antares vs celestron focal reducer

You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. 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. They are designed (assuming you are referring to the f/6.3 version) for the f/10 light cone. 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. 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. If you want to save a few buck watch the classifieds on CN. Once focused it's pretty good. Edited by bluewater, 05 September 2020 - 11:27 AM. Since the Celestron and Antares are supposed to have different focal lengths and spacing specs, I expected different results. In many cases, the answer is yes, especially for electronically-assisted astronomy (EAA). A few large telescopes and mounts are excluded from this free shipping offer. DUE TO EXTREMELY HIGH DEMAND, WE WILL NOT BE TAKING NEW ORDERS UNTIL MONDAY, DECEMBER 14. Thanks Peter! Completely stuck, completely frustrated. 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. 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. Opticstar F6.3 Focal Reducer / Corrector. Your mileage may vary. This part is no longer in production, but it is sometimes available used and may be used with cameras with smaller sensors. Many focal reducers for refractors have a working distance (or back focus distance) of 55mm. I think that the FRs made in Japan in the day may have been better. 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. 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. 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. Specially-designed focal reducers are available for use with these telescopes. As a result, the smaller tube may cut into the light cone and effectively reduce the working aperture of the telescope. The problem with those SCT reducers is that they cause chromatic aberration and require refocusing when using parfocal RGB/other filters. Field stop diameters are one of the specified specs of eyepieces. I really don't see any difference in the current crop except the "Meade" is usually the cheapest. It was also a little brighter in the center of the field with subtle darkening in the outer 20% or so. So, if you have a filter that is 3mm thick, you need to add 1mm of spacing to your imaging train to retain the correct back focus. Because most modern Newtonians already have relatively fast focal ratios, these telescopes do not usually use focal reducers. I am a purely visual observer, so will evaluate for visual use only. Our proprietary StarBright XLT optical coatings dramatically increase transmission, up to 97.4% on our Schmidt corrector lenses. 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. 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. Ive owned Celestron, Meade, and Antares models over the years at least a couple of each. and you will be fine. For example, many focal reducers designed for f/7 or f/8 ED refractors such as those from Tele Vue, William Optics, Sky-Watcher, and Meade are designed to have a working distance (or back focus) of 55mm. It seems right to put some distance between the camera and the focal reducer, right? which looks like the same one. 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. The equations in the Appendix show how this all works. Reproduction without permission prohibited. They are also less expensive than many external focusers of similar build quality. I have Hirsch focal reducer, which is yet another clone of the Celestron reducer. Now It only focuses near things, like some kind of macro zoom. An f/6.3 reducer is designed to reduce the focal ratio of an f/10 SCT to f/6.3. Most different was that the sky background was a little darker and more uniform, providing a tiny contrast boost for fainter objects. A f/10 focal ratio now achieves a f/6.3, while an f/11 focal ratio now achieves a f/7. 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. Celestrons award-winning Nature DX binocular gets a major upgrade with the addition of ED objective lenses. 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. All additional accessories mount onto the exterior/male threads. Thank you so much for the informative article, I now understand better how to integrate my reducer into my system to get better performance. However, some focal reducers can be used over a wider range of working distances, especially those with simpler optical design, and especially when used with cameras with smaller sensors. However, with appropriate spacers and a camera with a known back-focus, it is easy to determine the exact amount of focal reduction for a given setup (some imaging software packages will also let you derive this from images). They are reported as identical. 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. There is a way to make subjective data more useful and that way is proper blind, or better still. 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. How does it look thats what matters. To further factor out my natural astigmatism (I normally wear glasses while observing), I did the tests with my regular progressive lenses, single vision glasses I use when observing, and naked eye. There are many different types of focal reducers and they all effect. Sign up for our newsletter to get exclusive deals, observing tips, and new product announcements. 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. I've seen some older threads saying that the Celestron, Meade and Antares FRs are all the same and manufactured in the same factory. Download the Celestron PWI Telescope Control Software. Hello! Meade and Celestron both sell such SCT-T adapters with the correct optical length. Free shipping $189.95 * Not a Retail Store * 16313 Arthur StreetCerritos, CA 90703, USA, Availability: Item has been discontinued by Agena and we no longer carry this item. . . 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. Does anyone know if the Antares 4000 focal reducer is as good as the Celestron focal reducer. They both are great and I doubt my eyes could detect a difference in any one of them including the Japan version. This also resulted in the clear aperture of the Antares being about 39-39.5mm, versus the Celestrons 41mm. 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. 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. Best evidence would by obtained by using a camera and evaluating the image both by eye and with a computer analysis. GSO, for example, has a 0.75x reducer for RC scopes with a back focus of 80mm, which is usually enough room for a wide range of astronomy cameras and accessories and spacers as needed. Both exhibited consistent reduction, identical field flattening, and edge correction properties, and both were high quality optically and mechanically. Just point the telescope at any three bright objectsstars, bright planets, or even the Moonand your telescope can orient itself with the night sky. But the smaller image circle means there is a limit to the field stop of an eyepiece that can achieve an unvignetted image. 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. If you are using a camera that has a back focus of less than 55mm, additional spacer rings will be required between the reducer and the camera. Reducer - Corrector Learn More. a Tele Vue Panoptic), or a Plossl eyepiece with an apparent field of view of 50 and a focal length of 32mm. Optically, it consists of a four-element lens that is fully multi-coated for high contrast and resolution. Focus misses by about 1 turnof the focus knob.Here is my solution:Buy a shorter 1.25 visual back for my scope. Perfect for the serious student, professional scientist and discriminating hobbyist. We do not price match competitors if they are out of stock. 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. Shipping will be via the cheapest shipping method which will vary depending on the items in your order. I have a made in Japan 6.3 R/C and a made in China 6.3 R/C. Well done. However, the China 6.3 R/C has noticeable internal reflections that I haven't figured out yet. Since the focal plane of an eyepiece is rarely precisely known(except for some brands such as Baader Planetarium and Tele Vue), and because the nosepiece of an eyepiece is of a fixed length, the actual reduction factor will be close to, but not exactly at, its designed reduction factor. The telescope side of the barrel is often threaded with an M48 x 0.75 thread for standard 2" astronomy filters. 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. 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. It threads onto the rear cell of 5" to 16" Celestron and Meade Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes, making it possible to have a dual focal ratio instrument without sacrificing image quality. Many focal reducers are meant to be used within a few millimeters of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. Your price: $579.00. 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. 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. The price for an item/offer must be listed and valid at the time of match. The threads were similar on the eyepiece end, but a bit smoother. Things change but when I rebought I got an Antares and it seems about the same to me. 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. However, even though the imprint on the item states "Reducer / Corrector" please note that his is a reducer only. I've only used it a few times but it looks good to me. I even lost track of which reducer I was using. Explore Scientific Keys to the Universe Sale. That is definitely a 2" eyepiece, but it is not a large or long focal length 2" eyepiece. If you want to use them for visual - try maybe long focal length eyepieces rather than the reducer. Contiguous US Customers:All items we sell ship for free within the Contiguous US. At a significantly lower price point, the Antares is a steal, and theres no need to upgrade to the Celestron if you already have one. Nada. 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. . 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. You may need spacers or a T-adapter to ensure the correcting working distance. Regardless, the difference was miniscule and is more than adequate on both and exceeds a 8 or 6 SCTs baffle tube diameter. Orders placed over the weekend will be shipped on the following Monday. The lens has a knurled surface, providing a tremendous gripping surface for threading/unthreading. He tested this on an 8 Celestron , I have a Celestron 6SE. Yellow and orange members of open clusters stood out a bit more as the various stars displayed their individuality. The same illumination you have at the edge of a 27mm field, the C8 has at the edge of a 38mm field. This is one of our best-selling items, and customers have reported that this product is at least as good as, and probably better than, other leading f/6.3 focal reducers sold on the market for a lot more. A focal reducer does just the opposite of a Barlow lens or focal extender. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. So ab6110 is asking for a FR only without coma correction, there are a couple of brands who make special reducers for the ACF. This focal reducer is made to attach to the rear cell of Schmidt-Cassegrain or Maksutov-Cassegrain telescopes. Some coma is visible in the corners, but the image is quite good for EAA applications. This is a. 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. 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. Does anyone have any experience with the Celestron and Antares focal reducers? 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. 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. That means the base of the mounting threads of the focal reducer needs to be 55mm from the camera sensor to achieve the design reduction factor, which is usually 0.8x or 0.85x. Antares or Celestron? A little longer light path with a 2 Baader click-lock, low profile 1.25 adapter, and the 1.25 diagonal; This fully multi-coated lens provides maximum light transmission with near full-field illumination. It was used strictly for imaging, not visual observing. Reviews. 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. A longer effective focal length leads to higher magnification with a given eyepiece for visual observers. Sharpness is essentially the same. Not noticed any optical problems. 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. As per the OP I still can't see any reason to buy the Celestron for significantly more $$$. However, because the field curvatures in refractors and SCTs vary a lot, I would predict unpredictable effects inre: field curvature. In your opinion, is the Celestron is worth the added cost ($150 vs. $90)? Learn more about extra solar planets imagery, 3D Star rendering, observation planning, telescope control, multiple-panel printing, and much more. That was fun. Focal reducers for refractors with focal ratio of f/7 to f/9, roughly, have a design reduction factor of about 0.75x to 0.8x and produce a flat field by correcting for the curvature of the objective lens. 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. 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. They only publish the value of D, the working distance (sometimes called the back focus distance) and the design reduction factor MRD. I also used several eyepieces including the ES 24mm/68, 17.5mm and 12.5mm Morpheuses, and a 10.5mm Pentax XL. The stars at the edge could be worse or better. Focal Reducer, 2", 0.7X. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 2.2 Using a Focal Reducer at the Working Distance, 2.3 Adjusting the Reduction Factor of a Focal Reducer, 3.3 Focal Reducers for Compound Telescopes, 3.5 Focal Reducers for Ritchey-Chretien and Field Flattened Scopes, 3.6 Focal Reducers in 1.25" and 2" Barrel Formats, 4. Easy solution found a very tiny dab of super lube on the threads and all was well and quiet.. The review is a subjective visual impression, which is interesting but not best evidence. Since then, Agena has become one of the leading online retailers of telescopes and astronomical accessories worldwide. I've never found my 0.63 reducer causing CA when used with my SCT. Description. Orders placed after 12:00 PM Pacific Time will be shipped the next business day. 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. Thanks for any advice or experience you could share. Optically, it consists of a four-element lens that is fully multi-coated for high contrast and resolution. There may have been an almost imperceptible difference, but the Antares and Celestron were producing precisely the same reduction. Stars had a tiny bit more sparkle and pop. I use the same back spacing for both on a small 6" Celestron SCT. The Antares f6.3 focal reducer screws directly to the visual-back thread of all popular SCTs and converts f10 instruments to f6.3. riklaunim Members 559 3,445 Location: Poland Posted October 11, 2010 They are reported as identical. But nearly every observer who installs one of these devices is pleased with their performance. For imagers using longer focal-length refractors and SCTs, especially when using smaller sensors that place less demand on the focal reducer, there are economical alternatives for focal reducers from manufacturers such as GSO, Agena, and Antares. 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. Thks for that and its not for visual it for astrophotography. Fortunately, my neighbors are not out in their backyards at 11 pm, or they may have thought I was torturing a small mammal. With both, using the same diagonal set-up, the exact same stars were visible at the very edge of the FOV. The resultant reduction factor was measured to be 0.46x. In both cases will end with a similar tfov. This means that there must be sufficient travel on the telescope focuser to make up for this. Michael 1 ronin Members Thanks for the extremely valuable article. Telescope Optics, Rutten and van Venrooij, Chapter 15, Willman-Bell (1988). For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. OPT Product Number: AE-SCTFR specifications Warranty 2 Year Warranty Works as advertised! At least these two units I tested make the answer - whatever. Dedicated focal reducers for refractors are intended primarily for imaging, not visual observation.

Samuel Argall Iowa City, Ob Noodle House Peanut Butter Whiskey Shot Recipe, Strake Jesuit Acceptance Rate, Articles A