Spot on nailed this video. Friendly, knowledgable, concise, and most importantly, extremely helpful!! Can you also Add in the comments you link to the astrostacker video?
Steve, Trying to get a better planetary image with my eVscope. Ddo you think the c-mount adapter would hold a 1.25" Barlow. It would put the Barlow really close to the sensor, heavy too but Barlows don't require backfocus like reducers. What do you think of the idea?
Sorry for the late reply. No, it won’t work. I mean it will hold one fine. I tried 1.25x, 1.6x, and 2x barlows and none would allow the scope to reach focus. The focus range is really small. Probably you could modify it to allow for more mirror travel but that would be a big undertaking.
Steve thanks for the response. After I asked my question I realized the eVscope focuser has very little travel. Thanks for sharing your research attempts with other Barlows@@EarthtoSpaceScience
The chart shown at 2:57 comparing various manufacturer and filter types. Will you please tell me where that is taken from? Also the DGM NPB filter seems to be unobtainable. Do you have another recommendation for a good all around filter for the eVscope? Nevermind I found it in Astronomy magazine August 'o5. Totally agree the DGM NPB filter rocks the eVscope on emission nebulae.
In November 2023 Unistellar came out with a solar filter that retails for $249. Pricey. It has a spider built into the filter. I wonder if the filter spider is supposed to provide some thermal protection to the telescope spider and camera. I have looked at off axis filters but they are usually costly too. What are your thoughts on this? Has the spider of your scope gotten hot or distorted from solar viewing using the Astrozap film filter?
I never had any issues using the solar filter I used. There won’t be enough heat getting through to cause any physical problems, but possibly it will keep the camera warmer to where you would have more noise. The Unistellar solar filter does look more robust, so might be less likely to be damaged. I’ve since sold the telescope (picking up a smaller SeeStar and putting more money into planetary photography).
there are 3d printable c-mount to 1.25 adapters for free to 3d print if you google search for them. youtube seems to not want me to direct link to them. But it's an option if you're wanting something with like less than half the height of that ebay low profile option.
I tried the dew shield idea on my eVscope. eVscope really does not like anymore weight on the long end of the tube. Although I've seen a video of the Unistellar Chief Technology officer installing a filter. Unistellar technical support strongly advises against installing filters.
The filters improve the images considerably on emission nebula but don’t help on anything else really. The main issue is that if you don’t take care you can drop it in the mirror and damage the mirror. Some people have devised little adapters that slide onto the camera and hold the filter and have the adapter attached to the side of the scope with a string so that is an option too potentially.
Usually called something like a c mount to 1.25” adapter or c thread to 1.25” thread adapter. You can find them on most astronomy websites and Amazon too.
Hi, I wanted to ask a question. I bought the same adapter and filter that you recommended, but when I tried to use the telescope, it couldn't align and I could see the reflection of the spider being projected in the image. What could this be?
You may have to align without the filter on if it can’t see enough stars. This can be an issue, especially if not many stars are visible to begin with. The reflection part I’m not sure about. Perhaps because of a lot of background stray light if the environment is very bright.
@@EarthtoSpaceScience Yes, my Evscope is already aligned, I used the template that comes with the cap, it's fine, but when I put the filter on, everything goes dark and all I see is the reflection of the spider (that cross that the sensor is on) and the telescope can't find any stars. I live in NY, Manhattan, in fact, it's quite bright and there are few stars at night.
I’m guessing it is also changing the focus just enough to blur out the stars (dimmed by the filter) so you can’t see them. Generally if you can see the secondary you are out of focus. Filters can impact focus position. You can always make a mark on the focus knob where the best focus position is for a given filter once you find it.
I’m not 100% certain whether I like the NPB or the L-Pro filter better. I’ve been using the L-Pro a little more lately but both are pretty similar narrow band filters. There are a lot of narrow band filters out there and all allow varying amounts of light through at different wavelengths. So, one might do better on one object and one better on another. The NPB seemed harder to come by recently so the L-Pro is a good alternative. There isn’t that much difference between the two on most objects.
@@EarthtoSpaceScience I have the L-Pro and I'm on the fence still if it's doing any better at giving a clear image in light pollution vs nothing at all. And for sure it significantly reduces the visibility of certain kinds of nebula and galaxies that dont cater to the spectrum the L-pro passes thru. The filters also end up throwing off the focus whenever you take it off or put in on due to the necessary manipulation of the camera mounting, which means doing a whole re-focus and process. I also noticed that perhaps due to tension on the primary mirror based on current collimation screws, my use of higher profile (10mm) adapters was warping the shape of stars in a way that collimation couldn't fix. Using a much smaller height adapter i 3d printed reduced that effect to something that I can't tell the difference from removed or on now when it comes to the focus and shape of stars. perhaps i'm just in too much of a light polluted area to see the benefit of the L-Pro. Though it's certainly not as bad as being in a city like the advertising always shows. The Veil nebulas are difficult to resolve with the telescope in my current light polluted sky.
do you know if there is any way to improve Moon observation? I know the evscope isn t meant for that but the Moon being so close it s a shame we can t even get a sharp picture of it...
To get a nice picture you have to do a lot of stills or record video on your device and then stack the frames in something like autostakkert and then sharpen the result. So, it takes a while. I bet they eventually offer an update to do that with lunar images
You could put it anywhere. You would just want to adjust it so the view through the finder was the same place in the sky as what you were seeing on your screen. Probably try to center a bright star in both.
Jim Price Would a focal reducer work on an Unistellar EvScope and would the spacer you recommend for filters be too short for a focal reducer to properly widen your FOV.
I have an Equinox Evscope, I purchased the Farpoint dew shield on amazon www.amazon.com/dp/B09MSTVPH9?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details it fits perfectly with ample wrap around for a little smaller and larger diameter scopes. The evscope2 is the same diameter as the Equinox (10.3"), so it will fit your evscope2 just fine.
Yes, any dew shield sized for about a 125 mm outside diameter like the one that fits a C5 will work. They attach by Velcro, so there is some flexibility in actual tube width.
have you or anyone tried mounting a barlow aux objective lens to try and view planets better using the 1.25 adapter? If so, what were the results? Distance from lens to camera sensor probably really makes or breaks any attempt to use something like that, but the lack of anyone trying something like that makes me think it's futile.
I’ve tried several screw on barlow lenses and couldn’t even get a 1.25x barlow to reach focus. The range of focus is pretty limited as it is set up on the scope.
You would have to create a system to physically move the whole primary mirror assembly in and out another inch or more beyond what it can do now. Even if you were able to do that, the software might not be able to handle the smaller field of view. I don’t know.
