the boundaries of technology. They are commonly available in 1.25" and 2" threaded cells that conveniently thread into the nosepiece of a compatible camera or the barrel of an eyepiece. No negative issues to report. Start here to find the perfect telescope for you! Nebula Filters. No rainchecks will be issued for items out of stock at OPTcorp.com to match a competitor's price. It seems right to put some distance between the camera and the focal reducer, right? I am new to these optic topics, and I want to ask you what happens with Masutov like SW or Celestron 4 or 7 inches. Using an eyepiece with a 27mm field stop with the reducer will illuminate the edge the same as using an eyepieces with a 42.9mm field stop without it. Practical Considerations of Focal Reducers, 4.2 Back Focus Requirements of Focal Reducers, GSO makes focal reducers for their line of Ritchey-Chretien, Celestron makes a series of focal reducers for the Edge HD line, 0.75x focal reducers for these telescopes, focal reducer for an 8-inch Celestron EdgeHD, A Primer on T-Rings and T-Adapters for Astronomy and Astrophotography, Choosing the Best Telescope for Beginners 2023, Top Night Sky & Astronomy Events in August 2022, Top Night Sky & Astronomy Events in July 2022, Selecting a Baader Planetarium Star Diagonal, A Guide to Choosing Astronomy Eyepieces for Binoviewers, Choosing a Magnifying Finder Scope for Your Telescope, A focal reducer will provide its design reduction factor only when it is placed at the exact working distance from the focal plane of the eyepiece or camera, Reducing the operating distance, that is, moving a focal reducer closer to the eyepiece or camera increases its reduction factor, or conversely reduces the amount of focal reduction. 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. However, manufacturers virtually never provide this specification. Product Details. Unlike SCT telescopes, Ritchey-Chretien telescopes and Celestron Edge HD or Meade ACF scopes have internal optics that provide an inherently flat field, so these telescopes require a special focal reducer than does not provide additional correction for field curvature. Celestron Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 925 The EdgeHD .7x Focal Reducer Lens makes your EdgeHD 925 one full F-Stop faster than f/10, reducing your exposure time by half to capture the same brightness of object 5-element lens design Maintains similar. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 But is there a difference in quality between the Antares and the Celestron or Meade focal reducers? As a consequence, the standard f/6.3 and f/3.3 focal reducers for SCT scopes do not work. This appendix summarizes how this works based on simple equations from the book Telescope Optics by Rutten and van Venrooij. However, even though the imprint on the item states "Reducer / Corrector" please note that his is a reducer only. Focal reducers (and focal reducer/field flatteners combos) are usually used with two types of telescopes, refractors and compound telescopes such as Schmidt-Cassegrain or Ritchey-Chretien. It is not a corrector or flattener. They both are great and I doubt my eyes could detect a difference in any one of them including the Japan version. Because I have not heard any complaints about the made in China R/C. These 0.63x focal reducers were originally designed to optimize for an image circle to match 36mm x 24mm film or its digital equivalent for astrophotography. Not noticed any optical problems. However, doesn't fit in the telescope and even if it did wouldn't work. If you place your camera at a different working distance, you will get a different reduction factor and perhaps unwanted distortion in the image. Fumbling around in the dark, fine threads might be a problem. Antares or Celestron? That includes, for example, a 1.25" eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 68 and a focal length of 24mm (eg. The two samples I have PERFORM IDENTICALLY. For Stephen Wilkerson: The ZWO ASI120MC-S does come with a wide angle lens, HOWEVER, it is NOT intended to used when you are using the ASI120 camera attached to your telescope. No retailers currently carry this product. Some manufacturers will specify the working distance from the middle of the rear lens surface, and this number must then be converted into a practical working distance number by subtracting the amount by which the rear lens surface is recessed in its housing. JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. The telescope side of the barrel is often threaded with an M48 x 0.75 thread for standard 2" astronomy filters. This is very impressive performance given how hard this problem is to mitigate in general. The equations and argument in the Appendix of this article shows the relationship between the working distance and the reduction factor. Never used one, but read the reviews here that suggest a coating problem. . Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, E of San Francisco Bay and W of the Awahnee, This is not recommended for shared computers, reviews here that suggest a coating problem, Back to Celestron Computerized Telescopes, Looking for advice on first refractor and camera. He tested this on an 8 Celestron , I have a Celestron 6SE. The C8 has no noticeable vignetting with a 32mm Plssl in the f/6.3 reducer. 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. (Note: Using the simple equations above, the focal length of this reducer can be estimated to be about 350mm). We do not price match competitors if they are out of stock. 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 equations in the Appendix show how this all works. The distances d1 andd2 can also be expressed in terms of the focal length of the focal reducer FR with the lens equation: Using Equation 2, Equation 1 can also be expressed in terms of d2: The focal reduction factor of the focal reducer depends on its focal length and its distance from the focal plane of the objective as shown by Equation 4: Again, for example, when the focal reducer is placed at the original focal plane of the objective, d1=0 and MR=1, which means there is no focal reduction. It has only one cover, which surprised me. You currently have javascript disabled. Your price: $579.00. All rights reserved. In these equations: The combined focal length of the objective and focal reducer is given by Equation 1: For example, when d1=0, that is, the focal reducer is at the focal plane of the objective, Fcomb=Fo, so the focal reducer has no effect. Theres a long-running debate in these forums and even statements from some reputable dealers that the Antares is just a reducer (even though it is labeled Reducer/Corrector), whereas the Celestron is a true R/C, which flattens the SCTs naturally curved field and provides some edge correction. So, this past week I challenged the Antares and Celestron models to a head-to-hear on my C8 on some decent nights of good seeing and transparency in my Bortle 5-6 urban skies. Product Details Antares' f/6.3 focal reducer provides a faster f/6.3 system for imaging or visual use when used with an f/10 SCT or other compatible telescopes. Thanks for the extremely valuable article. Regardless, the difference was miniscule and is more than adequate on both and exceeds a 8 or 6 SCTs baffle tube diameter. With the barrel 1.25 reducer won't focus, all I get is fuzzy snowballs. Celestron or Antares f/6.3 focal reducer for SCT? Also, the focusers of most Newtonians do not have enough in-travel to accommodate a focal reducer. For both imaging and visual observing, these reducers also improve image sharpness at the edge of the field by correcting for coma and field curvature. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. Easy solution found a very tiny dab of super lube on the threads and all was well and quiet.. The Antares focal reducer comes in small box. Perfect for the serious student, professional scientist and discriminating hobbyist. Please note, orders placed after 10am on 2/28/2023 will be delayed. More details are found in the Appendix of this article. InternetSales@optcorp.com. However, the export of some items may be restricted outside the US due to size or manufacturer restrictions. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 800 Learn More. Specially-designed focal reducers are available for use with these telescopes. There are many different types of focal reducers and they all effect. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 800 The camera side of the focal reducer is threaded for a T-adapter with wide M48 threads, or in some cases, with smaller M42 threads. The resultant reduction factor was measured to be 0.46x. Like many of us with SCTs, I have bought and sold a number of f/6.3 reducer/correctors over the years, and I have always been curious how they really stack up to each other. This article explains the basics of how focal reducers work with an astronomy telescope. Some are available in 1.25" barrel format but with C threads. Details: The item must be the identical item, brand name, size, weight, color, quantity and model number. The focus barely shifts between filters and I suspect any shifts I do get are down to the filters and changes in temp. Some third-party vendors also make reducers for SCT scopes. For this test, I used a single configuration R/C, Click-lock, and 1.25 diagonal with the adapter. Some refractors such the TeleVue Nagler-Petzval (NP), the Takahashi "FSQ", and the William Optics Redcat/WhiteCat 51 have inherently flat fields because of internal optical elements. The working distance or required back focus, explained above, is usually specified and is far more important in practice. These RC reducers cannot be used with other types of telescopes. I've only used it a few times but it looks good to me. Our proprietary StarBright XLT optical coatings dramatically increase transmission, up to 97.4% on our Schmidt corrector lenses. I only have the Celestron f/6.3. The Celestron is both a corrector and focal reducer and the Antares is just a focal reducer. Celestron's EdgeHD reducers feature a custom 5 element optical design engineered to maintain the flat-field performance of our award-winning EdgeHD optical system. I have an 8SE, and am thinking about getting a focal reducer. Overall, this reducer does a phenomenal job at preventing gradients due to internal reflections from the camera sensor back to the glass in the reducer, as I suffered with the Antares reducer. There will be no shipments on 3/1/2023, 3/2/2023, or 3/3/2023 (March 1st - March 3rd, 2023). Theoretically each of these combinations all varied-length light paths should have resulted in slightly different reductions between the Celestron and Antares, since they supposedly have different focal lengths. When using the diagonal, keep the field stops of the eyepieces under 20mm. No small animals were harmed in making these observations. The working distance (backfocus) of the Celestron f/6.3 reducer is specified to be 105mm from the base of the male SCT thread on the camera side. Michael 1 ronin Members As per the OP I still can't see any reason to buy the Celestron for significantly more $$$. Style: I also used several eyepieces including the ES 24mm/68, 17.5mm and 12.5mm Morpheuses, and a 10.5mm Pentax XL. However, some focal reducers can be used on other models of telescopes, but this is not always possible. This is a. Go behind the scenes with Celestrons product development team and learn more about our award-winning and patented innovations. But the smaller image circle means there is a limit to the field stop of an eyepiece that can achieve an unvignetted image. The focal length of a focal reducer is usually measured from the rear lens surface of the reducer (and not the reducer's housing). I have this one Opticstar F6.3 Focal Reducer / Corrector. 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. But nearly every observer who installs one of these devices is pleased with their performance. This standard distance is a consequence of the design of DSLR cameras for which the distance of the sensor to the outer edge of the flanges is about 45 mm, while the T-ring that attaches to the flange for astrophotography is about 10mm thick. WiFi technology encircles the globe in a web of connectivity, knowledge, and information. 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. DUE TO EXTREMELY HIGH DEMAND, WE WILL NOT BE TAKING NEW ORDERS UNTIL MONDAY, DECEMBER 14. They never really recovered from selling a few 15 years back with element reversed. The internal surfaces are blackened and glare-threaded to provide the highest contrast. ), but stars seemed a bit tighter and their colors were richer and more dramatic. Meade once made an f/3.3 focal reducer for SCT scopes. An image of about 24mm across, approximately, allows an observer to use a 1.25" eyepiece with a maximal field stop. Reviews. 1.2" in that scope is a field stop of 43mm at f/10 and 27mm at f/6.3. The most popular accessories for your new telescope! Any comments gratefully received. It was used strictly for imaging, not visual observing. Because most modern Newtonians already have relatively fast focal ratios, these telescopes do not usually use focal reducers. And when d1 = FR, that is, when the focal reducer is placed at a distance from the focal plane of the objective that's equal to the reducer's focal length, the focal length of the combined optical system is Fo, so it acts as a 0.5x reducer. Place the plastic covers on the lens when not in use to reduce the dust collection. For this shoot-out, I used a standard Celestron C8 with Starbright coatings. Melotte 15 - First Process in PixInsight (easy! If I had to guess, the difference is maybe 10-15 grams. Anyway, when purchased my R/C the "original" Celestron unit was not readily available and was offered instead the one sold under the shop's own label (in my case Tecnosky, but I saw the same product offered under TS label). Powered by Invision Community. Once focused it's pretty good. In this configuration, the 29.5mm camera nosepiece and a 6mm extension ring positions the reducer at a working distance of 53.5mm from the camera sensor, which is located 12.5mm inside the front edge of the camera. Edited by Tony Bonanno, 16 April 2021 - 06:44 PM. We will be glad to help. Sharpness is essentially the same. Most refractor manufacturers such as William Optics, Tele Vue Optics, Explore Scientific, Sky-Watcher, William Optics, and Stellarvue make their own focal reducers optimized for use with their telescopes. You also wont be unhappy spending the few extra bucks on the Celestron for the pretty orange lettering, particularly if you can pick one up used, as I did. So it provides a 0.63x design reduction factor when used with an f/10 SCT at the specified working distance. 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. The Reduction Factor and the Amount of Reduction are inversely related. As a result, the smaller tube may cut into the light cone and effectively reduce the working aperture of the telescope. CPWI has an extensive object database, employs PointXP mount modeling, and more. In terms of reduction and correction which are what reducer/correctors are supposed to do both are superb. Meade once made an f/3.3 focal reducer for SCT scopes. . I have the Antares and have no complaints. Brian Ventrudo is a writer, scientist, and astronomy educator. Celestron Nexstar+ 127 SLT, several budget plossl eyepieces, Celestron 8-24mm zoom EP and a 12.5mm illuminated double reticle EP, Svbony SV205 camera w/.5 focal reducer, Celestron SkyMaster 20x80 binos on a 40 yr old QuickSet PanHead tripod, Stellarium, Sharpcap and ManyCam on my laptop, SkyView and Nightshift on my phone and a dandy little $9 . Is that distance D= Fo-d1=Fo-(d2/MR)? I focus using a moonlight electronic focuser and focusmax. Right off the bat, I was struck by how similar the two R/Cs were. This telescope control software replaces the hand control and allows the user to remotely control their Celestron computerized telescope from their personal PC or laptop. As mentioned in Section 2 of this guide, the reduction factor of a focal reducer depends on its position in the optical path relative to the eyepiece or camera. The focal length and design working distance for this focal reducer were not available from the manufacturer. It is recommended for . Thanks guys, I'm trying to get my ZWO ASI120MC-S to work with my 90mm Meade. a Tele Vue Panoptic), or a Plossl eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 50 and a focal length of 32mm. If I had to chose one, I would base my decision on your level of light pollution perhaps the Antares for its slightly higher transmission if you live under less light polluted skies, but the Celestron for its greater contrast if you are dealing with a suburban or urban light dome. For example, the focal reducer for an 8-inch Celestron EdgeHD telescope has a design reduction factor of 0.7x and a specified working distance (or back focus) of 105mm. The more focal reduction, the further inward the focal plane will be. Generally, views through the Antares seemed a little more transparent and brighter. Most amateur astronomers are familiar with a Barlow lens (or a focal extender), a negative or diverging lens that effectively increases the focal length and the focal ratio of a telescope's objective lens. Can these economical focal reducers from GSO and other vendors result in good images? 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.

How To Update Ancel Ad410, Jason Mantzoukas Forehead, General Admission Silverstone, David Funeral Home Obituaries New Iberia, Show Me Whole Living Sweet Potato Quiche, Articles A