thanks so much for this review. I'm just now looking to upgrade from my 100mm Bausch & Lomb Schmidt Cassegrain from the 1980's, and I don't want to jump and then be disappointed.
Wonderful, very thorough review James. I picked up an EdgeHD 8 earlier this year and run it on an EQ6-R Pro. Overall, I’m really pleased with mine although I’m still tinkering with my image train. With a Celestron OAG, I seem to be just a little long in my back focus and as a result, I’m seeing some odd spikes through the brighter stars. Plate solving says that my focal length with the 0.7 reducer is 1489mm which is longer than the expected 1422mm. I’ll probably end up testing a shorter ZWO OAG just to shorten the image train.
Thanks Ken. I should have talked a little more on the OAG and back focus because it is an issue. I went with the zwo version (old/small version) because it was thin. My first choice was actually the celestron "thin" OAG.. but I couldn't find it in stock anywhere. The ZWO one I have is decent.. but the prism is small. If I want to use a guide cam larger than the 178.. say a 174mm for example.. I would need a larger prism. Appreciate the comments and good luck with the backspace/oag tuning. Once you get it dialed in it's going to work really well :)
Perfectly done review James! As another EdgeHD8 owner I completely agree on just about everything you stated. The only think I haven't noticed is bad halo'ing around bright stars. I've not had any issues like you showed. I can concur on the slight chromatic aberration from the reducer as well. I also think the ASI294MM in Bin2 mode is the best camera to use with this scope as you mentioned. I've tried it with the 2600MM and was not as happy with the image quality as I am with the 294MM. With my observatory walls and the CEM120, I am able to image in wind speeds up to around 12mph and on occasion higher depending on which direction the wind is blowing. I've yet to do any planetary imaging, but I may try some out this month, if I can get some clear skies. I also agree that it holds collimation amazingly well. I've only had to collimate a few times in over a year, mostly when moving it around a lot. The last time I did it was when I made my collimation video and that's been months ago and it's still good.
Thanks Joe! That's right.. I remember now on the halos.. that you don't get them. I thought it could have been my filters but there is a formula that you can use to calculate where the halo is occurring.. and if I remember correctly it pointed to the reducer. I kind of stopped TSing the issue. Interesting though. On planets.. Aug 13th is Saturns opposition.. so anytime over the next week would be good for Saturn.. and with a bright moon up.. might as well :)
Thank you James! First of all, your Pac Man Nebula image is outstanding! I purchased an EdgeHD 8” last year but have only used it on a couple of targets. I’m planning to dust it off and use it in combination with my Esprit 150ED as they have similar focal lengths. For galaxies, I plan to try using my 2600MC with the Edge on my EQ6 to collect colour data and then use my 2600MM with my Esprit 150 on my EQ8 to collect the Luminance and Hydrogen Alpha. That’s my plan anyway. Thank you for going through the pros and cons of the Edge: that was very helpful.
@@DSOImager Hello James, I have a question - I purchased an EdgeHD 8 and a colleague mentioned this: You’ll be shocked at the bloaty stars compared to the short refractors, it is just an everyday occurrence with SCTs and RCTs. Maybe not so much ‘bloating’ - just much larger stars. It takes some getting used to. What are your thoughts or have you experienced bloating or larger-than-normal stars?
@@fotografiabymiguel Hi Miguel, this is mostly a function of image scale. Just now I've compared a couple of raw subs... same targets, different scopes.. the Edge 8 compared to the at115edt, a triplet refractor. If I register the at115edt image to the edge image.. thus comparing the two at the same image scale.. the stars between the two look nearly identical.. in fact the edge stars look better to me. Ironically, the scope that I experienced the worst star bloat was my sv70t, a 70mm refractor. I think the issue was just the scope because my little 65phq handles the stars much better than the sv70t. Additionally, with starXterminator and processing/stretching the stars separately from the rest of the image.. even if I had some star bloat.. it's easily corrected in post processing. Hope this helps! Grats on your purchase!
Nice review. I liked the images, especially the Crescent nebula, the Eagle and the Horsehead. Your information about binning for guiding stability is really helpful. For me, this scope is on order right now. But looks like I’ll have to spend more money on EQ6-R mount 😂😂. Thanks a lot for making this great video and sharing your experience with the scope. Very nice presentation 👍🏼👍🏼.
Great presentation and review. Thank you. I've just bought an edge8. Not used it yet as I'm battling with dovetails for guide scopes, but looks a great scope
Good video. I'm going on 2 years with my HD8 and am still learning to get the most out of it. Interesting on the binning. I skipped the 294 for the 071 so I wouldn't have to bin and lose resolution but sounds like binning may have it's benefits. I will have to do more research.
Thanks Rod. In regards to binning.. it's a rabbit hole with strong opinions when it comes to CMOS sensors :) Bin2 on the 294mm works real well with the Edge. I can't say how other camera's would do.
I'm hoping to pickup the CGEM II 11" 1100 edgeHD on the CGEM Equitorial Computerized Mount with about 4 Televue eyepieces within the next couple of months. Very nice presentation, it was most helpful. Than you.
Your planetarys are outstanding. Btw, Have you considered the ZWO ASI174MM for your guide cam? The large sensor better fits the prism in the Celestron OAG. How easy is it to locate guide stars with your set up? Ahh, I notice you're using a zwo oag with a smaller prism.
Thanks Ron! Yea.. I'm using that small prism zwo oag.. so an asi174 would be wasted. The 178mm I"m using is fully utilized.. a larger sensor wouldn't improve things. Most of the time, I dont have a problem finding a guide star.. but occasionally some targets it's hard. For example.. I did have to abandon a few galaxies due to limited guide stars.
@@DSOImager James Lamb's channel has a OAG setup where he uses Stellarium to plan where to locate his OAG. Might save some time, but looks complicated!
I have a non HD C8. I use a Starizona focal reducer which is stated to reduce a C8 to F7.1. My main camera is an ASI071MC Pro with and APS-C sized sensor. I also use the Celestron OAG with an ASI174mm mini guide camera to take advantage of the OAG 12.5mm prism.. I assumed you had the focal reducer installed for the Alnitak photo? The first time I took a similar image of the Horsehead framed with Alnitak to the left I had I was using Celestron's 6.3 focal reducer. Alnitak was closer to the frame edge and the looping artifact that you showed was much more pronounced, brighter and tighter plus a large halo. I did write up a question in Cloudy Nights and the response was Alnitak was a problem child of astrophotographers. I thought maybe it was the focal reducer. I will have to check out your video on how to shoot the Horsehead. Now that I have the Starizona focal reducers I experienced a similar artifact imaging IC 63 Ghost of Cassiopeia recently. The adjacent star, yCAS, is very bright, mag 2.3, and even though it wasn't in the frame but just outside it left an artifact similar to your second Horsehead image except mine was brighter. I did some testing using NINA Framing Assistant. After determining the rotation of my camera frame I would move the frame so the star was in the corners and along the sides of the frame. I all cases except in the middle of the long side of the sensor frame I got the looping artifact. The C8 SCT optic hole is 38mm in diameter. Is the C8 Edge HD the same? The optical circle of the Starizona focal reducer is 27mm. My ASI071MC sensor diagonal is 28.4mm. I assumed because my sensor diagonal didn't quite fit inside the focal reducer's image circle that was causing the artifacts. Back focus for the Starizona FR is 90.3 and adding up the OAG and filter drawer etc I got my back focus to 90.5mm. I even tested without the OAG to see if it caused the issue. I removed my Antilia Quad band filter and no change. I did the same framing test at F/10 with a back focus of 127mm. No artifact present in the corners and along the sides. My conclusion is the focal reducer. I installed my ASI585MC planetary camera with a sensor diagonal of 12.8mm and with the focal reducer no artifacts. An ASI284 camera sensor diagonal is 23.1mm. I wrote up a thread on Cloudy Nights. Seach for "Artifacts" in title only and you'll see my thread "C8 SCT Optical Artifacts....". I have photos showing the issue in the thread. Several contributors to the thread have said there is a reflection occurring in the baffle and to flock the baffle. One person removed his baffle from his C6 and painting the inside with foam trim roller and said it cured the problem. Also mentioned was to use black flocking paper and make a roll and insert it in the baffle to test. I did that with black paper but only created a 6" long paper tube but saw no change to the artifacts. I was then told the issue is at the top of the baffle. I may make a longer tube of paper but if it cures it I'm not confident to paint the inside of the baffle along its whole length. If the paper tube works I could just leave it there full time. I didn't notice anymore vignetting with the 6" tube. I contacted Starizona and they told me the issue is generated at the top of the baffle. They said the SCT are designed for F10 and not F6 or F 7. I don't understand optics so I don't understand why the artifact is not present at F/10 but is at F/7.1. The light entering the baffle is not changed until it gets to the focal reducer? The only solution is to frame the target knowing this issue and maybe crop or skip the target. I the bright star is moved out from the sides of the frame the artifact will disappear. I have star halos to on my C8 too. They seem to dissipate at lower exposures. I had contacted several C8 Edge users and they said they hadn't seen issue and one used a 2600 camera without issue. You video here shows that is not true. Thank you.
Thanks! I recorded short videos with red, green and blue filters. Stacked the best frames from each video, then combined the channels. Then used the RGB align function in registax.
What FWHM do you get on Edge 8? What exposure time do you usually use for galaxies? What smallest and weakest galaxy did you photograph? Could you see details in 1’ size galaxy?
fwhm on a 120" lum sub usually be in the 3s. Depending on target and seeing conditions. For galaxies, usually I do 120-180" on lum and 240" on RGB. NGC 7331 and the Deerlick group was probably the "smallest" galaxies I shot that were the primary target. Yea.. you can get some detail in at 1'.. not a lot though. Spiral arms and such.. I don't think you'd see much in the way of dust lanes. I think deerlick group images taken with an Edge 8 would give you a good idea of what you can do with one in terms of further out galaxies.
@@DSOImager Great! There are two small galaxies near ngc7331. Do you see arms on those? It will be quite remarkable, if you do with 3+ arcseq FWHM. I have NexStar 8i SE (last Celestron scope build in USA). My FWHM
@@anata5127 Check out my astrobin, there is a link on my channels banner (lower right). You can find a shot I took of that target with the Edge and an ASI533mc. I was still pretty new with the system so I dont consider it one of my better shots.. but it should still give you a good idea.
@@DSOImager Good shot! Good technique. But, it is impossible, or should be extremely good seeing and guiding, to resolute 40-60” galaxies with C8 scope. Otherwise, nobody could try to buy 14+” scopes.
Unfortunatelly I don't think it's Neptune cos there must be Triton clearly. I did same thing when I began to image planets. I thought I shot Neptune but then some other night I figured out that Triton and Neptune so close and so clear to see.
Can anyone answer if I really need the flattener for the EDGE model in comparison to the base model. I have a C6 with the Starizona .63 reducer but it’s a bit wide and sometimes I’d like to get a bit further out. With the EDGE 8 I would get over 2000 mm for planetary stuff.
For planets, no reducer needed. In fact you'd probably want to add a barlow (assuming your local seeing conditions are good enough). For deep sky, you can certainly image without the reducer. The field will be nice and flat. Just understand that at f10, you'll need solid guiding, longer exposures, and more total integration time.
![Wolfram Physics Project: Working Session Wednesday, May 6, 2020 [Finding Black Hole Structures]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qdVSOLL1mls/mqdefault.jpg)
thanks so much for this review. I'm just now looking to upgrade from my 100mm Bausch & Lomb Schmidt Cassegrain from the 1980's, and I don't want to jump and then be disappointed.
@@catlover7339 Your welcome. I am still getting great results from my 8" Edge.
Great video, thank you. Including Holst’s “Planets” suite is just priceless. Cheers!
Thanks! I thought Holst just seemed appropriate :)
@@DSOImager Yep, like everyone knows Mozart's "Jupiter", but it is Holst, who is not very well known :) Cheers!
Wonderful, very thorough review James. I picked up an EdgeHD 8 earlier this year and run it on an EQ6-R Pro. Overall, I’m really pleased with mine although I’m still tinkering with my image train. With a Celestron OAG, I seem to be just a little long in my back focus and as a result, I’m seeing some odd spikes through the brighter stars. Plate solving says that my focal length with the 0.7 reducer is 1489mm which is longer than the expected 1422mm. I’ll probably end up testing a shorter ZWO OAG just to shorten the image train.
Thanks Ken. I should have talked a little more on the OAG and back focus because it is an issue. I went with the zwo version (old/small version) because it was thin. My first choice was actually the celestron "thin" OAG.. but I couldn't find it in stock anywhere. The ZWO one I have is decent.. but the prism is small. If I want to use a guide cam larger than the 178.. say a 174mm for example.. I would need a larger prism.
Appreciate the comments and good luck with the backspace/oag tuning. Once you get it dialed in it's going to work really well :)
Difinitely a scope I would like to own one day or the 9.25 even. Nice info James and you get great results from that OTA
The 9.25 is a really nice scope.. and unlike the 8" I believe it can accommodate a full frame sensor. Thanks for commenting :)
Thanks for the overview it's sounds like a solid dependable scope. I only have the std C925 but I'm still impressed by how easy it's been so far.
A lot of what I had to say with my Edge applies to your C9.25. I've been impressed with what you've been getting.
Perfectly done review James! As another EdgeHD8 owner I completely agree on just about everything you stated. The only think I haven't noticed is bad halo'ing around bright stars. I've not had any issues like you showed. I can concur on the slight chromatic aberration from the reducer as well. I also think the ASI294MM in Bin2 mode is the best camera to use with this scope as you mentioned. I've tried it with the 2600MM and was not as happy with the image quality as I am with the 294MM. With my observatory walls and the CEM120, I am able to image in wind speeds up to around 12mph and on occasion higher depending on which direction the wind is blowing. I've yet to do any planetary imaging, but I may try some out this month, if I can get some clear skies. I also agree that it holds collimation amazingly well. I've only had to collimate a few times in over a year, mostly when moving it around a lot. The last time I did it was when I made my collimation video and that's been months ago and it's still good.
Thanks Joe!
That's right.. I remember now on the halos.. that you don't get them. I thought it could have been my filters but there is a formula that you can use to calculate where the halo is occurring.. and if I remember correctly it pointed to the reducer. I kind of stopped TSing the issue. Interesting though.
On planets.. Aug 13th is Saturns opposition.. so anytime over the next week would be good for Saturn.. and with a bright moon up.. might as well :)
Thank you James! First of all, your Pac Man Nebula image is outstanding! I purchased an EdgeHD 8” last year but have only used it on a couple of targets. I’m planning to dust it off and use it in combination with my Esprit 150ED as they have similar focal lengths. For galaxies, I plan to try using my 2600MC with the Edge on my EQ6 to collect colour data and then use my 2600MM with my Esprit 150 on my EQ8 to collect the Luminance and Hydrogen Alpha. That’s my plan anyway. Thank you for going through the pros and cons of the Edge: that was very helpful.
Thanks David! That's an awesome 2 rig setup... I'm a bit jealous :) Looking forward to seeing your results with the pair.
A thorough review, I enjoyed it and please keep up the great content. This will be a scope on my radar.
Thanks Miguel!
@@DSOImager Hello James, I have a question - I purchased an EdgeHD 8 and a colleague mentioned this: You’ll be shocked at the bloaty stars compared to the short refractors, it is just an everyday occurrence with SCTs and RCTs. Maybe not so much ‘bloating’ - just much larger stars. It takes some getting used to. What are your thoughts or have you experienced bloating or larger-than-normal stars?
@@fotografiabymiguel Hi Miguel, this is mostly a function of image scale. Just now I've compared a couple of raw subs... same targets, different scopes.. the Edge 8 compared to the at115edt, a triplet refractor. If I register the at115edt image to the edge image.. thus comparing the two at the same image scale.. the stars between the two look nearly identical.. in fact the edge stars look better to me.
Ironically, the scope that I experienced the worst star bloat was my sv70t, a 70mm refractor. I think the issue was just the scope because my little 65phq handles the stars much better than the sv70t.
Additionally, with starXterminator and processing/stretching the stars separately from the rest of the image.. even if I had some star bloat.. it's easily corrected in post processing.
Hope this helps! Grats on your purchase!
@@DSOImager James this addresses my concerns and puts it all to rest. Hearing it from someone who uses the tools of the trade, is very reassuring.
@@fotografiabymiguel This might make a good topic for a future video. :)
Nice review of the scope. You have certainly shown that it can produce fantastic images. The shot of Mars was outstanding.
Thanks Logan! That Mars shot was helped by the 2020 opposition. It won't be that bright again until 2035.
@@DSOImager oh no! Not till 2035! I’ll be ……. um, not going to say how old I’ll be then🤣
🤣🤣
Nice review. I liked the images, especially the Crescent nebula, the Eagle and the Horsehead.
Your information about binning for guiding stability is really helpful.
For me, this scope is on order right now. But looks like I’ll have to spend more money on EQ6-R mount 😂😂.
Thanks a lot for making this great video and sharing your experience with the scope. Very nice presentation 👍🏼👍🏼.
Spend more money... thats what this hobby should be called, lol.
Thank you. Been waiting for mine for over a year. Still waiting
Ugh.. hopefully the wait is almost over.
Love the Planetary images James. Pretty Powerful scope!
Thanks.. I agree. It's a good balance between size and performance.
Great presentation and review. Thank you.
I've just bought an edge8. Not used it yet as I'm battling with dovetails for guide scopes, but looks a great scope
Thanks Kevin! I've had this scope for close to 3 years now, it's been a true work horse for me. Very satisfied with it. :)
@@DSOImagersubscribed too. You have a great presentation style. Honest, informative and easy listening 👍
@@astrokev99 Awesome, really appreciate the sub! CS!
@@DSOImager 👍
Nice info here, just bought one of these 👍🏻 Thanks for doing this 😀
You're welcome. Enjoy the scope! :)
Good video. I'm going on 2 years with my HD8 and am still learning to get the most out of it. Interesting on the binning. I skipped the 294 for the 071 so I wouldn't have to bin and lose resolution but sounds like binning may have it's benefits. I will have to do more research.
Thanks Rod. In regards to binning.. it's a rabbit hole with strong opinions when it comes to CMOS sensors :) Bin2 on the 294mm works real well with the Edge. I can't say how other camera's would do.
I'm hoping to pickup the CGEM II 11" 1100 edgeHD on the CGEM Equitorial Computerized Mount with about 4 Televue eyepieces within the next couple of months.
Very nice presentation, it was most helpful. Than you.
Thanks Larry! The 11" Edge is a great scope. CS!
Your planetarys are outstanding. Btw, Have you considered the ZWO ASI174MM for your guide cam? The large sensor better fits the prism in the Celestron OAG. How easy is it to locate guide stars with your set up?
Ahh, I notice you're using a zwo oag with a smaller prism.
Thanks Ron!
Yea.. I'm using that small prism zwo oag.. so an asi174 would be wasted. The 178mm I"m using is fully utilized.. a larger sensor wouldn't improve things.
Most of the time, I dont have a problem finding a guide star.. but occasionally some targets it's hard. For example.. I did have to abandon a few galaxies due to limited guide stars.
@@DSOImager James Lamb's channel has a OAG setup where he uses Stellarium to plan where to locate his OAG. Might save some time, but looks complicated!
I have a non HD C8. I use a Starizona focal reducer which is stated to reduce a C8 to F7.1. My main camera is an ASI071MC Pro with and APS-C sized sensor. I also use the Celestron OAG with an ASI174mm mini guide camera to take advantage of the OAG 12.5mm prism.. I assumed you had the focal reducer installed for the Alnitak photo? The first time I took a similar image of the Horsehead framed with Alnitak to the left I had I was using Celestron's 6.3 focal reducer. Alnitak was closer to the frame edge and the looping artifact that you showed was much more pronounced, brighter and tighter plus a large halo. I did write up a question in Cloudy Nights and the response was Alnitak was a problem child of astrophotographers. I thought maybe it was the focal reducer. I will have to check out your video on how to shoot the Horsehead.
Now that I have the Starizona focal reducers I experienced a similar artifact imaging IC 63 Ghost of Cassiopeia recently. The adjacent star, yCAS, is very bright, mag 2.3, and even though it wasn't in the frame but just outside it left an artifact similar to your second Horsehead image except mine was brighter. I did some testing using NINA Framing Assistant. After determining the rotation of my camera frame I would move the frame so the star was in the corners and along the sides of the frame. I all cases except in the middle of the long side of the sensor frame I got the looping artifact. The C8 SCT optic hole is 38mm in diameter. Is the C8 Edge HD the same? The optical circle of the Starizona focal reducer is 27mm. My ASI071MC sensor diagonal is 28.4mm. I assumed because my sensor diagonal didn't quite fit inside the focal reducer's image circle that was causing the artifacts. Back focus for the Starizona FR is 90.3 and adding up the OAG and filter drawer etc I got my back focus to 90.5mm. I even tested without the OAG to see if it caused the issue. I removed my Antilia Quad band filter and no change.
I did the same framing test at F/10 with a back focus of 127mm. No artifact present in the corners and along the sides. My conclusion is the focal reducer.
I installed my ASI585MC planetary camera with a sensor diagonal of 12.8mm and with the focal reducer no artifacts. An ASI284 camera sensor diagonal is 23.1mm.
I wrote up a thread on Cloudy Nights. Seach for "Artifacts" in title only and you'll see my thread "C8 SCT Optical Artifacts....". I have photos showing the issue in the thread. Several contributors to the thread have said there is a reflection occurring in the baffle and to flock the baffle. One person removed his baffle from his C6 and painting the inside with foam trim roller and said it cured the problem. Also mentioned was to use black flocking paper and make a roll and insert it in the baffle to test. I did that with black paper but only created a 6" long paper tube but saw no change to the artifacts. I was then told the issue is at the top of the baffle. I may make a longer tube of paper but if it cures it I'm not confident to paint the inside of the baffle along its whole length. If the paper tube works I could just leave it there full time. I didn't notice anymore vignetting with the 6" tube.
I contacted Starizona and they told me the issue is generated at the top of the baffle. They said the SCT are designed for F10 and not F6 or F 7. I don't understand optics so I don't understand why the artifact is not present at F/10 but is at F/7.1. The light entering the baffle is not changed until it gets to the focal reducer? The only solution is to frame the target knowing this issue and maybe crop or skip the target. I the bright star is moved out from the sides of the frame the artifact will disappear. I have star halos to on my C8 too. They seem to dissipate at lower exposures.
I had contacted several C8 Edge users and they said they hadn't seen issue and one used a 2600 camera without issue. You video here shows that is not true.
Thank you.
It's interesting. I know a couple of people with Edge 8's that don't get that giant lens flare effect. I think it could be the filters I was using.
I'd love an edge so I can image galaxies as my 250PX is just to long to use in the observatory, one day I hope to find one nice review to James.
Thanks! I hope it wasn't too long. Yes.. I should have mentioned.. the compactness of the scope is another benefit. :)
Seems mars has red color. How did you get that with a monochrome camera? Nice job!!
Thanks! I recorded short videos with red, green and blue filters. Stacked the best frames from each video, then combined the channels. Then used the RGB align function in registax.
@@DSOImager brilliant idea!!!!
What FWHM do you get on Edge 8? What exposure time do you usually use for galaxies? What smallest and weakest galaxy did you photograph? Could you see details in 1’ size galaxy?
fwhm on a 120" lum sub usually be in the 3s. Depending on target and seeing conditions.
For galaxies, usually I do 120-180" on lum and 240" on RGB.
NGC 7331 and the Deerlick group was probably the "smallest" galaxies I shot that were the primary target.
Yea.. you can get some detail in at 1'.. not a lot though. Spiral arms and such.. I don't think you'd see much in the way of dust lanes. I think deerlick group images taken with an Edge 8 would give you a good idea of what you can do with one in terms of further out galaxies.
@@DSOImager Great! There are two small galaxies near ngc7331. Do you see arms on those? It will be quite remarkable, if you do with 3+ arcseq FWHM. I have NexStar 8i SE (last Celestron scope build in USA). My FWHM
@@anata5127 Check out my astrobin, there is a link on my channels banner (lower right). You can find a shot I took of that target with the Edge and an ASI533mc. I was still pretty new with the system so I dont consider it one of my better shots.. but it should still give you a good idea.
@@DSOImager Good shot! Good technique. But, it is impossible, or should be extremely good seeing and guiding, to resolute 40-60” galaxies with C8 scope. Otherwise, nobody could try to buy 14+” scopes.
@@anata5127 agreed :)
Interesting, what bracket are you using here for mounting the powerbox on the ota ?
That's the bracket that comes with the finder scope. I just put some Velcro tape on it and the bottom of the power box.
@@DSOImager Thank you, didn't think on that
@@siegfriednoet you're welcome
Does carrying the Edge 8 around and placing it on the mount affect its collimating ?
Not in my experience. I've taken it in and out many times with no change in collimation.
@@DSOImager that’s good to hear. Will definitely be looking into getting one !
@@Gordonlanguam Nice!
Unfortunatelly I don't think it's Neptune cos there must be Triton clearly. I did same thing when I began to image planets. I thought I shot Neptune but then some other night I figured out that Triton and Neptune so close and so clear to see.
You might right on that. One of these days ill try again and look for Triton. Ive also yet to capture Uranus.
@@DSOImager Uranus is a little bit easy to be sure. :)
Can anyone answer if I really need the flattener for the EDGE model in comparison to the base model. I have a C6 with the Starizona .63 reducer but it’s a bit wide and sometimes I’d like to get a bit further out. With the EDGE 8 I would get over 2000 mm for planetary stuff.
For planets, no reducer needed. In fact you'd probably want to add a barlow (assuming your local seeing conditions are good enough).
For deep sky, you can certainly image without the reducer. The field will be nice and flat. Just understand that at f10, you'll need solid guiding, longer exposures, and more total integration time.