I think I remember hearing the reduction factor is slightly different, cant remember more or less reduction. My experience is that CN sellers are way above those listing elsewhere. This was most noticeable on the eyepiece end of the RC, where the metal rim surrounding the lens was about 1mm thicker than on the Celestron. Since the Celestron and Antares are supposed to have different focal lengths and spacing specs, I expected different results. For this shoot-out, I used a standard Celestron C8 with Starbright coatings. The naming convention of SCT focal reducers is a little confusing. Can these economical focal reducers from GSO and other vendors result in good images? A few people have reported issues with the male SCT thread diameter on this item being a bit larger than necessary. For Ritchey-Chretien telescopes such as those manufactured by GSO, there are also dedicated focal reducers with a reduction factor of 0.7x to 0.8x. That is definitely a 2" eyepiece, but it is not a large or long focal length 2" eyepiece. Images made with my ZWO 533 camera testing both show them to be essentially the same. Specially-designed focal reducers are available for use with these telescopes. 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. Performance wise what differences might there be using the reducer on a smaller scope. looks virtually identical, except for the lettering. When you said, "in some cases" a focal reducer also works as a flattener/corrector, are you saying that not all focal reducers are flatteners/corrector? More aggressive reduction, or using these reducers with larger sensors, will result in aberrations and distortions near the edge of the image. 1.2" in that scope is a field stop of 43mm at f/10 and 27mm at f/6.3. Images in the Celestron tended to appear ever-so-slightly dimmer (maybe? 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. 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. Reviews. For visual use, this means you get lower power with the same eyepiece and a wider field of view. Focal Reducers - Complete Overview and Function - YouTube At least these two units I tested make the answer - whatever. InternetSales@optcorp.com, 800-483-6287 It's highly unlikely that they could be so precisely identical unless they were. I happily cycle through LRGB filters to build the image rather than do a whole run of one filter at a time. The Antares f6.3 focal reducer screws directly to the visual-back thread of all popular SCTs and converts f10 instruments to f6.3. 0.5X focal reducer for Celestron, Meade, and Orion CCD imaging cameras As a result, the smaller tube may cut into the light cone and effectively reduce the working aperture of the telescope. Get ready for a night of astroimaging with your mount faster than previously thought possible with All-Star Polar Alignment. Even though the manufacturer did not specify the working distance or focal length of this reducer, it is easy to see from this plot that this item provides its stated reduction of 0.5x when it is placed at a working distance of 51.5mm between the base of the threads on the mount and the focal plane of the eyepiece or camera. These scopes are compatibles with focal reducers. Obviously bright objects like Jupiter or The Moon show the reflections. This rugged, 3-in-1 device features a true tactical 3-mode flashlight, a hand warmer, and a portable power bank for recharging your personal electronics on the go. The resultant reduction factor was measured to be 0.46x. Can you help me? We tested GSO's 1.25" 0.5x focal reducer at a variety of operating distances and calculated the field of view through a telescope to derive the actual reduction factor that is plotted below. This filter threads on to the rear cell of your Celestron or Meade SCT telescope. Since the focal length of the reducer, FR, is fixed, as d2 increases then MR decreases. This is especially true when these reducers are used with cameras with smaller sensors with a dimension of about 1/4 to 1/3 the diameter of the reducer, and with telescopes with a focal ratio of f/7 or larger. The Reduction Factor and the Amount of Reduction are inversely related. Whereas the Celestron threaded smoothly onto the scope, the Antares chattered and squeaked a bit more so when being removed. You may need spacers or a T-adapter to ensure the correcting working distance. The focus barely shifts between filters and I suspect any shifts I do get are down to the filters and changes in temp. A former wireless communications consulting engineer and management consultant to various Fortune 500 companies, Manish started Agena AstroProducts in 2003. Celestron Solar Safe filter technology is GUARANTEED SAFE for direct solar observation and has been independently tested by SAI Global Assurance Services. Wow, that is a very detailed discussion! There is a way to make subjective data more useful and that way is proper blind, or better still. Reducer - Corrector | Celestron Meade once made an f/3.3 focal reducer for SCT scopes. The reduction factor MR can also be written in terms of d2 as: When the focal reducer is placed at the working distance, D, that is when d2=D, then the reduction factor MR is equal to the design reduction factor MRD: Equations (6) and (7) imply these important considerations: Most manufacturers do not publish the focal length of their focal reducers, so it is not usually possible to calculate the working distance and design reduction factor. Rather than a direct side-by-side, I swapped the reducers so that I was using them on the exact same, well-collimated instrument. Your wishlist has been temporarily saved. OPT Product Number: AE-SCTFR specifications Warranty 2 Year Warranty Works as advertised! The threads were similar on the eyepiece end, but a bit smoother. With the Celestron Reducer/Corrector Lens, thats precisely what you get. I think that the FRs made in Japan in the day may have been better. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 No small animals were harmed in making these observations. I have an 8SE, and am thinking about getting a focal reducer. Just one question. I really don't see any difference in the current crop except the "Meade" is usually the cheapest. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 925 Assuming you use the reducer with the stock 1.25" diagonal, it will operate at f/6.3. With both, using the same diagonal set-up, the exact same stars were visible at the very edge of the FOV. Most Feather Touch focusers cost between $300-$350. Edited by Tony Bonanno, 16 April 2021 - 06:44 PM. 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) Share Customers Also Purchased Description 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. Well done. In terms of reduction and correction which are what reducer/correctors are supposed to do both are superb. That's partly because focal reducers correct for field curvature, which itself depends on the focal ratio and other optical design factors of the telescope. If I had to go out on a very thick limb, I would have to say that these two reducers/correctors are, indeed, identical the exact same glass in slightly different housings with different lettering. By In such cases, we will be happy to take the item back as per our standard return terms. But nearly every observer who installs one of these devices is pleased with their performance. In many cases, the answer is yes, especially for electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA). Newtonian reflectors will seldom be able to accommodate the in-focus travel demanded by focal reducers. 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. I wonder whether, for example, Antares focal reducer for SCT belongs to the latter category. I focus using a moonlight electronic focuser and focusmax. I am a purely visual observer, so will evaluate for visual use only. Using this same example of an 8" SCT and a 0.63x reducer, a visual observer can also enjoy brighter images and a wider field of view. This focal reducer and field flattener consists of a four-element multicoated 40mm lens in a metal cell. Both exhibited consistent reduction, identical field flattening, and edge correction properties, and both were high quality optically and mechanically. More details are found in the Appendix of this article. I have had the Japan unit on the back of my C5 since 1994 or thereabouts. * Not a Retail Store * 16313 Arthur StreetCerritos, CA 90703, USA, Availability: Item has been discontinued by Agena and we no longer carry this item. Is there likely to be any differences in performance between using these on an 8 or something smaller like my 6SE? https://www.celestron.com/products/reducer-corrector, //cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1935/4371/products/94175_reducer_corrector_01.jpg?v=1603736883, //cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1935/4371/products/94175_reducer_corrector_01_medium.jpg?v=1603736883, Popular Science by Celestron StarSense Explorer DX 5" Smartphone App-Enabled Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope, Advanced VX 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, C9.25 Optical Tube Assembly (CGE Dovetail), Advanced VX 6" Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, Advanced VX 700 Maksutov Cassegrain Telescope, CGX-L Equatorial 925 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CPC 1100 GPS (XLT) Computerized Telescope, CGX-L Equatorial 1400 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CGX-L Equatorial 1100 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CGX Equatorial 925 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CGX Equatorial 800 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CGX Equatorial 1100 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, CGEM II 1100 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, Advanced VX 9.25" Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, Advanced VX 11" Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope, Not compatible with #93648 Off-Axis Guider, not compatible with #93519 2" Mirror Diagonal (discontinued), Currently not compatible due to mechanical interferences. I own both and concur heartily. 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. 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. 3. Many focal reducers are meant to be used within a few millimeters of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. With spring galaxy season here, I decided to pick up a couple more to compare in a head-to-head shoot out. The Celestron f/6.3 is ~150 compared to the Antares at ~70. Go behind the scenes with Celestrons product development team and learn more about our award-winning and patented innovations. Is that distance D= Fo-d1=Fo-(d2/MR)? It is recommended for . Over the course of a several nights of general observing, I swapped back and forth between the Antares and Celestron R/Cs on a wide variety of objects open clusters, brighter galaxies, a couple of nebulae, and globular clusters as well. These RC reducers cannot be used with other types of telescopes. Reproduction without permission prohibited. Celestrons patented StarSense Technology makes it easier than ever to locate objects in the night sky, even if youve never used a telescope before. Very helpful, thanks a lot for this article! In both cases will end with a similar tfov. I have a made in Japan 6.3 R/C and a made in China 6.3 R/C. Most manufacturers provide this specification. Reducer - Corrector Learn More. Yellow and orange members of open clusters stood out a bit more as the various stars displayed their individuality. If the reducer is placed closer to the eyepiece or camera than the distance D, the reduction factor decreases. These reducers can also be used for visual observing with SCT scopes with eyepieces with a field stop as large as 24-27mm. Antares Click Lock Visual Back - posted in Cats & Casses: Here is the situation:I bought a Celestron CPC 1100 for visual use.Want to put on the scope simulteanously a6.3 focal reducer, filter wheel, and aneyepiece turret. 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. Focal reducer for 8SE - Celestron vs. Antares - Cloudy Nights 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. So Celestron buyers like Celestron, Meade buyers like the Meade and Antares buyer like the Antares. Brian Ventrudo is a writer, scientist, and astronomy educator. The Best Dedicated Astronomy Cameras for Beginners, Astronomik OIII 12nm CCD Filter - T-Threads, Pegasus Astro Dual Motor Focus Controller, 10 Micron 12kg (26.45lbs) Stainless Steel Counterweight- GM 2000, I would like more information regarding stock availability dates. 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. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. If I had to guess, the difference is maybe 10-15 grams. 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. All Rights Reserved. Here, there was a subtle difference . Using one on such a scope would make demands on the eyepiece design and increase the exit pupil to an extent that focal reduction on fast Newts is not practical. The most popular accessories for your new telescope! The lens that the ZWO comes with give a perfect wide angle image of what is in front of it. Upgrading the Focuser of Your Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope - Agena Astro That said any comparison reviews are helpful. As per the OP I still can't see any reason to buy the Celestron for significantly more $$$. Orders placed over the weekend will be shipped on the following Monday. . I doubt there is any difference between the Antares and the Celestron except price. Also, the focusers of most Newtonians do not have enough in-travel to accommodate a focal reducer. These reducers can also be used for visual observing with SCT scopes with eyepieces with a field stop as large as 24-27mm. The more focal reduction, the further inward the focal plane will be. Given past experience with them, I decided not to include the Meade version in my little experiment, as I have never met one I liked from getting one of the too-short focal length models, to one with some overflow cement in the doublet, to focus difficulties with some eyepieces. Blue Fireball M42 T/T2 Thread Camera Adapter for Prime Focus Photography - 2" # P-06, Celestron T-Ring for Canon EOS Camera # 93419, GSO 2" Crayford Focuser for SCTs - Dual Speed, Length of male SCT thread = 5mm (0.2") but this is preceded by an unthreaded part on the eyepiece side making the total length = 8.8mm (0.35"), Length of female SCT thread = 7.5mm (0.3"). 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. They both are great and I doubt my eyes could detect a difference in any one of them including the Japan version. Still not sure what is the right gear for you? If it's positioned further from the eyepiece or camera and closer to the telescope objective, the reduction factor increases. So ab6110 is asking for a FR only without coma correction, there are a couple of brands who make special reducers for the ACF. I have Hirsch focal reducer, which is yet another clone of the Celestron reducer. This focal reducer is made to attach to the rear cell of Schmidt-Cassegrain or Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes. Clearly cost is a big factor for satisfied users. I don't know. How does it look thats what matters. The previous post shows the reducer on what appear to be two different refractors. Another factor to consider: focal reducers also increase the angle at which light approaches the focal plane. In this case, an additional T-adapter (with an optical length of 50mm) is needed to get the spacing correct for a DSLR or other camera with a 55mm back focus. Our proprietary StarBright XLT optical coatings dramatically increase transmission, up to 97.4% on our Schmidt corrector lenses. Focal Reducers | Celestron Explore Scientific Keys to the Universe Sale, Antares f/6.3 Focal Reducer for Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes, Skip to the beginning of the images gallery. Free shipping $189.95 My Celestron was made in China and the Antares in Canada. In some cases, focal reducers also act as field flatteners by correcting for field curvature and coma of the objective lens. Sign up to receive sale alerts, news about upcoming celestial events, and telescope tips from our experts! Perfect for the serious student, professional scientist and discriminating hobbyist. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. CPWI has an extensive object database, employs PointXP mount modeling, and more. I have/had both the Celestron (Japan) and Antares units. All Rights Reserved. ED stands for "extra-low dispersion," which refers to the composition and optical properties of the glass used for the lenses. Have always disliked the crude, noisy SCT threads, but I get it. The design reduction factor of a focal reducer is the relative amount by which the effective focal length of the telescope is reduced when the focal reducer is used at its specified working distance or back focus. But is there a difference in quality between the Antares and the Celestron or Meade focal reducers? 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. Many focal reducers for refractors have a working distance (or back focus distance) of 55mm. This "speeds up" the optical train by reducing the focal length and magnification of the scope, requiring less time to integrate the same signal. The distance d2, which measures the position of the new focal plane of the objective from the back of the focal reducer is given by Equation 5: In these equations, d1, d2, and MR are all variables that depend on each other through Equations 2 and 4. This focal reducer is made to attach to the rear cell of Schmidt-Cassegrain or Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes. I've only used it a few times but it looks good to me. Dedicated focal reducers for refractors are intended primarily for imaging, not visual observation. Take control of your telescope! 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. StevieDvd Members 1,182 1,812 Location: Stevenage, UK Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) Don't know but your welcome to try out my Meade 6.3 sct reducer next time you are passing. It's easy! - thanks. Unleash the full pointing accuracy of your Celestron computerized telescope with a specialized telescope control software suite. This also resulted in the clear aperture of the Antares being about 39-39.5mm, versus the Celestrons 41mm. 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. USD $80.00. To test this, I used three set-ups: 1. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1100. 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. But while the image gets brighter, the size of the image circle gets proportionately smaller. Nowadays I tend to use the Celestron more with my refractors for imaging and viewing. As one increases, the other decreases. Besides observing from his heavily light polluted backyard in Los Angeles, Manish enjoys conducting astronomy outreach programs in local schools. The designed reduction factor (0.5x in the case of the GSO reducer example above) should be considered a rule of thumb or approximate value in most cases, rather than a very precise number. As often noted in reviews and forum threads, Antares products tend to have threads that are a little less precise, and this specimen certainly demonstrated this. 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. Reducer - Corrector As a real-world example plot showing the above relationships, let's look at the 1.25" GSO focal reducer that provides a design reduction factor of 0.5x. I'd favor the Japanese Celestron version over the others that are commercially available. For example, with a 0.8x focal reducer, a telescope with a focal length of 800mm will operate at 800 x 0.8 = 640mm when the reducer is placed at the working distance specified by the manufacturer. Astro-Tech Schmidt-Cassegrain f/6.3 Focal Reducer Field Flattener 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 of a focal reducer is usually measured from the rear lens surface of the reducer (and not the reducer's housing). That includes, for example, a 1.25" eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 68 and a focal length of 24mm (eg. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. The equations in the Appendix show how this all works. Please let us know what topics you are interested in. Brightness, color, and contrast were subtly different, but could be as much the day they were coated as any real difference in the two brands.
Where Is Jerry Jones Yacht Docked, American Racing Team Apparel, Palestine Isd Football Tickets, Erika Tarantal Wedding, Kevin Murphy Ferguson Ceo Salary, Articles A