However, this also came at a cost, as the sky background in the Antares was slightly brighter. Unlike . More aggressive reduction, or using these reducers with larger sensors, will result in aberrations and distortions near the edge of the image. 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. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 But in the Japan version I have never noticed any anomaly like the ghosting in the China R/C. Does anyone know if the Antares 4000 focal reducer is as good as the Celestron focal reducer. The new Lithium Phosphate (LiFePO4) battery chemistry has significant advantages over other battery chemistries, great for for those Astronomers on the go. In the 1960s, Celestrons founder, Tom Johnson, created groundbreaking new telescopes never before seen on the consumer market. The reducer fits all Meade and Celestron . Never noticed any anomalies with this unit. A few large telescopes and mounts are excluded from this free shipping offer. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.
Telescope Focal Reducers & Correctors - High Point Scientific The nominal design reduction factor of these reducers is typically 0.5x. Sky recognition technology that has revolutionized the manual telescope by eliminating the confusion common among beginners and enhancing the user experience for even seasoned telescope users. CPWI has an extensive object database, employs PointXP mount modeling, and more. First, let's have a look at some key optical parameters are needed to understand focal reducers. You can probably eke out 1.2 without noticing serious vignetting, which is a field stop of 31.5mm. 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. 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. The stars at the edge could be worse or better. Have always disliked the crude, noisy SCT threads, but I get it. They never really recovered from selling a few 15 years back with element reversed. Because most modern Newtonians already have relatively fast focal ratios, these telescopes do not usually use focal reducers. On the camera side, the focal reducer has male M42x0.75 or M48x0.75 threads that attach directly to the T-ring (with an M42-M48 adapter if necessary). When using the diagonal, keep the field stops of the eyepieces under 20mm. If you want to use them for visual - try maybe long focal length eyepieces rather than the reducer. Images in the Celestron tended to appear ever-so-slightly dimmer (maybe? This filter threads on to the rear cell of your Celestron or Meade SCT telescope. Right off the bat, I was struck by how similar the two R/Cs were. Reducer - Corrector This focal reducer is made to attach to the rear cell of Schmidt-Cassegrain or Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes. Bear in mind you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip, i.e. Completely stuck, completely frustrated. Very helpful, thanks a lot for this article! However, I noticed immediately that the Antares had a bit more of an heft to it, giving it a solid feel the Celestron didnt possess. Not noticed any optical problems. Hello! 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. 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. The C8 has no noticeable vignetting with a 32mm Plssl in the f/6.3 reducer. However, the China 6.3 R/C has noticeable internal reflections that I haven't figured out yet. I focus using a moonlight electronic focuser and focusmax. Edited by bluewater, 05 September 2020 - 11:27 AM. Some coma is visible in the corners, but the image is quite good for EAA applications. It's important to match the back focus to within a millimeter or two to get an optimal image, especially with cameras with larger sensors. For these items, please contact us to obtain a shipping quote before you check out using the online shopping cart.International Customers:Free shipping does not apply to international orders. I've never found my 0.63 reducer causing CA when used with my SCT. Best evidence would by obtained by using a camera and evaluating the image both by eye and with a computer analysis. If the focal reducer is to be used for visual observation, the visual back is threaded onto the eyepiece side of the reducer, and then a star diagonal and eyepiece are installed as usual. I happily cycle through LRGB filters to build the image rather than do a whole run of one filter at a time. Regardless, the difference was miniscule and is more than adequate on both and exceeds a 8 or 6 SCTs baffle tube diameter. If used before or beyond the working distance, unwanted image distortion may result. If you place your camera at a different working distance, you will get a different reduction factor and perhaps unwanted distortion in the image. 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. Nebula Filters. This award-winning optical system reduces visual defects like field curvature and coma, creating an ultra-flat field for pinpoint stars all the way to the edge of todays largest imaging sensors.
Antares F/6.3 SCT Focal Reducer | OPT Telescopes Sign up to receive sale alerts, news about upcoming celestial events, and telescope tips from our experts! So Celestron buyers like Celestron, Meade buyers like the Meade and Antares buyer like the Antares. Sign up for our newsletter to get exclusive deals, observing tips, and new product announcements. 2023 OPT Telescopes. Whereas the Celestron threaded smoothly onto the scope, the Antares chattered and squeaked a bit more so when being removed. Therefore, a 55mm back focus with a filter that is 3mm thick added to the imaging train would become 56mm. Torazz Reproduction without permission prohibited.
The Antares is supposed to be pretty comparable. I think I remember hearing the reduction factor is slightly different, cant remember more or less reduction. 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. The telescope side of the barrel is often threaded with an M48 x 0.75 thread for standard 2" astronomy filters.
Antares f/6.3 SCT Focal Reducer - Rother Valley Optics Ltd They provide 0.75x focal reducers for these telescopes that takes an f/8 instrument down to f/6. Assuming you use the reducer with the stock 1.25" diagonal, it will operate at f/6.3. However, even though the imprint on the item states "Reducer / Corrector" please note that his is a reducer only. 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.
In your opinion, is the Celestron is worth the added cost ($150 vs. $90)? Not one detectable iota of discernable difference. I was going to measure the difference in grams, but my lovely wife caught me trying to use her precious, high-tech kitchen scale for the cause, and put the kibosh on it. Add a 0.63x reducer, and the brightness of extended objects increases by (1/0.63)2 = 2.5. So it provides a 0.63x design reduction factor when used with an f/10 SCT at the specified working distance. Some third-party vendors also make reducers for SCT scopes. 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. Yellow and orange members of open clusters stood out a bit more as the various stars displayed their individuality. Easy solution found a very tiny dab of super lube on the threads and all was well and quiet. I have a made in Japan 6.3 R/C and a made in China 6.3 R/C.
because they really dont matter. Read our guide! For example, an 8" SCT without a focal reducer has an illuminated field of 38mm at 50% fall-off. But the smaller image circle means there is a limit to the field stop of an eyepiece that can achieve an unvignetted image. This is the simplest way to attach your ASI121 to your telescope. Figure 1 shows the relationship between the focal reduction factor MR and the position of the reducer in the optical path. When placed in the focal plane in front of a camera or eyepiece, a focal reducer leads to a wider field of view and a brighter image of extended objects, which is important for reducing the exposure times when imaging faint extended objects like nebulae or galaxies. . Place the plastic covers on the lens when not in use to reduce the dust collection. Ive owned Celestron, Meade, and Antares models over the years at least a couple of each. What I do know is that the Antares and the Celestron samples that I have perform exactly the same from the center right out to the edges. It might work but it does not tell us anything about how well or to what extent the product works to correct the field of an SCT. 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. Free shipping $189.95 Celestron Focus Motor for SCT, EdgeHD & 8" RASA, Celestron C6 0.63 reducer/flattener back focus. Your price: $579.00. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. Copyright 2003-2022 Agena AstroProducts. These reducers have a back focus (or design working distance) of 80mm. I found both to be very good. It was used strictly for imaging, not visual observing. A reducer is a set of converging (or positive) lenses that cause the light from a telescope objective to converge at a steeper angle to the focal plane as if it were coming from an objective with a faster (lower) focal ratio and a shorter focal length. I have the Japanese version and although I haven't used it in quite awhile, the views through it were superb with no internal reflections at all. As a Barlow's magnification increases with increasing distance from the Barlow, a focal reducer's reduction increases with increasing distance from the reducer. Your eyepieces are the first accessories you should learn to use with your telescope. That said any comparison reviews are helpful. The faster f/ratio allows you to use slower film or shoot in lower light level situations and still properly expose your subject. Thanks. For example, a 0.8x reducer placed at the working distance provides a reduction of (1 0.8) x 100 = 20%. When placed in the focal plane in front of a camera or eyepiece, a focal reducer leads to a wider field of view and a brighter image of extended objects, which is important for reducing the exposure times when imaging faint extended objects like nebulae or galaxies. Michael 1 ronin Members Dedicated focal reducers for refractors are intended primarily for imaging, not visual observation. However, in principle, the reduction factor of a focal reducer can be varied by changing the distance from the back of the focal reducer to the camera or eyepiece. The female end attaches to the rear cell of the telescope. High power views will provide flatter fields all the way to the edge, both visually and photographically. 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. Most focal reducers are designed to operate optimally at the working distance in the optical path to achieve their specified reduction factor, which is usually between 0.5x and 0.8x. The Reducer/Corrector can also be used for terrestrial digiscoping. It seems right to put some distance between the camera and the focal reducer, right? No small animals were harmed in making these observations. The review is a subjective visual impression, which is interesting but not best evidence. Product Details. Celestrons patented StarSense Technology makes it easier than ever to locate objects in the night sky, even if youve never used a telescope before. Start Chat With this telescope and this focal reducer, it does not help to move to a 2" eyepiece and a 2" diagonal as the visual view will be akin to looking through a porthole within the larger apparent field of view of the eyepiece. These reducers can also be used for visual observing with SCT scopes with eyepieces with a field stop as large as 24-27mm. On the trail, at the job site, in the classroom, or simply sitting at home relaxing the Celestron Elements ThermoTank 3 will keep your hands toasty. Try & buy if you like - usual mates rates. 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. The lens that the ZWO comes with give a perfect wide angle image of what is in front of it. Perfect for the serious student, professional scientist and discriminating hobbyist. control and Sky Viewer display makes selecting your target easy. As mentioned in Section 2.3, the reduction factor for these focal reducers can be varied by adding spacers to move the reducer further from the camera sensor or eyepiece. The Reduction Factor and the Amount of Reduction are inversely related. That includes, for example, a 1.25" eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 68 and a focal length of 24mm (eg. But nearly every observer who installs one of these devices is pleased with their performance. And, the reality is that every F/6.3 RC out there Celestron, Hirsch, Astromania, etc., etc. Optically, it consists of a four-element lens that is fully multi-coated for high contrast and resolution. 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. The lens has a knurled surface, providing a tremendous gripping surface for threading/unthreading. Both exhibited consistent reduction, identical field flattening, and edge correction properties, and both were high quality optically and mechanically. Scope size might influence choice as well, as a C6 might benefit from the Antares' transparency, while larger scopes might benefit from the Celestron's higher contrast. Orders placed after 12:00 PM Pacific Time will be shipped the next business day. This superb fully multi-coated multi-element focal reducer takes advantage of the latest computer aided design techniques to achieve the highest standards of performance set by the brand leaders at a fraction of the cost. You need to be a member in order to leave a comment. The Celestron is both a corrector and focal reducer and the Antares is just a focal reducer. The resultant reduction factor was measured to be 0.46x. When the camera sensor is placed at this distance, the reduction factor of these reducers is 0.75x. Meade once made an f/3.3 focal reducer for SCT scopes. Scope size might influence choice as well, as a C6 might benefit from the Antares' transparency, while larger scopes might benefit from the Celestron's higher contrast. I think there may be some confusion here, because Antares makes a variety of reducers for eyepieces and scopes in addition to this SCT R/C but this definitely is a reducer/corrector. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.
Focal reducer for 8SE - Celestron vs. Antares - Cloudy Nights Celestrons aplanatic EdgeHD optics revolutionized astroimaging. This focal reducer and field flattener consists of a four-element multicoated 40mm lens in a metal cell. One problem with getting opinions is that most of use do not have both reducers or have never done a side by side comparison. ), but stars seemed a bit tighter and their colors were richer and more dramatic. Thanks for pointing this out. Now, Celestron is using that same technology to allow star gazers to connect to the night sky and enhance their experience of the cosmos in fun and unique ways. While most Barlow lenses and focal extenders work with most kinds of telescopes available to amateur astronomers, focal reducers are designed to work in a narrow range of focal ratios of a telescope objective. There may have been an almost imperceptible difference, but the Antares and Celestron were producing precisely the same reduction. 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. This would tell us exactly how well aberrations are corrected. 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. Maybe I got a lemon. A wider field of view and a lower magnification is also useful, with some focal reducers and with some eyepieces, for visual observers with telescopes with long focal ratios. My Celestron was made in China and the Antares in Canada. 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. These scopes are compatibles with focal reducers. That was fun. Thks for that and its not for visual it for astrophotography. Can these economical focal reducers from GSO and other vendors result in good images? 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. Orders placed over the weekend will be shipped on the following Monday. Please let us know what topics you are interested in. I have the Antares and am not unhappy with it, but for AP I would want more back focal distance if those numbers are accurate. 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. 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. Also read the reviews here, including those at 4 stars. This fully multi-coated lens provides maximum light transmission with near full-field illumination. During check-out, you will be presented with several shipping choices and costs. For visual use, this means you get lower power with the same eyepiece and a wider field of view. I've seen some older threads saying that the Celestron, Meade and Antares FRs are all the same and manufactured in the same factory. My application is mostly visual now, but I'm looking to do more astrophotography over time. Thank you so much for the informative article, I now understand better how to integrate my reducer into my system to get better performance. Antares or Celestron? The equations and argument in the Appendix of this article shows the relationship between the working distance and the reduction factor. Is there likely to be any differences in performance between using these on an 8 or something smaller like my 6SE? For imaging, a T-adapter is threaded to the camera side of the focal reducer, which in turns connects to the camera with the appropriate hardware. Easy solution found a very tiny dab of super lube on the threads and all was well and quiet.. During checkout, you may also be shown other optional faster shipping choices.US Customers in Hawaii and Alaska: Free shipping applies to almost all products. I was referring to the C6 to answer you specifically. Quite interestingly it bears the very same engravings of the Meade 4000 r/c (including "series 4000") except for "MEADE". Does anyone have any experience with the Celestron and Antares focal reducers? ED stands for "extra-low dispersion," which refers to the composition and optical properties of the glass used for the lenses. Keep in mind that these differences were very subtle, and could be due to normal variations in coatings among different runs, and not necessarily unique to the brands. The brightness, shape, and distortion of specific stars in the exact same position at the edge of the field was precisely identical in both reducers. Many reducers, such as the Celestron HD focal reducer mentioned above, and many focal reducers for apochromatic refractors, are meant to be used within a few millimeters (or less) of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. I'd favor the Japanese Celestron version over the others that are commercially available. Despite never removing it no matter what I was looking at. The Antares f/6.3 Focal Reducer for Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes is a low-price option for reducing the focal length of your Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope from f/10 to f/6.3. The f/6.3 reducer is operating at f/5-f/5.5 with a 2" diagonal, depending on the back focus length of the diagonal. Optically, it consists of a four-element lens that is fully multi-coated for high contrast and resolution. Powered by Invision Community. Can you tell me about the use of reducers in Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes? a Tele Vue Panoptic), or a Plossl eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 50 and a focal length of 32mm. There are also third-party vendors such as Hotech.
Focal Reducers - Complete Overview and Function - YouTube Watch this before you buy Celestron 8SE SCT, or a Focal Reducer or a Hyperstar 7,758 views Mar 28, 2018 145 Dislike Share Ray's Astrophotography 42.3K subscribers Note: I am not paid or. We have corrected # (iii) after equations 6 & 7. Thanks Peter!
Imaging - Focal Reducers and Flatteners - Page 1 - KW Telescope Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 800 They are also less expensive than many external focusers of similar build quality. It's usually specified from the base of the mounting threads on the reducer's housing, and this is the most practical way of providing this specification. The most commonly available focal reducers for SCTs are the f/6.3 reducers from Celestron and a similar f/6.3 focal reducer from Meade. I would not use the reducer with a 2" diagonal or eyepiece in the C6.
Focal Reducer, 2", 0.7X - Antares 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. I only have the Celestron f/6.3. Focal reducers are essential optical accessories for astrophotography, electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA), and in some cases, for visual observation with long focal ratio telescopes. But in the end they both do pretty much the same thing and it sounds like any performance difference is subtle. InternetSales@optcorp.com. Copyright 2003-2022 Agena AstroProducts. 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. Performance wise what differences might there be using the reducer on a smaller scope. You don't need to follow these equations to use a focal reducer, but they do show how the reduction factor changes with the placement of the reducer. The threads were similar on the eyepiece end, but a bit smoother. Celestron makes a series of focal reducers for the Edge HD line that are matched to the 8", 9.25", 11", and 14" apertures of these scopes. riklaunim Members 559 3,445 Location: Poland Posted October 11, 2010 They are reported as identical. Who cares? Focal reducers for these relatively fast ED refractors are generally for imaging only, not for visual observation. I have this one Opticstar F6.3 Focal Reducer / Corrector. Equation (4) shows the relationship between the distance d2 and the reduction factor MR. Perhaps not exactly- there will be some uncertainty because of manufacturing tolerances and so forth, but it will be close.
Celestron & Antares f/6.3 Reducer/Corrector Shoot-out We only send interesting emails and will never sell your data. I have an 8SE, and am thinking about getting a focal reducer. DUE TO EXTREMELY HIGH DEMAND, WE WILL NOT BE TAKING NEW ORDERS UNTIL MONDAY, DECEMBER 14. But when not in the box or on the telescope, there is no cover for the other end. It covers the basic optics and design specifications of a focal reducer, and goes through some practical factors to consider when selecting and using a focal reducer. Figure 7 shows an example of an image of the Dumbbell Nebula taken with a 1.25" GSO focal reducer at a reduction factor of 0.63x with an 85mm f/7 refractor and a QHY5III-290M camera with a sensor with a 6.4mm diagonal. Hmmm . In this case, d2 = FR/2, which means the back of the focal reducer is located at a distance FR/2 from the camera or eyepiece. I have/had both the Celestron (Japan) and Antares units. 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. A slight nod to the Antares for heft and higher transmission, but points to the Celestron for nice threads and better contrast. Housings, threads, reduction, correction, blah, blah, blah. Turn it on and push Align. In about three minutes, youre ready to observe! I would pay slightly more for the Japan produced version, just because Hirsch was not bad either but sold it since I had 2 already. Given the results of Test #1, I wanted to see if there was any truth to this assumption. It has only one cover, which surprised me. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 Learn More. 2. The most popular accessories for your new telescope! and you will be fine. But I am rusty, can you condense a bit for me please? No idea what the issue is. 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.