Unistellar Store Link: tidd.ly/4i7ZlZB Unistellar loaned me this telescope for this video, and If you're really interested in one of these I have a helpful link to their store (which gets me commission in return). And for the next week or the Black Friday sale is running, giving everyone a 20% discount! AND.... for channel viewers there's a special code that'll get you the Solar Filter for the Odyssey series for free, the filter is essential if you are interested in viewing sunspots or with the telescope. * add an Odyssey/Odyssey Pro and the 'Smart Solar Filter' to the shopping cart and use the code 'scott1124' during the checkout to get the filter for free. So - here's the link for those of you in a buying mood: *** tidd.ly/4i7ZlZB **** The Black Friday Sale runs until December 2nd, after that the discount is gone and the bonus code won't work.
this thing is WAY more expensive than the big newtonian that I own XD . . . but those elecrtonics aint cheap all things concidered this would be Very expensive gift for any kid in my country that most wouldn't afford . . . but it's not like that whith higher wages like you have in the us . . .
$3200 telescope that ceases to work when the company goes out of business and stops keeping the mobile apps updated... If they made it clear that the protocol for interacting with it was open and published the documentation for it, allowing open source devs to pick up the slack if the company does go out of business, that's a different story. But I'm not finding anything on the subject on their site. Even a commitment to publish the protocol and open-source the app if they go out of business would help, though I'm not sure that would be enough if going out of business involves getting bought up by private equity... So, wake me when they open the protocol, I'd kinda like a good digital scope.
@@JohnSmith-x3y8h they have a good point, why should someone who spent 3.2k on a digital scope and have to worry about it turning into a brick when the company dies and having to turn to the community to fix that issue?
How can we be sure this isn't manipulated, like the controversy around Samsung's moon photos? It would be great to understand how the telescope captures and processes the images!
@@scottmanley Thanks for the explanation! It's reassuring to know that raw images are accessible for independent processing. That definitely adds credibility. How was your experience with the comet and terrestrial objects? Did the telescope handle the details well?
I'm an amature astrophotographer and it is one of the most frustrating but rewarding hobbies I have ever endeavored. It is truly amazing to go to process your image and see the beauty of space that YOU capture with your own equipment. It is incredibly rewarding and awesome
Indeed, and while the Unistellar hardware does its own image processing you can download the raw data from the telescope and apply your own processing to the image stack. The data saved on my phone also has high resolution pixel depths.
@@scottmanley This was actually a really important detail I think I missed from the video! The whole time I was thinking "I hope this allows me to access the raw data too". Makes a big difference for retired astrophoto nerds who want to occasionally dabble but sometimes just want the dopamine hit experience.
I still rock my homemade pvc telescope with 10 bucks worth of lenses in it. The rest is cardboard and glue. I have even got a solar filter for it and it’s actually good enough to see sunspots. I can make it work with my phone camera so there, it’s even digital
This is very funky stuff, but as you point out, the view down the eyepiece is actually just a screen. What I'd love is a second purely optical eyepiece on the other side and a flippable secondary so you can use it as a standard optical telescope. And for two very good reasons: 1: You can start off showing your Scouts or whoever the *actual view* through a telescope like this, which for things like the Moon, Jupiter and big comets will be mindblowing, and it's actual photons hitting your eyes. Then, yes, you can go in to however much detail about astrophotography techniques and show them the live stack on the other eyepiece. 2: It will still work as a telescope if the battery/software/processing/firmware/company fails. Hey, it turns out your telescope is no longer supported in the latest update? You can still stick a webcam in the optical port.
Zero chances to see Jupiter with a 85mm reflector. i tried with a 130mm and even in the best conditions it takes a lot of imagination to see the color bands.
@@crono331 I observed Jupiter regularly with a 60mm while growing up. Bands, GRS, zones, etc. That was a "department store scope" from the 1960s. Its optics were far superior to a lot of midrange scopes being sold today. You can observe details on Jupiter in scopes as small as 50mm with a good mount and decent optics. Things to try: Block off part of your aperture with your hand--move it in and out from in front of the objective lens. Jupiter is so bright it often washes out its own details. Blocking some of the light helps tone it down and improve image contrast. Make sure your focus is spot on for your eyes. The higher the power, the more touchy the focus. Purposely move it out of focus then back in to see if you can get a sharper focus. Make sure you don't have stray light getting into the scope. That can ruin the image. Even with a dew cap, it's possible. And most modern scopes have no baffling to block out stray light sources that will destroy image quality. But you should be able to see the bands and zones clearly with your 130mm, unless its optics are really terrible.
@@crono331 You'll get a disc and the Galilean moons, which is still cool. I've got definite bands and the GRS with a 130, although in pretty good dark, cold conditions here.
The digital eyepiece is a big disadvantage since it takes away the sensation of having photons from space objects hitting your retina directly, which is one of the most magical things in astronomy.
That's the way I see it, too. I'd like to ALSO be able to do astrophotography, to see more, but yeah, I think of those photons travelling 2-1/2 million years to interact with my retina for me to detect, to them, at the exact same instant they left.
This is a cool telescope. However, personally I'd say there's a certain charm to seeing things (however dim) with your own eyes through an optical system. It's as close as most of us will probably get to seeing the stars/planets etc with our own eyes.
If the computer aims it and the computer takes the pictures then why not just surf the internet for great astronomy photos for free. I'm not currently doing astronomy but when I was my enthusiasm came from learning my way around the sky. This is like getting to know a city by going from place to place blindly following your car's GPS. If people get excited by this then more power to them but it sounds boring to me.
@@paulramsey2000 I tend to agree. Seeing Jupiter with my own eye, the amazement I felt to witness its bands of colour, quickly giving way to clouds before my brother could see it. 😊 An unforgettable experience.
@@paulramsey2000 if you think its boring, then you've never actually tried it. Setting up for imaging, capturing, stacking, and processing the image is all a very interesting process full of nuance. This is such a ridiculous argument. Thats like saying "why take pictures when you can look at pictures online?" what? lmao thats kinda stupid dont you think?
Well as described, all of that stacking and processing nuance is just taken care of by the computer. I didn't mean to say that digital astronomy is all boring. Just that hitting a few buttons on your phone and having it automatically point to the nebula and take a stacked photograph sounds boring. Being able to look up at the sky a have some idea where all of those interesting things are made the sky so much bigger to me. I guess I'm saying the journey was the point for me. Zooming to the destination sounds like it throws out an important part of it. As for the general notion of photography I think people spend too much time taking pictures of the same things as everyone else. Photographing major landmarks without bringing a personal perspective to it just fills up disks. Another photograph of the liberty bell seems pointless. A selfie or photograph of friends visiting the liberty bell is documenting an experience. I appreciate that others will have a different view of this. Enjoy.
The magic of using a telescope is that there is nothing but glass between you and the universe. I'd rather see the Great Red Spot as a blurry, black and white smudge than an AI enhanced video image.
Exactly. There's something extra special about seeing celestial objects through a good old fashioned 'analog' scope, when you know that the photons hitting your retina came from that very object. When I saw the ice caps on mars and the rings of saturn through my telescope for the first time, it was blurry and probably not as perfect as what a digital scope would show, and it was freaking amazing. This thing has some novelty as well, but it's just not the same.
Couldn't agree more! And I have a fully automatic 43cm (17") aperture telescope with a fancy astrocamera, it's still way better personal experience to look through a small telescope with your own eye.
@@nzavon Still not a real image. Ever seen those vids of regular people on the street getting blown away looking at the moon through a telescope for the first time? That happens because it's real, not a picture on a digital screen that you could just look up on your phone.
For real? Searching ... . Found it. [1m52s later] Holy crap! "There's extra room on the large third rack served by rotating 360° Max Jets, and at the end of the cycle the true self-cleaning filtration system automatically cleans this dishwasher filter as it drains so you don't have to do that yourself." Cringe!
People trying to make a living here with informative videos, or you over there complaining about someone else's work you could have decided not to watch any poor second of your miserable existence. Wow, I got so high so fast! Thanks Scott For showing us the Sky 🌟
@@QuasiRandomViewer He did the ad separate from his science videos and labeled it as sponsored. It is also 2 minutes, not going to be confused with the science videos. Plus, like it or not, people are very naive about how anything they own works. I think ads showing how appliances work are a PSA he can get paid for even if its mixed with ad speak. (He could tone the ad speak down a little. You can plug the product without using marketing terms such as the tv show "How It's Made" which felt more historical and explanative, than marketing. ) The discovery channel reaches no one under 30 anymore. This ad showed a lot of people what the inside of their dishwasher does that they never had any clue about. The discovery channel used to provide that function, but they failed to adapt to changing media.
@@_PatrickO What's amusing about Veritasium's dishwasher ad is the comment section. Huge numbers of his presumed followers rush to praise the series of excellent (and non-sponsored) videos explaining how to get the best out of dishwashers on the Technology Connections channel. While not a direct rival to Veritasium, the consensus seems to be that you learn more and more entertainingly from Alec's long-form Technology Connections videos than from watching Derek's Veritasium ad.
For the money, the ZWO Seestar S50 is a much better bargain at about 1/5th the price (aperture is only 50mm vs 83mm, but the software is excellent, and it's delightfully compact). (Assuming this comment is fine to make because this video isn't declared as an ad)
I second this. The nice part about it: people already figured out how to talk to the telescope without the app. So even if they ever disappear, there's at least a chance the telescope doesn't become paperweight. Not sure if this also applies to the Odyssey Pro
Hard to compare tbh... o_O The Odyssey’s 83mm aperture pulls in 3x more light, so you get way brighter and sharper views. Makes a huge difference for star parties! Got mine back in March 2024, and I’m loving it so far! :D
Side note, one can always begin with a Binoculars. They are quite good enough for some basic observation, cheap and you can always have other uses for them once you decide to build a more power telescope.
That's quite a hefty pricepoint considering their competition are putting out $500 smart scopes that produce incredible data much easier. But yeah, almost need to put the "this is an ad" disclaimer. But I wouldn't exactly justify this cost increase over the cheaper options.
@@scottmanley Why not just be straight and honest and say it at the start of the video. Something like: Hello, this company has paid me to advertise this overpriced telescope with a pretend eyepiece that you can fool boy scouts with...
@@scottmanleyI’m on mobile with RUclips premium and I didn’t get anything about paid promos. It’s weird. Looks like a cool telescope Scott, you sound like you had a lot of your youthful nostalgia playing around with it
@@PejmanManI also didn't see the usual "contains paid promotion" or something similar. Initially I assumed it was a sponsored-not-sponsored video because he said it was loaned to him. About ¼ through the video I thought maybe he has something about his Apple job that says he can't do official sponsorships. Either way, buyer beware as ever.
If you go to the Unistellar website some of those pictures they use to show off their equipment are ones I took with my eQuinox2 and gave permission to Unistellar to use. I apologize for that. I know people will think that they can just point and shoot and get a crisp Trifid Nebula like on their webpage. BTW the Trifid pic took about 5 days of figuring which magic sequence of how to take the subframes to produce the minimum amount of garbage artifacts then a day of Pixinsight to bring out all the details properly.
I'm all about making it easier. Back before HD TV was a thing, I experimented with stacking images from a Sony TRV900 camcorder, which of course only captured 720x480 pixels. But in the stacking process, not only was the sensitivity improved, but also the resolution, since the images were magnified (to 2160x1440, IIRC) before stacking, the X and Y offsets to compensate for earth rotation were just a fraction of a pixel per frame. I took about a 10 minute sequence of the Andromeda galaxy at F/1.8, 1/8 second, and did all of the processing using an animation application of my own design. The processing involved subtracting a black frame (itself produced by stacking a minute of video with the lens cap on) to compensate for the different pixel sensitivities, then expanding and offsetting the frames, and just superimposing all of these frames. A little sharpening of the image was necessary because the pixels being stacked were 3x3 pixel squares, and this did produce an image that was .. amazing, but nowhere near the quality of real telescope images. I'm sure that some of this was due to compression artifacts, since this was from miniDV tape, so it was near incredible anyway. I mean, I knew where to point the camera because I could see a faint fuzzy spot in the sky, surrounded by a few visible stars, so I aimed it by finding that pattern of stars in the viewfinder. Like I said, not a very impressive image, but made more impressive by the virtue of being beyond reasonable expectations.
The real issue is them using a cheap sensor. 20-30mp sensors should be easily available and simply included for that high price. My phone has a 16mp sensor and is under $200? 7.7mp at f/3.9 is really them setting the bar low, IMO. Even Celestron is pulling the "Apple Tax" move here with a puny 6.4mp sensor ( and a future "upgrade" for only $2000 or some idiocy, most likely ) The chip itself is close to $50, retail. So, definitely can do better.
@@plektosgaming Just slapping in more MP does not help in low light situations, quite the contrary. You want big individual pixels, so they capture more light and produce less noise. I checked this scope, it uses a Sony IMX347 with 2.9 μm pixels. Phones cameras are typically around 1 μm. Proper cameras with full frame sensors can go up to 30 MP at 5 μm pixel size. Not saying $3000 is reasonable (I am more disappointed by the 85mm reflector), but you also can't expect the same as in cameras that alone already cost more.
In this class of telescope is the Celestron Origin is an intelligent home telescope. Origin’s 6” Rowe-Ackermann Schmidt Astrograph (RASA) optical design with a 6 inch aperture and fast f/2.2 focal ratio, you get remarkable image brightness and clarity with less exposure time. It is listed at $3,999.00.
Yes, the Origin looks like the obvious step up, but I haven’t had a chance to work with it. Also it supports filters which can let you do some specialized imaging. Still needs an app for now
The Perth Observatory in Australia is updating their Lowell telescope, which helped co discover the rings of Uranus, into an internet telescope, so any university or institution can use it. We already have a few telescopes like that, there’s one which tracks space junk and helps the global meteor network, and a 12” telescope for observing objects. And why spend $3k on a fancy telescope where you could spend about $1.5k on a decent motorised telescope and just attach your phone to the eyepiece. I’ve gotten photos of dozens of objects that way
Back in the analog days, it was categorically impossible to manipulate image data without introducing errors. Getting the highest quality signal and minimizing noise was therefore the only way to get good images. But with digital imaging, there’s just about no limit to what computational photography can do with a shitty sensor…so long as your subject isn’t moving.
Short exposure times help the movement problem. I started astrophotography on film with an SLR on a tripod, and make prints by physically stacking the negatives. I shot near the pole, and took short exposures with short and mid-length lenses. The modern digital scopes do well with fairly crappy guidance and lots of short exposures (5-15s is not unusual). When I step through my smart scope's individual images, the subject is hopping all over the frame. But once they're stacked, I just have to crop a bit and it comes out fine.
I'm a bit surprised you failed to mention Vaonis' Vespera and Stellina smart telescopes, which got available at the same time, if not before Unistellar's ones. Their scopes are of a much better quality and the on-board algorithms are just one or two magnitudes above those on Unistellar. Just to mention a few functionalities: - Mosaic mode, which allows you to image areas bigger than the scope field of view and act as a virtual derotator (although Stellina has a physical derotator). - Continue mode, which allows you to stack the same object over several nights. - Planning mode, which allows you to program your scope to shoot at targets that are not yet visible. - Automatic refocus. Objects get out of focus when temperature drops. Vaonis' scopes will refocus automatically before the image gets too blurry. - Ability to download the individual pictures in FITS format, so that you can process them yourself on the same kind of applications you mentioned using with your former telescope.
If you're looking to try a small telescope for much cheaper, the Dwarf2 and Dwarf3 are available for $500 & cheaper. As a bonus they can used in the daytime for tracking things like planes, birds, wildlife, etc. ...and it is super light and fits easily into your backpack for hikes.
@tma2001 I mentioned it because with the D3 out there is the increased option to buy a used D2 now for less. In my opinion, it's a better device, at least for my use case and a great way for a beginner to jump into the hobby for cheap. There really isn't anything close to the D2 in size and weight that can fit into a climbing pack, and automatically track a person making a climb and descent in 4k, and then still work very nicely at night for Astro. It's the ultimate setup for anything in the mountains. The D3 is bigger, which I don't personally like. I have plenty of giant telescopes at home and portability and weight are my biggest metric.
@@PowerScissor yeah I'll be holding onto my D2 although I wish they would give us custom dark frames and shooting presets from D3. I'd also like the option to not save the raw fits files or png stacked file when just using it for EAA. In fact there are tons simple software features missing which I find frustrating as a software developer.
I did a Astro photo class in college we had a night shot at Stony ridge telescope a 28” Newtonian our target was Orion shooting 4x5 B&W 400 asa film I got a great shot my film was the best shot of the night. Stony ridge was one of the locations referred to in the book Lucifer’s Hammer. One can really appreciate what the early astronomers did standing in the cold up 20’ in the air at on a home shop made Elevators guiding their photographs.
Years ago, I was staying the night at Fossil Falls on Hwy. 395, heading to the Sierra's, and a group from UCLA were in the next campsite setting up telescopes for photography because dry desert air and no planes near China Lake. They invited me to view and it was amazing.
Most people don't want to do the work in the first place. This is ideal for them. They can take great photos without having to make it into a complete hobby.
@@dampfwasi Why do people still take photographs of the places they visit (without people in them) when they know there are better images available on the web? I have hundreds of such photos. You're still doing it. You're still engaging in the experience of setting up your telescope, choosing the target and taking photos right there and then. I'm sure plenty of amateurs have bemoaned every new convenience that's come along for the amatuer astronomer, digital photography especially. e.g. "Where's the sense of accomplishment when the Photoshop does all the work for you?" And what's the point in doing any astrophotography if you can't match what's online? The new scope only changes the amount of work involved, it doesn't really change much else.
I agree. They're great for those with a casual interest in stargazing, but they don't fully scratch the itch for most dedicated AP guys/gals. I do know some big Dob owners who use smart scopes (SeeStar50 in most cases) while observing some of the fainter NGC & IC objects to verify field location. That's a pretty neat use case, especially if using very large Dobs (18" to 24"+) searching for very faint targets (+15 mag galaxies)... OTOH, trying to keep eyes dark adapted is going to be a bitch with any smart scope, even if using a red screen cover, which kinda defeats the whole point of searching them down with a big Dobsonian....
I got some insane images of the aurora back a few months ago, and on one of the images, Ursa Major was in the background. Unintentionally dramatic image :)
With Orion and Meade going out of business leaving many customers with no support, it was looking like amateur astronomers were going to have to go back to the days of grinding and silvering mirrors using Moore books. Glad someone is still out there doing something for amateurs.
Well, some years ago, I saw your video about a travel refractor. Bought the 70mm. Got hooked. Now I'm into high resolution planetary imaging. Best drug ever. TY Mr Manley for giving me back the dream my 7yo me had !
I gained passing interest in astronomy at a young age in the early 60's while in Colorado visiting my uncle whom taught at the university and was part of a group of teachers that gathered enough funding to build a respectable telescope for the school. Watching him look at a chart then pick up an industrial styled button box with cable, he moved the dome to a point then began fine tuning it. I was lucky to see Jupiter, Saturn, and the Moon so close it kept leaving the view quickly. It was very quiet.
This reminds me of of the introduction of sampling keyboards in the music world. When they were introduced in the 80s you could suddenly create a chamber orchestra in the comfort of your living room.
I used to have a 10” Schmidt Cassegrain reflector. Spent hours getting good photographs of different galaxies. This thing looks great for my grandkids. Thank you Scott
@@richlo8887 'High' range (they go for more): $10,000 Astro rig Low range: $600 seestar Idk what to tell you man, it's an expensive hobby, it's not for everyone.
Meade went out of business because they fell asleep while whole industry moved towards astrophotography. Celestron survived because of RASA and Starizona which enebled them to image at F2. However, they are also going to fail if nothing will change because their most important parts are not available anywhere. I am talking about F/7 reducer and aluminium dew shield. They don't have one shop in China that would have them despite thousands of their SCT sold in here.
@@luboinchina3013 Celestron is owned by Skywatcher and Orion mounts were rebadged skywatcher mounts. For example the Orion Atlas mount is the skywatcher eq-6 and parts are interchangeable.
Except that it can save the individual raw images, which you can then download onto your PC and process them yourself. So nope, no sneaky sleight of hand stuff going on.
Scott if you like telescopes get in touch with me and you can come do astronomy on the 100 inch Hooker telescope at Mt Wilson. We are currently working on an advanced science camera package to do observations with the old telescope. We just got done doing engineering on the system at Mt Wilson and our first science run will be in June of 2025.
I think the Seestar looks like the best option currently, and since everyone just wants to take pictures, it looks like a good starting point. When you get tired of taking pics and want to learn the sky then it may be time get the proper scope, a 6" or 8" dob will do. Binocs will also be good.
I use a 4" f/7 refractor on a small altaz mount for a grab-n-go setup, and it's by far my most used scope. After that would be my 8" Dob. Although I love my 5" refractor & 12" Dob, neither get used nearly as much as their smaller siblings. The 5" isn't that much bigger, but the larger size mount it take to ride on is a beast. The 12" has a pyrex primary that cools nearly as quickly as the 8", but the solid tube is a bear getting in & out of the house.
Thank you for this video Scott. These tiny scopes are carving an interesting niche for the younger generations of astronomers. At age 67 I am old school, so I will keep my 22" heavy dobsonian motor driven and computerized telescope a while longer.
Don‘t be so sure of that. A lot of my generation (I‘m 24) will go out of their way to have memorable experiences and see the planets for themselves compared to using this fancy and expensive piece of equipment. I find a lot of enjoyment in searching for eye pieces and gear in general and then putting it to the test. Real analog astronomy is where it‘s at
If these can be hooked in to a network of owners, they could be left running in the backyards of people world wide, and combine images from many units in to a massive virtual telescope. Cloudy where you are, share the images off of scopes where it's clear. Spot something moving, send out a group request to slew scopes on to the same object for hyper accurate distance and direction calculation. Volunteer scope time to deep-feild exposures.
I don't look at smart scopes as an either/or product. They are just another tool to help people enjoy the night sky or in fact the day time sky as well as most have solar filters. I don't have one by the way, not because I have anything against them but because over the years I have built up rigs that can do the same thing, but admittedly I do have to polar align them, but as the mini pcs I use for control have PA software it takes no more than a minute or two to do that. I still like using binoculars for star gazing and even the good old mark 1 eyeball. Astronomy, like any other hobby should be fun, the tools we use to that end are entirely up to personal choice. We're so lucky these days to have such a wide range of gear to choose from. Whatever we choose, they are all reduced to ornaments by cloudy weather!
Seeing Orbital perform Brown must have been amazing; that and Carl Cox FACT opened my eyes to that imagination can be realised. That there is more to this word that what the standard information gatekeepers have us believe and we can escape their narratives and no longer be stuck where time becomes a loop, where time becomes a loop, where time becomes a loop.
These smart scopes are a game changer. If you go to a star party, such as at Chabot Space Science Center, you'll get a look at a bunch of smart telescopes that folks bring to help decide which one is right for you, and if you'd want one.
I was always put off by astro photography because of the steep learning curve involved. The complexity of building running an astro rig, and stacking/processing pictures always sounded like way more hassle than I was willing to subject myself too. These smart telescopes are perfect for people like me. We bought the Origin, mainly because of the bigger OTA and the possibility of future upgrades and we just love it.
So I spent about 15 grand on a Celestron 1100 EdgeHD telescope, CGX mount (junk), automatic alignment camera, focus motor etc etc etc, spend hours to days getting it all to work and align and take images, and this thing aligns faster and takes better images for a quarter of the price... Thanks Scott... thanks....
Unistellar is kinda cool but what I really want them to do is make a full mini-observatory that can stay outside. Literally zero setup and having it actively contribute to science all the time would be super cool. Would definitely mitigate the fear of not using the telescope after a few months because not only would it be no-setup but it would still be doing something even if I stopped using it.
This is how I find out that Orion went out of business. I just bought my Skyquest XT6 last year from them. Used to to see the eclipse! (yes I had a solar filter and my eyes didn't vaporize)
Convenience is THE feature of this for me. Another thing that is critical to me is no AI "enhancement" (as a particular brand of phone does when pointed at the moon), so you really are just looking at what is there in the sky right now and captured by the image sensor. I hadn't realized how sophisticated it was with image stacking and sky haze removal. This is definitely for people who want to view objects in the sky, but aren't interested in becoming telescope hobbyists.
My days of astrophotography were using 35mm film and long exposures guiding manually with an off axis reticle eyepiece. Some of my exposures were an hour long.
im in the middle of 3d printing my own harmonic drive mounts and use OnStep for the controller to attempt astrophotography. TONS of work but like you said if I can pull this off and get results I will be so extatic. At the same time I am thinking about getting a newer smart telescope for my kids and when I don't feel like setting up my rig. Great video!
And just when I thought I was talented for being able to rig up a pipe mount, here you are printing a harmonic drive 😂 Good luck with your effort!! Learning AP is a tough cookie, much less trying to learn on homemade gear, but if you pull it off it'll definitely be a feather in your cap. The biggest tip I can offer is to be patient yet persistent. Try to isolate issues and solve each problem that crops up systematically. Start small with a lightweight, small aperture scope with short focal length. It'll make life a ton easier when starting out.
Scott, I have to apologize for watching you for so long without subscribing. Honestly though I was. Rare cheers to the RUclips algorithm. Super cool gizmo but I think I’ll stick with dragging out my 10” Dob and finding stuff myself. Nothing can ever replace the memory of my daughter and I observing M42 and M43 for the first time just pushing a not so great Dob around by hand. Wish I had the $ to get into astrophotography. It looks super challenging and rewarding.
Not sure I would recommend the Unistellar, it is *way* too expensive for what you get. If you want to get your feet wet for a few hundred dollars, get a Dwarf 3 or the Seestar S30. You can actually do more with the data these collect and you can properly stack them on a PC for higher quality. And if you really like it, and wanna get deep into it, get a good cooled camera, a Juwei 17 harmonic mount, a small guide scope, a guide camera, and of course a telescope. That way you can upgrade each component whenever you want. And there's excellent free software for controlling your telescope, like Nina (Windows) or KStars/EKOS (Linux). You can also get a small mini computer that lets you control everything with an app, like the ZWO AsiAir and the Touptek Astrostation. Drawback of the ZWO gear: It's more expensive and they lock you into their cameras and focusers. Touptek and other systems are completely open. If you can afford a Unistellar... just get a proper telescope setup, or a much cheaper Dwarf 3 if you want something that is perfectly usable for beginners.
I see the main value add is the software, support, and updates. Since this is essentially an automatically correcting long exposure camera system with tracking, ease of use will be useful for most casual individuals. There's also reason to expect it to be able to handle very long exposures.
Centimeters, millimeters, dekaliters...what's the difference so long as you're healthy? :D Three and one quarter inches in Freedom Units. Or 4.23x10-4 Furlongs.
@@BabyMakR The purpose of a telescope with a true eyepiece is to allow your eye to focus on those photons. Your eyes cannot do that by just going outside and looking up.
That is frackin’ awesome. I have been looking to get back into amateur astro. The demise of Orion was certainly a blow to those aspirations. I will definitely be checking out digital scope options.
Good vid. Just shouting out seeing Orbital. They had a great show here in Chicago too. It was good to be able to see them after being essentially non-existent in the US for forever.
there is an amazing experience to do astrophotography. To make mistakes when aligning, to improve and to buy new scopes. It cannot be replicated with a point and shoot thing.
I see lots of conspiracy theorists here thinking that the scope is actually downloading images taken elsewhere. Easy to check. Just hold a piece of cardboard between the telescope and the target, and see if you get the image anyway.
I really don't understand the gatekeeping going on in the comments. Did the old-timers complain this much when the kids started using digital sensors and Photoshop to do in minutes what it used to take hours to do in the dark room? How much time and money would a novice need to invest just to match the quality of images Scott showed in this video? Sure you can buy a much cheaper telescope with similar quality optics, but once you've added up the value of all the time you would need to invest in researching all the other hardware and software tools you need to create such images, along with learning how to use them effectively and the techniques involved in taking the images and processing them correctly, you're likely talking dozens if not hundreds of hours. Only a tiny fraction of telescope owners get this far, even those who do spend thousands of their first scope. Can people do better for the same cost of equipment, or less? Absolutely, but it takes a committed hobbyist to do it -- someone who is happy and able to spend many hours developing the skills required. The rest of us simply don't have the time, money or inclination to try. So what's wrong with non-hobbyists getting a taste of what can be done with astrophotography? Do amateur photographers still bristle at the existence of the iPhone and complain that taking good quality photos is too easy these days, or that people could do better if they bought a $500 SLR camera instead of a $1000 iPhone? This is the type of telescope designed for people like me -- astronomy enthusiasts, but without the inclination and/or opportunity to invest the hours and level of commitment astrophotography needs to do it the old-fashioned way.
@scottmanley ...and one more comment on 9:10 - it is not actually you producing these images, that telescope is. You had actually produced the images back in 2004 and these are really something to be proud of. Using this thing is like typing prompt to create an AI image, vs doing the actual photography..
Having a small collection of telescopes, including S50 and Dwarf II; I can say that planets are indeed not the prime target of these small smart scopes. But by far, for me, the best overall is the Dwarf. Absolutely fantastic support to the community and added features.
15:34 "And while I can confirm this is the most fun I've had with a telescope in a long time, I cannot guarantee that when *_you_* get a telescope that the skies will be clear" This is the most realistic part of the advertisement you've said and it's hilariously true
not entirely sober 😂 but seriously this was just fascinating to see the latest in modern digital telescopes - really makes it easy and fun - so thanks for showing us 🎉
I've logged into RUclips for possibly the first time ever to leave a comment so things must be bad! All the way through I was thinking "surely this is a paid advert?" Sure enough, right at the end, which was a bit sneaky, it was there. I'm quite surprised at Scott given his scientific background that he compared the quality of these images to some he took 18 years ago! That's a lifetime in terms of astrophotography. It's also worth pointing out that for c$3,000 or equivalent, you could get a setup that absolutely blows this thing out of the water. Sure it's self-contained but what if the app is no longer supported? What if you get bored of the Orion Nebula and want to upgrade like you can with a normal rig?
I love your rocket videos together with Eager Space and Marcus House. Eager Space supplement your videos with his calculations and Marcus House supplement with the journalism point of view. Thanks to all of you.
The Google targeted advertising is amazing! This weekend I was shopping online for telescopes and today Scott Manley uploads this video about digital telescopes, which I didn't even know was a thing. I must admit, the Odyssey is a lot more portable than the 12" Dob I was eyeing.
@@elephantsarenuts5161 I bought my first telescope (8" dob) last month and there's just something about manually locating and observing the object through the glass. I think about how people hundreds and thousands of years ago were looking at these same objects and I feel this connection with the past I haven't felt before, it's really special. I feel like it just wouldn't be the same with a digital telescope but I guess I wouldn't know for sure until I tried it.
Does the app and the telescope require Unistellar's servers to be operational? What happens if in 5 years they go out of business or get bought by another company and they decide they want to move the company in a different direction? Does your telescope become a $3,000 paperweight This is the problem with everything being smart, you don't actually own anything. Everything either becomes a subscription or goes away (or both).
I have their Eq2. Similar setups with no eyepiece. The battery in mine is good for about 11 hours. Probably the only thing this brand is better at than other manufacturers
It’s a difficult balance here. Scott’s 20 year old kit is showing its age (understandably) I have spent a not an insignificant amount on astrophotography equipment and these scopes cannot match the images I can obtain. Where they do benefit massively is their ease of use. I think they are great for outreach and getting results quickly. I will say that half of the pleasure I get is all about the post processing. I get that you can download the RAW images but it won’t match a proper AP setup. My issue is that I no longer have time to setup my kit each time. On average it takes about an hour and half to get going. No great .so I am in this situation where I have decent kit but it’s not getting used.
Smart telescope? Much cheaper and faster to buy a Hubble photograph. "Alexa, order me a photo of M42". For me, the hobby is setting up my scope, leveling, polar aligning, finding the subject and taking the photo.
nice image processing trick - yet there is a difference in essence between using a conventional optical telescope and and electronic assisted vision system: in one case you detect an actual photon coming from far, far away with your own eye, in the other you're watching a screen.
Wonderful technology! ❤ I bought some new astronomy tech myself recently, retiring my Losmandy G-11 for a Skywatcher EQ-6R. While the G-11 has served me well, life is too short for star hopping under mediocre skies.
My perception is that this would be good for outreach, or something for parents to get their kids started on an addiction to imaging (and chasing ever better gear 😁)
You can buy eyepieces that stack, have an sd card slot to get the raw images, and the same style lcd-in-eyepiece viewer. They're pricey, but not as pricey as this whole kit. The advantage of having it in the eyepiece is that you can swap it out for a normal eyepiece very quickly, or you can swap out the telescope.
@scottmanley I don't have any experience with them personally, but I know my local astronomical society was discussing them a while back. I'll see if I can dig up that thread from the mailing list and come back with some product names, even if it isn't a recommendation. I will say that the software for processing raw images has gotten quite good though. Siril has an initial learning curve, but once you get over the hump it's incredibly powerful for free open source software.
I've been meaning to go out and photograph some DSO's. Weather has been the worst for past month here now. I ordered a polar wedge for my setup as well and I'm afraid I won't be able to use it for another month when it arrives.
Unistellar Store Link: tidd.ly/4i7ZlZB
Unistellar loaned me this telescope for this video, and If you're really interested in one of these I have a helpful link to their store (which gets me commission in return).
And for the next week or the Black Friday sale is running, giving everyone a 20% discount!
AND.... for channel viewers there's a special code that'll get you the Solar Filter for the Odyssey series for free, the filter is essential if you are interested in viewing sunspots or with the telescope.
* add an Odyssey/Odyssey Pro and the 'Smart Solar Filter' to the shopping cart and use the code 'scott1124' during the checkout to get the filter for free.
So - here's the link for those of you in a buying mood:
*** tidd.ly/4i7ZlZB ****
The Black Friday Sale runs until December 2nd, after that the discount is gone and the bonus code won't work.
this thing is WAY more expensive than the big newtonian that I own XD . . . but those elecrtonics aint cheap
all things concidered this would be Very expensive gift for any kid in my country that most wouldn't afford . . . but it's not like that whith higher wages like you have in the us . . .
Scott, I get a message that scott1124 is not valid for this purchase. I tried a couple of different telescopes. FYI
So is it filling in data from a pre recorded database or is it all actual new data? ie how much is realtime and how much is from the planetarium?
@@A31415me too, doesn’t work for any scope selections.
Very unethical. This telescope will stop working as soon as the comoany goes under.
The rule in Astrophotography is that whenever someone buys a telescope in your area, the skies will be cloudy for many days.
True also for fancy eyepieces, CCD sensors, and even mounts. Cloud cover is directly proportional to the cost of the new gear.
That's how I know this is a real telescope and not a toy.
@@scottmanleyagreed.
Amen brotha
I know. I finished building my 12" telescope and it was cloudy for three weeks. I eventually got a patch of clear sky at 2am. What fun.
$3200 telescope that ceases to work when the company goes out of business and stops keeping the mobile apps updated...
If they made it clear that the protocol for interacting with it was open and published the documentation for it, allowing open source devs to pick up the slack if the company does go out of business, that's a different story. But I'm not finding anything on the subject on their site. Even a commitment to publish the protocol and open-source the app if they go out of business would help, though I'm not sure that would be enough if going out of business involves getting bought up by private equity...
So, wake me when they open the protocol, I'd kinda like a good digital scope.
Hasn’t it been hacked already? Which amounts to the same thing.
@JohnSmith-x3y8h So I have to hack the device to make it work properly? It is an overpriced peice of junk.
@@myacctoostale9345
That’s not what I said.
Argumentative
Blocked
ZWO avec leur Seestar a cela de disponible. Il est possible de créer des applications externes pour le contrôler (déjà fait).
@@JohnSmith-x3y8h they have a good point, why should someone who spent 3.2k on a digital scope and have to worry about it turning into a brick when the company dies and having to turn to the community to fix that issue?
How can we be sure this isn't manipulated, like the controversy around Samsung's moon photos? It would be great to understand how the telescope captures and processes the images!
Yeah, I took a bunch of images to test this, like the recent comet and terrestrial objects. You can also dump the raw images and process them yourself
@@scottmanley Thanks for the explanation! It's reassuring to know that raw images are accessible for independent processing. That definitely adds credibility. How was your experience with the comet and terrestrial objects? Did the telescope handle the details well?
@@scottmanley By the way, is the telescope capable of tracking satellites? That would be amazing to see!
@@6227836jschulz it doesn’t slew fast enough for that unfortunately but I might try it for rocket tracking if I can
Easy, go to a dark site and see for yourself.
Scott's first full-length infommercial
Big fan of QVC here. Saw this video there and came to RUclips to watch more of this Scott Manley fella. Great salesmanship!
Planes are expensive
Right lol
Gross.
I'm an amature astrophotographer and it is one of the most frustrating but rewarding hobbies I have ever endeavored. It is truly amazing to go to process your image and see the beauty of space that YOU capture with your own equipment. It is incredibly rewarding and awesome
Indeed, and while the Unistellar hardware does its own image processing you can download the raw data from the telescope and apply your own processing to the image stack. The data saved on my phone also has high resolution pixel depths.
@@scottmanley This was actually a really important detail I think I missed from the video! The whole time I was thinking "I hope this allows me to access the raw data too". Makes a big difference for retired astrophoto nerds who want to occasionally dabble but sometimes just want the dopamine hit experience.
If you go go google you can download HD versions 🤣
I still rock my homemade pvc telescope with 10 bucks worth of lenses in it. The rest is cardboard and glue. I have even got a solar filter for it and it’s actually good enough to see sunspots. I can make it work with my phone camera so there, it’s even digital
Fantastic!
Got a link to any plans?
This is very funky stuff, but as you point out, the view down the eyepiece is actually just a screen. What I'd love is a second purely optical eyepiece on the other side and a flippable secondary so you can use it as a standard optical telescope. And for two very good reasons:
1: You can start off showing your Scouts or whoever the *actual view* through a telescope like this, which for things like the Moon, Jupiter and big comets will be mindblowing, and it's actual photons hitting your eyes. Then, yes, you can go in to however much detail about astrophotography techniques and show them the live stack on the other eyepiece.
2: It will still work as a telescope if the battery/software/processing/firmware/company fails. Hey, it turns out your telescope is no longer supported in the latest update? You can still stick a webcam in the optical port.
Zero chances to see Jupiter with a 85mm reflector. i tried with a 130mm and even in the best conditions it takes a lot of imagination to see the color bands.
@@crono331 I observed Jupiter regularly with a 60mm while growing up. Bands, GRS, zones, etc. That was a "department store scope" from the 1960s. Its optics were far superior to a lot of midrange scopes being sold today. You can observe details on Jupiter in scopes as small as 50mm with a good mount and decent optics.
Things to try:
Block off part of your aperture with your hand--move it in and out from in front of the objective lens. Jupiter is so bright it often washes out its own details. Blocking some of the light helps tone it down and improve image contrast.
Make sure your focus is spot on for your eyes. The higher the power, the more touchy the focus. Purposely move it out of focus then back in to see if you can get a sharper focus.
Make sure you don't have stray light getting into the scope. That can ruin the image. Even with a dew cap, it's possible. And most modern scopes have no baffling to block out stray light sources that will destroy image quality.
But you should be able to see the bands and zones clearly with your 130mm, unless its optics are really terrible.
@@crono331 You'll get a disc and the Galilean moons, which is still cool. I've got definite bands and the GRS with a 130, although in pretty good dark, cold conditions here.
@@crono331 i have seen and shot jupiter with a 114mm dob, it's absolutely doable.
@@xureality with a 114mm dob, really well done.
The best present for a budding astronomer is a really nice pair of binoculars. Edit: and a copy of Turn Left At Orion, and some nice warm clothing.
Binoculars and money for a tank of gas*
Don't forget access to dark skies! Using binoculars in town could get you in trouble!
The digital eyepiece is a big disadvantage since it takes away the sensation of having photons from space objects hitting your retina directly, which is one of the most magical things in astronomy.
I really really do not like these.
That's the way I see it, too. I'd like to ALSO be able to do astrophotography, to see more, but yeah, I think of those photons travelling 2-1/2 million years to interact with my retina for me to detect, to them, at the exact same instant they left.
Photons reflected from a mirror are not the same than came from the space.
@@andylem lol is that right?
@@Top_Weebphysics, mate 😊they do not reflect, they are being consumed and then generate new ones.
This is a cool telescope. However, personally I'd say there's a certain charm to seeing things (however dim) with your own eyes through an optical system. It's as close as most of us will probably get to seeing the stars/planets etc with our own eyes.
If the computer aims it and the computer takes the pictures then why not just surf the internet for great astronomy photos for free. I'm not currently doing astronomy but when I was my enthusiasm came from learning my way around the sky. This is like getting to know a city by going from place to place blindly following your car's GPS. If people get excited by this then more power to them but it sounds boring to me.
@@paulramsey2000 I tend to agree. Seeing Jupiter with my own eye, the amazement I felt to witness its bands of colour, quickly giving way to clouds before my brother could see it. 😊 An unforgettable experience.
@@paulramsey2000 if you think its boring, then you've never actually tried it. Setting up for imaging, capturing, stacking, and processing the image is all a very interesting process full of nuance. This is such a ridiculous argument. Thats like saying "why take pictures when you can look at pictures online?" what? lmao thats kinda stupid dont you think?
Well as described, all of that stacking and processing nuance is just taken care of by the computer. I didn't mean to say that digital astronomy is all boring. Just that hitting a few buttons on your phone and having it automatically point to the nebula and take a stacked photograph sounds boring. Being able to look up at the sky a have some idea where all of those interesting things are made the sky so much bigger to me. I guess I'm saying the journey was the point for me. Zooming to the destination sounds like it throws out an important part of it. As for the general notion of photography I think people spend too much time taking pictures of the same things as everyone else. Photographing major landmarks without bringing a personal perspective to it just fills up disks. Another photograph of the liberty bell seems pointless. A selfie or photograph of friends visiting the liberty bell is documenting an experience. I appreciate that others will have a different view of this. Enjoy.
I setup my Seestar and let it stack while I spend time observing with my 8" Dob. Best of both worlds!
Scott made the biggest mistake an amateur astronomer could make - he bought gear and revived the curse.
The magic of using a telescope is that there is nothing but glass between you and the universe. I'd rather see the Great Red Spot as a blurry, black and white smudge than an AI enhanced video image.
Exactly. There's something extra special about seeing celestial objects through a good old fashioned 'analog' scope, when you know that the photons hitting your retina came from that very object. When I saw the ice caps on mars and the rings of saturn through my telescope for the first time, it was blurry and probably not as perfect as what a digital scope would show, and it was freaking amazing. This thing has some novelty as well, but it's just not the same.
There is no Ai involved, it's simple shift & add
Couldn't agree more! And I have a fully automatic 43cm (17") aperture telescope with a fancy astrocamera, it's still way better personal experience to look through a small telescope with your own eye.
This telescopt doesn't use AI
@@nzavon Still not a real image. Ever seen those vids of regular people on the street getting blown away looking at the moon through a telescope for the first time? That happens because it's real, not a picture on a digital screen that you could just look up on your phone.
"I'm a big space nerd", I think by now you earned the privilege of being called "the space nerd".
Not really a privilege though, just a label, like i am "the argument nerd"
Oh look it's free that makes it very good buy it now buy it
RIP Meade.
Now regretting not having done a firmware update for the 12” LX200…
Better than Veritasium's recent ad for a dishwasher. But it's a worrying trends with science channels.
For real? Searching ... . Found it. [1m52s later] Holy crap! "There's extra room on the large third rack served by rotating 360° Max Jets, and at the end of the cycle the true self-cleaning filtration system automatically cleans this dishwasher filter as it drains so you don't have to do that yourself." Cringe!
It will be a sad, sad day if Steve Mould ever sells out so blatantly.
People trying to make a living here with informative videos, or you over there complaining about someone else's work you could have decided not to watch any poor second of your miserable existence.
Wow, I got so high so fast!
Thanks Scott
For showing us the Sky 🌟
@@QuasiRandomViewer He did the ad separate from his science videos and labeled it as sponsored. It is also 2 minutes, not going to be confused with the science videos. Plus, like it or not, people are very naive about how anything they own works. I think ads showing how appliances work are a PSA he can get paid for even if its mixed with ad speak. (He could tone the ad speak down a little. You can plug the product without using marketing terms such as the tv show "How It's Made" which felt more historical and explanative, than marketing. ) The discovery channel reaches no one under 30 anymore. This ad showed a lot of people what the inside of their dishwasher does that they never had any clue about. The discovery channel used to provide that function, but they failed to adapt to changing media.
@@_PatrickO What's amusing about Veritasium's dishwasher ad is the comment section. Huge numbers of his presumed followers rush to praise the series of excellent (and non-sponsored) videos explaining how to get the best out of dishwashers on the Technology Connections channel. While not a direct rival to Veritasium, the consensus seems to be that you learn more and more entertainingly from Alec's long-form Technology Connections videos than from watching Derek's Veritasium ad.
For the money, the ZWO Seestar S50 is a much better bargain at about 1/5th the price (aperture is only 50mm vs 83mm, but the software is excellent, and it's delightfully compact).
(Assuming this comment is fine to make because this video isn't declared as an ad)
I second this. The nice part about it: people already figured out how to talk to the telescope without the app. So even if they ever disappear, there's at least a chance the telescope doesn't become paperweight. Not sure if this also applies to the Odyssey Pro
Yes, there's always a lower cost Chinese copy made.
I just checked that out. That does look nice.
Hard to compare tbh... o_O
The Odyssey’s 83mm aperture pulls in 3x more light, so you get way brighter and sharper views. Makes a huge difference for star parties! Got mine back in March 2024, and I’m loving it so far! :D
@@scottmanley This "Chineese copy" at least supports ASCOM and will not stop working when its producer goes out of business.
Side note, one can always begin with a Binoculars.
They are quite good enough for some basic observation, cheap and you can always have other uses for them once you decide to build a more power telescope.
That's quite a hefty pricepoint considering their competition are putting out $500 smart scopes that produce incredible data much easier. But yeah, almost need to put the "this is an ad" disclaimer. But I wouldn't exactly justify this cost increase over the cheaper options.
Do you have Adblock or something running that’s hiding the ‘promotion’ tags that RUclips adds?
@@scottmanley Why not just be straight and honest and say it at the start of the video. Something like: Hello, this company has paid me to advertise this overpriced telescope with a pretend eyepiece that you can fool boy scouts with...
@@scottmanleyI have RUclips Premium. It does NOT show any tag or mention of it being an infomercial.
@@scottmanleyI’m on mobile with RUclips premium and I didn’t get anything about paid promos. It’s weird.
Looks like a cool telescope Scott, you sound like you had a lot of your youthful nostalgia playing around with it
@@PejmanManI also didn't see the usual "contains paid promotion" or something similar.
Initially I assumed it was a sponsored-not-sponsored video because he said it was loaned to him. About ¼ through the video I thought maybe he has something about his Apple job that says he can't do official sponsorships.
Either way, buyer beware as ever.
The photos on the box “are never as good as what you can see through the eyepiece”? I think you meant the reverse of that. 0:33
lol… this is what happens when I add lib things
I didn't even realize until I read this comment! 😅
@@scottmanley - Followed up at 1:00 by referring to an 80 mm telescope as 80 cm.
If you go to the Unistellar website some of those pictures they use to show off their equipment are ones I took with my eQuinox2 and gave permission to Unistellar to use. I apologize for that. I know people will think that they can just point and shoot and get a crisp Trifid Nebula like on their webpage. BTW the Trifid pic took about 5 days of figuring which magic sequence of how to take the subframes to produce the minimum amount of garbage artifacts then a day of Pixinsight to bring out all the details properly.
I'm all about making it easier. Back before HD TV was a thing, I experimented with stacking images from a Sony TRV900 camcorder, which of course only captured 720x480 pixels. But in the stacking process, not only was the sensitivity improved, but also the resolution, since the images were magnified (to 2160x1440, IIRC) before stacking, the X and Y offsets to compensate for earth rotation were just a fraction of a pixel per frame. I took about a 10 minute sequence of the Andromeda galaxy at F/1.8, 1/8 second, and did all of the processing using an animation application of my own design. The processing involved subtracting a black frame (itself produced by stacking a minute of video with the lens cap on) to compensate for the different pixel sensitivities, then expanding and offsetting the frames, and just superimposing all of these frames. A little sharpening of the image was necessary because the pixels being stacked were 3x3 pixel squares, and this did produce an image that was .. amazing, but nowhere near the quality of real telescope images. I'm sure that some of this was due to compression artifacts, since this was from miniDV tape, so it was near incredible anyway. I mean, I knew where to point the camera because I could see a faint fuzzy spot in the sky, surrounded by a few visible stars, so I aimed it by finding that pattern of stars in the viewfinder. Like I said, not a very impressive image, but made more impressive by the virtue of being beyond reasonable expectations.
The real issue is them using a cheap sensor. 20-30mp sensors should be easily available and simply included for that high price. My phone has a 16mp sensor and is under $200? 7.7mp at f/3.9 is really them setting the bar low, IMO. Even Celestron is pulling the "Apple Tax" move here with a puny 6.4mp sensor ( and a future "upgrade" for only $2000 or some idiocy, most likely ) The chip itself is close to $50, retail. So, definitely can do better.
@@plektosgaming Just slapping in more MP does not help in low light situations, quite the contrary. You want big individual pixels, so they capture more light and produce less noise. I checked this scope, it uses a Sony IMX347 with 2.9 μm pixels. Phones cameras are typically around 1 μm. Proper cameras with full frame sensors can go up to 30 MP at 5 μm pixel size.
Not saying $3000 is reasonable (I am more disappointed by the 85mm reflector), but you also can't expect the same as in cameras that alone already cost more.
In this class of telescope is the Celestron Origin is an intelligent home telescope. Origin’s 6” Rowe-Ackermann Schmidt Astrograph (RASA) optical design with a 6 inch aperture and fast f/2.2 focal ratio, you get remarkable image brightness and clarity with less exposure time. It is listed at $3,999.00.
Yes, the Origin looks like the obvious step up, but I haven’t had a chance to work with it. Also it supports filters which can let you do some specialized imaging. Still needs an app for now
The Perth Observatory in Australia is updating their Lowell telescope, which helped co discover the rings of Uranus, into an internet telescope, so any university or institution can use it. We already have a few telescopes like that, there’s one which tracks space junk and helps the global meteor network, and a 12” telescope for observing objects. And why spend $3k on a fancy telescope where you could spend about $1.5k on a decent motorised telescope and just attach your phone to the eyepiece. I’ve gotten photos of dozens of objects that way
Back in the analog days, it was categorically impossible to manipulate image data without introducing errors. Getting the highest quality signal and minimizing noise was therefore the only way to get good images.
But with digital imaging, there’s just about no limit to what computational photography can do with a shitty sensor…so long as your subject isn’t moving.
A fast enough shutter will fix the motion problem.
Short exposure times help the movement problem. I started astrophotography on film with an SLR on a tripod, and make prints by physically stacking the negatives. I shot near the pole, and took short exposures with short and mid-length lenses.
The modern digital scopes do well with fairly crappy guidance and lots of short exposures (5-15s is not unusual). When I step through my smart scope's individual images, the subject is hopping all over the frame. But once they're stacked, I just have to crop a bit and it comes out fine.
I'm a bit surprised you failed to mention Vaonis' Vespera and Stellina smart telescopes, which got available at the same time, if not before Unistellar's ones. Their scopes are of a much better quality and the on-board algorithms are just one or two magnitudes above those on Unistellar. Just to mention a few functionalities:
- Mosaic mode, which allows you to image areas bigger than the scope field of view and act as a virtual derotator (although Stellina has a physical derotator).
- Continue mode, which allows you to stack the same object over several nights.
- Planning mode, which allows you to program your scope to shoot at targets that are not yet visible.
- Automatic refocus. Objects get out of focus when temperature drops. Vaonis' scopes will refocus automatically before the image gets too blurry.
- Ability to download the individual pictures in FITS format, so that you can process them yourself on the same kind of applications you mentioned using with your former telescope.
I saw Brian May showing off his on Instagram
If you're looking to try a small telescope for much cheaper, the Dwarf2 and Dwarf3 are available for $500 & cheaper.
As a bonus they can used in the daytime for tracking things like planes, birds, wildlife, etc.
...and it is super light and fits easily into your backpack for hikes.
Yes! That Dwarf 3 was what I was hoping for a review of.
I love my dwarf II, my S50 is not a match to it because it’s not as good stacking photos. Dwarf III should be amazing!
Dwarf 2 has been discontinued but unlike every other competitor is has replaceable storage and battery so won't end up as e-waste.
@tma2001 I mentioned it because with the D3 out there is the increased option to buy a used D2 now for less.
In my opinion, it's a better device, at least for my use case and a great way for a beginner to jump into the hobby for cheap.
There really isn't anything close to the D2 in size and weight that can fit into a climbing pack, and automatically track a person making a climb and descent in 4k, and then still work very nicely at night for Astro. It's the ultimate setup for anything in the mountains.
The D3 is bigger, which I don't personally like. I have plenty of giant telescopes at home and portability and weight are my biggest metric.
@@PowerScissor yeah I'll be holding onto my D2 although I wish they would give us custom dark frames and shooting presets from D3. I'd also like the option to not save the raw fits files or png stacked file when just using it for EAA. In fact there are tons simple software features missing which I find frustrating as a software developer.
I did a Astro photo class in college we had a night shot at Stony ridge telescope a 28” Newtonian our target was Orion shooting 4x5 B&W 400 asa film I got a great shot my film was the best shot of the night. Stony ridge was one of the locations referred to in the book Lucifer’s Hammer. One can really appreciate what the early astronomers did standing in the cold up 20’ in the air at on a home shop made Elevators guiding their photographs.
Yeah I never had a chance to use film with a telescope, but I did learn to develop film as part of my astronomy degree, used it for spectra.
Wow memory lane! I remember building a 6" reflector from plans in The Amateur Scientist ages ago. Definitely wouldn't want the hassles again! ;-)
Years ago, I was staying the night at Fossil Falls on Hwy. 395, heading to the Sierra's, and a group from UCLA were in the next campsite setting up telescopes for photography because dry desert air and no planes near China Lake. They invited me to view and it was amazing.
This seems to take out nearly all the work that makes astrophotography a challenging and fun art.
Indeed, but that leaves more time for me to make videos.
Most people don't want to do the work in the first place. This is ideal for them. They can take great photos without having to make it into a complete hobby.
@@EnglishMike But if you do not want to do the work, then why using a telescope at all? Just look at even better images from the web.
@@dampfwasi Why do people still take photographs of the places they visit (without people in them) when they know there are better images available on the web? I have hundreds of such photos.
You're still doing it. You're still engaging in the experience of setting up your telescope, choosing the target and taking photos right there and then.
I'm sure plenty of amateurs have bemoaned every new convenience that's come along for the amatuer astronomer, digital photography especially.
e.g. "Where's the sense of accomplishment when the Photoshop does all the work for you?"
And what's the point in doing any astrophotography if you can't match what's online? The new scope only changes the amount of work involved, it doesn't really change much else.
I agree. They're great for those with a casual interest in stargazing, but they don't fully scratch the itch for most dedicated AP guys/gals.
I do know some big Dob owners who use smart scopes (SeeStar50 in most cases) while observing some of the fainter NGC & IC objects to verify field location. That's a pretty neat use case, especially if using very large Dobs (18" to 24"+) searching for very faint targets (+15 mag galaxies)... OTOH, trying to keep eyes dark adapted is going to be a bitch with any smart scope, even if using a red screen cover, which kinda defeats the whole point of searching them down with a big Dobsonian....
I got some insane images of the aurora back a few months ago, and on one of the images, Ursa Major was in the background. Unintentionally dramatic image :)
I am a Kickstarter backer for the original eVScope. Absolutely love it.
With Orion and Meade going out of business leaving many customers with no support, it was looking like amateur astronomers were going to have to go back to the days of grinding and silvering mirrors using Moore books.
Glad someone is still out there doing something for amateurs.
Still have celestron
@@massmike11 Oh the sweet temptation of having a market to themselves and a monopoly...🙂
Well, some years ago, I saw your video about a travel refractor. Bought the 70mm. Got hooked. Now I'm into high resolution planetary imaging. Best drug ever. TY Mr Manley for giving me back the dream my 7yo me had !
Glad the travelscope turned out to be a good choice!
I gained passing interest in astronomy at a young age in the early 60's while in Colorado visiting my uncle whom taught at the university and was part of a group of teachers that gathered enough funding to build a respectable telescope for the school. Watching him look at a chart then pick up an industrial styled button box with cable, he moved the dome to a point then began fine tuning it. I was lucky to see Jupiter, Saturn, and the Moon so close it kept leaving the view quickly. It was very quiet.
This reminds me of of the introduction of sampling keyboards in the music world. When they were introduced in the 80s you could suddenly create a chamber orchestra in the comfort of your living room.
Hmm i dont know.
For me this is almost the same as downloading it from the internet.🤔
I used to have a 10” Schmidt Cassegrain reflector. Spent hours getting good photographs of different galaxies. This thing looks great for my grandkids. Thank you Scott
I've been lucky enough to use one of these. It is a wonderfully magical experience!
$1,800 to $3,500 range? Holy night sky, Batman!!!
As he said, it's a mid level entry. That price would barely buy a good mount and tripod for a full rig.
@netanmaldoran4816 That is not mid range! 🤡
@@richlo8887 'High' range (they go for more): $10,000 Astro rig
Low range: $600 seestar
Idk what to tell you man, it's an expensive hobby, it's not for everyone.
@@netanmaldoran4816 Wrong!
Entry level -$250+
Mid level - $500+
High end - $1000+
Pro level -$5000+
@@richlo8887 bud, $5k can't even buy a 'pro' level mount like an EQ8rH
1:03 Wow an 80 cm refractor for less than 100 dollars? Makes sense that meade would go out of business with a deal that good lol.
Meade went out of business because they fell asleep while whole industry moved towards astrophotography. Celestron survived because of RASA and Starizona which enebled them to image at F2. However, they are also going to fail if nothing will change because their most important parts are not available anywhere. I am talking about F/7 reducer and aluminium dew shield. They don't have one shop in China that would have them despite thousands of their SCT sold in here.
@@luboinchina3013 facts
@@luboinchina3013 Celestron is owned by Skywatcher and Orion mounts were rebadged skywatcher mounts. For example the Orion Atlas mount is the skywatcher eq-6 and parts are interchangeable.
Of course, if I was being a cynic it could be downloading hubble quality pictures and fading them in :D
My thoughts exactly.
Except for near earth fast movers, i cant see the point of a privat telescope.
Except that it can save the individual raw images, which you can then download onto your PC and process them yourself. So nope, no sneaky sleight of hand stuff going on.
There's absolutely no way they could get away with it anyway given their customer base. Not even worth worrying about.
Scott if you like telescopes get in touch with me and you can come do astronomy on the 100 inch Hooker telescope at Mt Wilson. We are currently working on an advanced science camera package to do observations with the old telescope. We just got done doing engineering on the system at Mt Wilson and our first science run will be in June of 2025.
Sounds great... I need to figure out how to fly down for that.
I wonder how long it will be till you will be able to buy time or request images from an orbital telescope as a normal person.
I think the Seestar looks like the best option currently, and since everyone just wants to take pictures, it looks like a good starting point. When you get tired of taking pics and want to learn the sky then it may be time get the proper scope, a 6" or 8" dob will do. Binocs will also be good.
Used to have a 12” dob, but didn’t use it as much as my 100mm refractor
I use a 4" f/7 refractor on a small altaz mount for a grab-n-go setup, and it's by far my most used scope.
After that would be my 8" Dob. Although I love my 5" refractor & 12" Dob, neither get used nearly as much as their smaller siblings. The 5" isn't that much bigger, but the larger size mount it take to ride on is a beast. The 12" has a pyrex primary that cools nearly as quickly as the 8", but the solid tube is a bear getting in & out of the house.
Thank you for this video Scott. These tiny scopes are carving an interesting niche for the younger generations of astronomers. At age 67 I am old school, so I will keep my 22" heavy dobsonian motor driven and computerized telescope a while longer.
22” I’m jealous
Don‘t be so sure of that. A lot of my generation (I‘m 24) will go out of their way to have memorable experiences and see the planets for themselves compared to using this fancy and expensive piece of equipment. I find a lot of enjoyment in searching for eye pieces and gear in general and then putting it to the test. Real analog astronomy is where it‘s at
If these can be hooked in to a network of owners, they could be left running in the backyards of people world wide, and combine images from many units in to a massive virtual telescope. Cloudy where you are, share the images off of scopes where it's clear. Spot something moving, send out a group request to slew scopes on to the same object for hyper accurate distance and direction calculation. Volunteer scope time to deep-feild exposures.
Astrobiscuit was/is doing something similar, AFAIK
I don't look at smart scopes as an either/or product. They are just another tool to help people enjoy the night sky or in fact the day time sky as well as most have solar filters. I don't have one by the way, not because I have anything against them but because over the years I have built up rigs that can do the same thing, but admittedly I do have to polar align them, but as the mini pcs I use for control have PA software it takes no more than a minute or two to do that. I still like using binoculars for star gazing and even the good old mark 1 eyeball. Astronomy, like any other hobby should be fun, the tools we use to that end are entirely up to personal choice. We're so lucky these days to have such a wide range of gear to choose from.
Whatever we choose, they are all reduced to ornaments by cloudy weather!
Nice video. You solved part of my Christmas list, got two of them for grandkids.
That looks phenomenal , thanks for covering it!
Seeing Orbital perform Brown must have been amazing; that and Carl Cox FACT opened my eyes to that imagination can be realised. That there is more to this word that what the standard information gatekeepers have us believe and we can escape their narratives and no longer be stuck where time becomes a loop, where time becomes a loop, where time becomes a loop.
Unistellar sent me one as well and I posted the video this morning. It was a really fun telescope to test! Note: the Black Friday sale has ended.
Got 40 mins on the whirlpool galaxy with my s50 last night :). Great piece of kit.
I appreciate this video tremendously, have been looking at different options for weeks. Thanks Scott!
These smart scopes are a game changer. If you go to a star party, such as at Chabot Space Science Center, you'll get a look at a bunch of smart telescopes that folks bring to help decide which one is right for you, and if you'd want one.
I was always put off by astro photography because of the steep learning curve involved. The complexity of building running an astro rig, and stacking/processing pictures always sounded like way more hassle than I was willing to subject myself too. These smart telescopes are perfect for people like me. We bought the Origin, mainly because of the bigger OTA and the possibility of future upgrades and we just love it.
So I spent about 15 grand on a Celestron 1100 EdgeHD telescope, CGX mount (junk), automatic alignment camera, focus motor etc etc etc, spend hours to days getting it all to work and align and take images, and this thing aligns faster and takes better images for a quarter of the price...
Thanks Scott... thanks....
Your celestron take better pictures, it just takes time
Unistellar is kinda cool but what I really want them to do is make a full mini-observatory that can stay outside. Literally zero setup and having it actively contribute to science all the time would be super cool. Would definitely mitigate the fear of not using the telescope after a few months because not only would it be no-setup but it would still be doing something even if I stopped using it.
This is how I find out that Orion went out of business. I just bought my Skyquest XT6 last year from them. Used to to see the eclipse! (yes I had a solar filter and my eyes didn't vaporize)
Convenience is THE feature of this for me. Another thing that is critical to me is no AI "enhancement" (as a particular brand of phone does when pointed at the moon), so you really are just looking at what is there in the sky right now and captured by the image sensor. I hadn't realized how sophisticated it was with image stacking and sky haze removal. This is definitely for people who want to view objects in the sky, but aren't interested in becoming telescope hobbyists.
My days of astrophotography were using 35mm film and long exposures guiding manually with an off axis reticle eyepiece. Some of my exposures were an hour long.
im in the middle of 3d printing my own harmonic drive mounts and use OnStep for the controller to attempt astrophotography. TONS of work but like you said if I can pull this off and get results I will be so extatic. At the same time I am thinking about getting a newer smart telescope for my kids and when I don't feel like setting up my rig. Great video!
And just when I thought I was talented for being able to rig up a pipe mount, here you are printing a harmonic drive 😂
Good luck with your effort!! Learning AP is a tough cookie, much less trying to learn on homemade gear, but if you pull it off it'll definitely be a feather in your cap.
The biggest tip I can offer is to be patient yet persistent. Try to isolate issues and solve each problem that crops up systematically. Start small with a lightweight, small aperture scope with short focal length. It'll make life a ton easier when starting out.
@@Astro_Ape Thanks for the tip! :)
Scott, I have to apologize for watching you for so long without subscribing. Honestly though I was. Rare cheers to the RUclips algorithm. Super cool gizmo but I think I’ll stick with dragging out my 10” Dob and finding stuff myself. Nothing can ever replace the memory of my daughter and I observing M42 and M43 for the first time just pushing a not so great Dob around by hand. Wish I had the $ to get into astrophotography. It looks super challenging and rewarding.
Not sure I would recommend the Unistellar, it is *way* too expensive for what you get. If you want to get your feet wet for a few hundred dollars, get a Dwarf 3 or the Seestar S30. You can actually do more with the data these collect and you can properly stack them on a PC for higher quality. And if you really like it, and wanna get deep into it, get a good cooled camera, a Juwei 17 harmonic mount, a small guide scope, a guide camera, and of course a telescope. That way you can upgrade each component whenever you want. And there's excellent free software for controlling your telescope, like Nina (Windows) or KStars/EKOS (Linux). You can also get a small mini computer that lets you control everything with an app, like the ZWO AsiAir and the Touptek Astrostation. Drawback of the ZWO gear: It's more expensive and they lock you into their cameras and focusers. Touptek and other systems are completely open. If you can afford a Unistellar... just get a proper telescope setup, or a much cheaper Dwarf 3 if you want something that is perfectly usable for beginners.
Yes, lots of cheaper Chinese alternatives
I see the main value add is the software, support, and updates. Since this is essentially an automatically correcting long exposure camera system with tracking, ease of use will be useful for most casual individuals. There's also reason to expect it to be able to handle very long exposures.
1:00 - An 80 cm refractor? That fits in a backpack... as a first telescope? I'm sold!
Good catch 😂
It'd be like a grab-n-go version of the Yerkes 40" haha.
Centimeters, millimeters, dekaliters...what's the difference so long as you're healthy? :D Three and one quarter inches in Freedom Units. Or 4.23x10-4 Furlongs.
@@saundby - I remember when Google first did unit conversions. I'd ask it "1 cubic parsec in teaspoons".
Hipster telescope isn't the same as billion year old photons hitting your cells.
So go outside and look up. Those same photons are going to hit your eyes, and you'll save yourself a heap of money.
@@BabyMakR The purpose of a telescope with a true eyepiece is to allow your eye to focus on those photons. Your eyes cannot do that by just going outside and looking up.
@@DominickHide That was his point - it's not about "the photons", it's about what you see
0:37 “The photos on those things are never as good as what you can see through the eye piece” 1:06 “80cm refractor” FFS you had one job Scott… 😐
Great episode! Great comparison images!
That is frackin’ awesome. I have been looking to get back into amateur astro. The demise of Orion was certainly a blow to those aspirations. I will definitely be checking out digital scope options.
I’ve been very pleased with my $500 Seestar. And the updates have been stunning.
80 centimeter telescope that fits in a backpack, new goal unlocked.
Fantastic! Some day I'm definitely going to get one! 😃
Thanks, Scott!!!
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Good vid. Just shouting out seeing Orbital. They had a great show here in Chicago too. It was good to be able to see them after being essentially non-existent in the US for forever.
One idea I have is setting up a website to connect all these digital telescopes. Owner can rent their telescopes to others for seeing different sky.
there is an amazing experience to do astrophotography. To make mistakes when aligning, to improve and to buy new scopes. It cannot be replicated with a point and shoot thing.
I see lots of conspiracy theorists here thinking that the scope is actually downloading images taken elsewhere. Easy to check. Just hold a piece of cardboard between the telescope and the target, and see if you get the image anyway.
I really don't understand the gatekeeping going on in the comments. Did the old-timers complain this much when the kids started using digital sensors and Photoshop to do in minutes what it used to take hours to do in the dark room?
How much time and money would a novice need to invest just to match the quality of images Scott showed in this video? Sure you can buy a much cheaper telescope with similar quality optics, but once you've added up the value of all the time you would need to invest in researching all the other hardware and software tools you need to create such images, along with learning how to use them effectively and the techniques involved in taking the images and processing them correctly, you're likely talking dozens if not hundreds of hours. Only a tiny fraction of telescope owners get this far, even those who do spend thousands of their first scope.
Can people do better for the same cost of equipment, or less? Absolutely, but it takes a committed hobbyist to do it -- someone who is happy and able to spend many hours developing the skills required. The rest of us simply don't have the time, money or inclination to try.
So what's wrong with non-hobbyists getting a taste of what can be done with astrophotography? Do amateur photographers still bristle at the existence of the iPhone and complain that taking good quality photos is too easy these days, or that people could do better if they bought a $500 SLR camera instead of a $1000 iPhone?
This is the type of telescope designed for people like me -- astronomy enthusiasts, but without the inclination and/or opportunity to invest the hours and level of commitment astrophotography needs to do it the old-fashioned way.
Better ways to spend money to bring you closer to the stars.
@@Cruz474 Such as?
@scottmanley ...and one more comment on 9:10 - it is not actually you producing these images, that telescope is. You had actually produced the images back in 2004 and these are really something to be proud of. Using this thing is like typing prompt to create an AI image, vs doing the actual photography..
Having a small collection of telescopes, including S50 and Dwarf II; I can say that planets are indeed not the prime target of these small smart scopes. But by far, for me, the best overall is the Dwarf. Absolutely fantastic support to the community and added features.
I have a Dwarf Labs Dwarf II not as ‘easy’ as this one but a fraction of the price and I’m pleased with the results.
15:34 "And while I can confirm this is the most fun I've had with a telescope in a long time, I cannot guarantee that when *_you_* get a telescope that the skies will be clear"
This is the most realistic part of the advertisement you've said and it's hilariously true
I have that same Meade scope, I use it more than my $1200 carbon fiber triplet on an equally expensive tracking mount
not entirely sober 😂
but seriously this was just fascinating to see the latest in modern digital telescopes - really makes it easy and fun - so thanks for showing us 🎉
I've logged into RUclips for possibly the first time ever to leave a comment so things must be bad! All the way through I was thinking "surely this is a paid advert?" Sure enough, right at the end, which was a bit sneaky, it was there. I'm quite surprised at Scott given his scientific background that he compared the quality of these images to some he took 18 years ago! That's a lifetime in terms of astrophotography. It's also worth pointing out that for c$3,000 or equivalent, you could get a setup that absolutely blows this thing out of the water. Sure it's self-contained but what if the app is no longer supported? What if you get bored of the Orion Nebula and want to upgrade like you can with a normal rig?
I love your rocket videos together with Eager Space and Marcus House. Eager Space supplement your videos with his calculations and Marcus House supplement with the journalism point of view. Thanks to all of you.
The Google targeted advertising is amazing! This weekend I was shopping online for telescopes and today Scott Manley uploads this video about digital telescopes, which I didn't even know was a thing. I must admit, the Odyssey is a lot more portable than the 12" Dob I was eyeing.
get a dob, that will be way more capable than anything unistellar can offer
@@clayel1 Ya, that's the way I'm leaning.
@@elephantsarenuts5161 I bought my first telescope (8" dob) last month and there's just something about manually locating and observing the object through the glass. I think about how people hundreds and thousands of years ago were looking at these same objects and I feel this connection with the past I haven't felt before, it's really special. I feel like it just wouldn't be the same with a digital telescope but I guess I wouldn't know for sure until I tried it.
Does the app and the telescope require Unistellar's servers to be operational? What happens if in 5 years they go out of business or get bought by another company and they decide they want to move the company in a different direction? Does your telescope become a $3,000 paperweight This is the problem with everything being smart, you don't actually own anything. Everything either becomes a subscription or goes away (or both).
Yes, it's junk. You must be f****** crazy to buy it with your own money, and being happy with a purchase, where it can stop working next day.
They're gonna be $1500 paperweights.
Does it have a replaceable battery? External Power? Also, does the app rely on internet services, or is it fully standalone? Thanks Scott!
External power and there's a mode which limits the mount rotation if you have it plugged in.
I have their Eq2. Similar setups with no eyepiece. The battery in mine is good for about 11 hours. Probably the only thing this brand is better at than other manufacturers
It’s a difficult balance here. Scott’s 20 year old kit is showing its age (understandably) I have spent a not an insignificant amount on astrophotography equipment and these scopes cannot match the images I can obtain. Where they do benefit massively is their ease of use. I think they are great for outreach and getting results quickly. I will say that half of the pleasure I get is all about the post processing. I get that you can download the RAW images but it won’t match a proper AP setup. My issue is that I no longer have time to setup my kit each time. On average it takes about an hour and half to get going. No great .so I am in this situation where I have decent kit but it’s not getting used.
The true telescope experience. New scope arrives, clouds for days.
Smart telescope? Much cheaper and faster to buy a Hubble photograph. "Alexa, order me a photo of M42".
For me, the hobby is setting up my scope, leveling, polar aligning, finding the subject and taking the photo.
nice image processing trick - yet there is a difference in essence between using a conventional optical telescope and and electronic assisted vision system:
in one case you detect an actual photon coming from far, far away with your own eye, in the other you're watching a screen.
Wonderful technology! ❤
I bought some new astronomy tech myself recently, retiring my Losmandy G-11 for a Skywatcher EQ-6R. While the G-11 has served me well, life is too short for star hopping under mediocre skies.
do any of these telescopes use AI to "enhance" the image or do they just algorithmically process the light that hits the sensor?
My perception is that this would be good for outreach, or something for parents to get their kids started on an addiction to imaging (and chasing ever better gear 😁)
@Scott Manley, re: the Meade backpack telescope, did you mean 80 mm. refractor, not 80 cm?
You can buy eyepieces that stack, have an sd card slot to get the raw images, and the same style lcd-in-eyepiece viewer. They're pricey, but not as pricey as this whole kit. The advantage of having it in the eyepiece is that you can swap it out for a normal eyepiece very quickly, or you can swap out the telescope.
Do you have a suggestion, because all I saw were prototypes
@scottmanley I don't have any experience with them personally, but I know my local astronomical society was discussing them a while back. I'll see if I can dig up that thread from the mailing list and come back with some product names, even if it isn't a recommendation.
I will say that the software for processing raw images has gotten quite good though. Siril has an initial learning curve, but once you get over the hump it's incredibly powerful for free open source software.
0:34 What you can see through the eyepiece is never as good as the photos on the box.
I've been meaning to go out and photograph some DSO's. Weather has been the worst for past month here now. I ordered a polar wedge for my setup as well and I'm afraid I won't be able to use it for another month when it arrives.