Should have listened to you Ed. Went out and bought a 12" Dob. After a short period of time, yes, I discovered you were right!! It's too big, too heavy, and a chore to take outside. Just traded it in for a 6" Dob.....lesson learned.
Thanks, Ed! I am so happy with with the Quark Chromosphere, so I can use it in my 125mm & 65mm Refractors. NOTE: ALWAYS USE A UV/IR filter in front of the Quark, like on the front of the Diag, 1.25 .or 2". I got an special ERF-D filter for refractors 100mm and larger as the Sun can cause major damage to eye's and cameras...
I like mine and I usually use it with an Astrotech 115 EDT. But I do have some problems with it's way of tuning. I mean if it's hot outside, it will heat up to keep you from changing the tuning. Like I find if I rotate the knob backwards to turn it down it won't cool to the setting inside the quark. That's when I get the prominences to show better. Tuning it higher makes the surface of the sun appear more hardened. That's all fine if it's cool outside. In the summer in the south that doesn't work so well. Plus another thing is the Barlow that's built in. I'd rather not have that close of a view. I still love it though. A sunspot can take up a large part of the view of a ZWO 174mm camera at 805mm focal length. I have used a 60mm refractor and 72mm but the views aren't as good. They look a little less contrast, but editing helps with that. I bought the quark on cloudy nights for $1000, but I could never afford a strictly solar scope.
I love my Chromosphere, but nothing is without drawbacks. On the plus side, the refractors I use it with are the same refractors I use for deep sky imaging. There was no extra expense to get into the solar game since I already had the refractors, 60 through 115mm ED doublets and triplets. The great thing about these though is any decent refractor will do. A no-frills achromatic doublet is just fine. Additionally, at $1200, there is no cheaper way to get into H-a solar imaging and I can use this with different focal lengths since aperture masks give me further options for focal length (and aperture). On the con side, when you compare the contrast in solar images from these to double-stacked systems from Lunt in any aperture, you can immediately see a difference. It is very rare that I mistake an image between a Lunt and a Quark Chromosphere. However, that Lunt will set you back $3,000 at entry level (and $5K for a double stack) and it only works on that one 60mm telescope. If money were no object, I'd have both a Lunt and a Quark, but a variety of astronomy goals run up against limited astronomy dollars.
Great review, as usual! A couple of years ago I decided for a Lunt 50 as I was worried that a daystar quark, being a powered device, would eventually die (many points of failure: connector, cable, tuning knob, etc) and I'd be left with an expensive paperweight. But I agree this is the cheaper way to get into high resolution solar imaging. Regarding White light, It may seem boring but I consider it quite fun (not as dynamic as Hydrogen alpha, I concede). Chasing good seeing condition so to be able to capture granulation in the photosphere is the "Holy Grail". The problem is that daytime seeing (at least where I live) is usually bad, worst than nighttime.
for maybe 9 Months i use the Daystar Gemini. If you want switch between chromosphere and prominence, it is a better solution but 2x expensive. If you also use an Amici prism, the UV/IR cut filter should be attached beforehand, otherwise too much energy will hit the H-Alpha filter!
Great review Ed! I love my Quark Chromosphere and Gemini! Gemini? Yes Daystar makes a Quark with both the prominence and Chromosphere filters, for less than twice the cost. Great fun to slide between the two filters. Quarks are awesome and best option for those doing visual with multiple refractors (like you). I get full disc views with my 80F/6 up to zoomed in views with my 140 F/6.5 (I stop down to 120mm). Here is a solar h-a hint: like Moon and planets, H-a with binoviewers is AMAZING! Just put the BVs into the Quark and off you go… Also on finding the Sun, they do make inexpensive white light filters for 50mm finder scopes (see Orion web page)…using just a shadow is indeed tricky!
I do quite like the Quark as when they work they are great at taking images & to view through although why they feel the need to put a 4X Barlow in there is anyone's guess I feel a 2X would be better. However they have had quality issues in the past which I hope are now addressed these days but I know people who have been through a few including a guy on stargazers lounge who went through 6 I believe before finally giving up on them. Because of this I will just stick to a dedicated solar scope ok so I only use a PST or Lunt 35 which wont be as good as a view or to image with but I know I can just use it as & when I need to with minimal fuss. Interesting you mentioned about the white light wedges as I removed mine & forgot to cap it so when I put the end cap it melted it so you really have to be on your guard. Fortunately no harm done & it was a lesson learnt.
The long story short of this is that because the bandwidth is so narrow, the wider rays of a short goal length will reach the Etalon too steep if an angle to transmit correctly. The Barlow makes it enter the filter as though it were an F16+ scope, fully using the filter. Lunt/etc (and the Daystar scout models) just ship with scopes that are already super "slow." But usually small (40-60mm) scopes too. This is nice because it's much more affordable to grab a 100mm acro that you might already have (no worries of chromatic aberration with a monochromatic target). Just harder to get a full disc image
I see no reason to have a barlow on it, what in the fuck are they thinking? If I wanna use one, I would put one before or after. I fail to see the reason to fuck so many options over from doing that lol.
If you are considering imaging be warned about the variability of the quarks some are good many are not in the terms of even illumination. ( flats may or may not work to remove it ). The built in telecentric system makes full disk with proper sampling is not feasible when imaging. When using it with larger apertures you will also need a DERF, not just a UV/IR cut.
Thanks for another great review Ed. I have been considering a Quark to supplement my Lunt 40mm solar scope which is great for whole disc imaging but not optimal for close up views.
Thanks for this review, excellent as always. For my DayStar/Refractor setup, I put together a plate spanning the tube rings of my 80 mm refractor, with a Televue adapter, and on top a Tele Vue Sol Searcher to find the sun with (Thank you High Point Scientific).
Thank you for the review. I'm not a solar photographer, but your images look great to me. When I photographed the 2017 eclipse, I used my Canon 5D III with an EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L lens with a slip-on mylar filter. Yes, finding the sun is difficult; the sun is so danged bright. I draped a windbreaker over the camera and viewfinder to block out the surrounding brightness. I wasn't able to travel for the 2024 eclipse, but I was going to buy a focusing cloth that is used with 4×5 view cameras; it's silver on one side and black on the other.
Nice video Ed. Yeah I have the Quark Chromo an love the views I get. I pruchased it a couple years ago with the intent of doing a lot of imaging but got side tracked and am now into it for this summer. It was an easy decision me to go with the Quark rather than the Lunt or Coronado since I had two perfectly good refractors sadly sitting around collecting dust. Cheers
Good review. I’m not at all sold on leaving the front of my telescope open to the sun. It may be a fine product, but I would feel safer putting a full filter on the front with my PST on piggy back. Just my opinion.
The instructions are pretty clear on safety precautions but yes, this device is more prone to creating unsafe conditions that the plug-and-play units from Lunt and Coronado.
Antoher great review - thanks, Ed. It may be worth pointing out (maybe someone already did) that Quark also makes a low(ish)-cost "plug'n play"-version, the Daystar Solar Scout, a 60mm with a built-in Quark etalon filter. I got one to get me started, and soon ended up with adding the Quark you have. Great for flexibility :)
Hi Ed - I tend to agree with the comparison between this and a white light filter. My Quark is getting used much more often. Also just FYI a 10,000 mah battery pack like those for your phone with last a long time to power the quark. I simply velcro the battery pack to the scope, keeps it all neat.
I thought the Quark was temperature-tuned, not pressure-tuned like Lunt/Coronado, and that's what the little dial adjusts.. I use mine with a RedCat51 and Esprit100 and, when I have my whole act together, it's great. Flats are (for me anyway) really needed. Not a huge deal but probably different than your night routine. Great review, Ed. TY!
It would be very interesting to see a comparison between the image quality of the different systems first the benefit of those of us that have never observed with the Quark. I love solar observing and have had Ha scopes up to 90mm. Right now I only have an original PST that I keep tuned at a happy medium between chromosphere and prominence setting to show both.
It may be fascinating to look it. Now fascinating to get out and do solar photography, probably not judging by how few do it compared to astro photography. Of course a lot of the time here it's 100F in the sun or hotter. Of course at night it's a true dark site in this corner of TX, but super hot when the sun is out.
Thanks Ed Great Video! Love my Daystar Chromosphere Quark it's fantastic, use mine with the At 70ed and At 102ed using the 2" Astronomik UV-IR L-2 filter and get Amazing Views
As I have a Lunt LS50 Ha scope I will probably pass on this, though there is a calcium version available which I would be interested in, but not at the moment as my priority for an expensive purchase is currently a strain wave mount. I thought thouse images were pretty good ED, I'd be happy with them. I agree with you that solar imaging is an art, one I have yet to master but enjoy doing. I always find the Ha sun interesting, personally I find it more interesting than the moon but each to their own. Good review.
Another great vid Ed. I was considering the quark but was put off by the integrated Barlow (no full disk views without mosaics in my scope) and the waiting times. They make one without the Barlow, but they’re all hard to find in stock (as are all the others). But I found a Lunt in stock the other day (first one on a while) so I got it. I’ll share some images in slack if we ever see the sun again up here.
Hi Ed.. What about the light going through the tube ahead of the filter? Its been my experience that a sealed tube can become exceptionally hot to the point where lens elements can delaminate. Are there cautions about that? With a refractor I can imagine its easier than using a small Makutov or SCT for example. I have two deepsky observatories in the arizona desert and settng up a solar observatory here in Connecticut where we both live I believe. I took my degree in Astronomy to public outreach so this is why I have this non profit we started for this purpose. Being a big Solar fan, it was great to see you do a review on this system. I have a refractor I could use for this sand a larger SCTs that I can use but prefer a small refractor. Thank you for any help on the heating question., Marc Dantonio SkyTour LIveStream (STLS) Observatories
I have been quite interested in this system, but I have been put off by complaints about lack of support from the company if the heating system failed for whatever reason...
@@mikemuha7537 It seems like that is correct, though perhaps their barlow that is optimized for the wavelength they're after makes a difference...comparison testing would be needed to answer that.
Cool video, Ed. My Quark is currently being repaired by DayStar because it stopped working shortly after I got it. However, even after it stopped working (the light would no longer come on) I was still able to use it for photography. Do you have any advice for shooting solar images with a color camera? I don't have a planetary camera like you used, only a 183MC Pro and 294MC Pro, as well as many Sony mirrorless cameras. I've gotten some cool stuff but they lack detail and contrast. I've been considering an upgrade to a monochrome camera like the 2600MM Pro that I could use for DSO work and solar images but not sure what to do.
Ed, I enjoy your content. I'd stress a bit more that these should be simple refractor only devices. Daystar also recommends not using these with Petzval refractors or other refractors with a rear field flattener, etc. You used it only on a simple refractor in your video and mentioned that the manufacturer recommends refractors with a certain f/ range be used, but I think that more information would be helpful. Woe to the poor person who sticks one of these on the back of their 90mm SCT or Mak, or a Televue petzval scope. I guess that your early comments that 'don't look at the sun unless you know what you are doing' should be sufficient, but I've seen some pretty goofy things done with astronomical equipment 🙂. [edited to remove needless commentary on my part] Best regards, Mark
Thanks, Mark. The instructions are pretty clear on safety precautions but yes, this device is more prone to creating unsafe conditions that the plug-and-play units from Lunt and Coronado.
I live in the UK. Is this 'Sun' the same as these 'Stars' but hidden by clouds and rain during the day instead of the night? Jokes aside, this would be a perfect fit for my 70mm ED refractor. Right in the recommended specification band. Better save up...
Ed, what are the chances that you're going to do a review of the DayStar today ? Today is my 1st day with my chromosphere DayStar crazy! Setting it up right now. You didn't mention that the plug-in play option is considerably more expensive than the DayStar option, especially if you have most everything else.
actually "know what you are doing" often caused by not really knowing. I suggest we use "known what you are not doing and what you don't understand." 😆
I thought all those solar filters one puts on the telescope were to protect one´s eyes (of course) while looking into the sun but also all the glass elements and mirrors of a telescope, aren´t they affected by sunbeams?
Hello, can you tell me, please, what is the difference between the QUARK H-Alpha Combo Solar Filter, Chromosphäre and the QUARK H-Alpha Solar Filter, Chromosphäre. Thank you very much.
50+ years ago I would view the sun with my 60mm Sears refractor, and the provided eyepiece solar filter on the .965 eyepiece which would get very hot. I had to use the rest room one day while solar observing, and came back out to see smoke coming out of the seams of the telescope - the sun had moved and was focused on the side of the telescope and burned off the black paint. What is there to prevent that from happening with this filter? there is no energy reduction filter on the main objective like there is with other H-alphas.
A number of people have asked variations of this same question and I confess I do not know the answer. I am very careful to do an accurate polar alignment, I set the tracking rate to "solar" and I cap the objective when I'm not looking through it.
Thanks Ed! I have a question: I am new to this and never viewed the sun through a telescope. I have a 12" reflector and was always told they heat up while viewing. Does this problem exist with refractor scopes and if so wouldn't viewing the sun amplify this problem? Thanks in advance.
I'm not Ed but I've been researching this in advance of a purchase. With reflectors, you need a front mounted energy rejection filter (ERF) when using a Quark. There is risk to the secondary mirror being damaged by the concentrated sunlight. Also damage to the quark from large apertures, even large refractors (thus the need for a UV/IR cut on the front of the Quark). These ERF's are very expensive (>$1000) for large apertures. You'd be better off buying a refractor for less than that to use with the Quark.
@@edting I would agree with the above comment. I have an Edge HD 8 and wouldn't even consider using it for solar. It strikes me like it wouldn't take much of a mistake to cook it or something considerably more important. I bought an ASKAR 103APO and with no back end glass (field flateners, reducers and the like). It gives me a good up close view with great detail. it won't do full disk, but I would rather have the detail and if I want full disk, I could shoot a mosaic.
@@edting I wasn't going to use it for solar but was thinking of buying a smaller scope anyway and figured I might try solar viewing but didn't know about the over heating issues.
Hi @Ed, would you recommend the TV85 or the Tak FC-76d ? I was more looking at the FC-76d (I believe better optics, less expensive, slightly higher f-ratio which is useful for quark). Any opinion ?
@@edting lol, no i didn't mean to start a war, but clearly those two scopes are on par. FC-76d maybe a little better optics but also a lot longer than TV 85, more portable. And increased aperture probably compensate the slightly less good optics.. But just was curious about your own insights as I was more planning to use the FC 76d with a Quark and just saw you mentioning the TV85 also pairs very well :)
Conventional wisdom states to get the Tak if imaging is in your future. I'm not sure how valid this is but you see way more images taken through Takahashis.
Is the Daystar Quark equivalent to a Lunt Single or Double stack? (Is there a double stack feature in Daystar Quarks?). Also, can you get a full disk in view with the Quark?
The tubes really don't heat up from the light coming into the telescope, they heat up more from just being in the Sun. From the light that enters the telescope, the main hardware risk is damaging mirrors, diagonal and Quark from focused sunlight from large apertures. Below ~130mm refractors, all you really need is a good dielectric filter in front of the diagonal (or Quark if doing straight thru) that reflects back light that isn't H-a. UV/IR cut filter is the minimum, I use a Baader Red CMOS filter, can also go more extreme (eg 35nm H-a filter). 150mm and beyond you will want to use an expensive front objective energy rejection filter. For catadioptrics, you will have to use a front mounted ERF as in those systems the mirrors can get damaged from the focusing sunlight, but again no real heating of the optical tube itself from light entering it.
@@edting I am kind of eager to know how this device functions, I have also wanted to know how some of these companies go through the trouble of producing etalons? All I know is they use the mineral mica? And I get the sense if I want to know more, I will either have to find some text books or break into their company and spy on them? lol
Solar etalons work by interference between optical flats. The other kinds change spacing physically (tilt style) or by changing the optical properties of the air between them (pressure tuned). These use a mica based etalon, and the properties are tuned by changing the temperature (heating).
I talk about this a bit in the video. The device is meant for refractors, preferably 4" and under, and within an f/ratio range. You can download the instructions from their web site.
@@edting Thanks so much Ed. I'm a serious beginner, and I have a lot to learn. I guess some of the details in these videos slip out of my memory in the clutter. I have learned a great deal from you, and I'm grateful.
Not sure, but you'd definitely need an energy rejection filter on the end of your tube, and you might run into backfocus issues (couldn't find info about this on their website). Also, the daystar doesn't work well with off-axis filters, so unless you get a huge ERF your secondary mirror could block a major portion of the objective, leading to light loss and resolution issues. Also, it works best for for F/4 - F/8. A smaller on-axis ERF could take your speed out of this range. On top of that, reflectors tend to have longer focal lengths. Combined with the 4.3x barlow, you might be stuck with very zoomed-in views, unless you try to add a focal reducer to end of the Quark (but no idea how that would work out...). Not saying it's impossible, but I suspect there's a reason they don't even mention reflectors in on the quark website. I've thought of it myself though, obviously. Would be great to get that big aperture for a reasonable price. Edit: this one looks good for off-axis applications: www.daystarfilters.com/Quark/QuestarQuark.shtml . Not sure if there's other deal-breakers with this one though.
Good Lord, with the price of this, I'd rather just spend it on a telescope. Or a camera. Or something else. By the way, what do you think of focal reducers that screw onto the eyepiece vs. ones that you place into the telescope body?
@@SonoranAstroit's because the quark and the IR/UV filter you use reflects the light that causes heat back out the front of the scope. At least that's what the website says.
@@Thunder_Dome45 just seems risky, especially if it’s an undriven telescope, just a bit off axis and boom your focus tube is melted. atleast from my assumptions. it may be different because i have no experience with this sort of thing, other than melting a cheap diagonal attempting solar projection as a child hahaha
@@Thunder_Dome45 actually just reading reports now on SL of users melting the end of the quirk leaving it on too long for the reasons i stated. seems avoidable if you track it on axis.
I have never looked at the Sun. I do have an Sun filters on the dust cover of a copy optical tubes. I also have a SvBony 220 dual filter which allows H-Alpha and O-III in made for emission nebula. Wonder if that would work and if so, would I need a broad band filter, as well?
IT WILL NOT!! DON'T LOOK THUR IT NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!! That filter is NOT FOR SOLAR!!! Yes your Solar Film/Glass white light is fine! The Quark under 100mm refractor is safe when using a IR/UV high quality filter. PLEASE DO MORE RESEARCH as DAMAGE to your eye or EQ is DANGEROUS!!!! Also if you are talking about those thread on SUN filters DON'T!!! Only Filters that are made for SOLAR are safe and go on the front of the refractor scope and no SCT, or mirrors scopes, just refractors. Some filters sold on eBay & Amazon are fakes! ONLY BUY WELL KNOWNED BRANDS!!!
It will not work, do not attempt this. There's not a cheap option of doing this. If you want to view the sun in HA, you either buy a dedicated solar scope, or you buy a quark. Dualband filters are made for viewing and imaging nebulae, and would not protect you at all from the sun.
Night sky Ha filters are nothing like solar etalons. The band pass is 3 nm or more depending on quality, and the bandpass for etalons like the quark is 0.5 Å (10 Å = 1 nm). This is not a safe way to view the sun. You can get green filters (solar continuum filter) designed to work with a white-light filter, but these just improve contrast in the white light filter image. So you always need a white light filter (or Herschel wedge), or a true solar etalon (Quark, Lunt, Coronado, etc.).
