Does anyone have any experience with the Celestron and Antares focal reducers? Wonder how they would stack up with a Japanese 6.3. If the reducer is placed elsewhere, at a position called the operating distance, the focal reduction factor will not be as advertised. I've seen some older threads saying that the Celestron, Meade and Antares FRs are all the same and manufactured in the same factory. The camera side of the focal reducer is threaded for a T-adapter with wide M48 threads, or in some cases, with smaller M42 threads. Looking forward to the day when I can do a shoot-out between a Japan and China Celestron, just for kicks. One problem with getting opinions is that most of use do not have both reducers or have never done a side by side comparison. The Reducer/Corrector is easy to install by threading the unit onto the rear cell of your Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope (or the reducer plate of the C11 and C14). The review is a subjective visual impression, which is interesting but not best evidence. This is one of our best-selling items, and customers have reported that this product is at least as good as, and probably better than, other leading f/6.3 focal reducers sold on the market for a lot more. Not a bit.
Antares Click Lock Visual Back - Cats & Casses - Cloudy Nights Better images are also obtained when using these focal reducers at a reduction factor of 0.5x 0.8x, approximately. This would tell us exactly how well aberrations are corrected. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 800 For example, a 0.8x reducer placed at the working distance provides a reduction of (1 0.8) x 100 = 20%.
Antares f/6.3 Focal Reducer for SCTs - Awesome Astro Read our 101 article or get in touch. When placed in the focal plane in front of a camera or eyepiece, a focal reducer leads to a wider field of view and a brighter image of extended objects, which is important for reducing the exposure times when imaging faint extended objects like nebulae or galaxies. First, I wanted to compare the actual reduction provided by these competitors, as many threads here cite different ideal spacing from the reducer to eyepiece focal plane to achieve the correct f/6.3 result. Focal reducers (and focal reducer/field flatteners combos) are usually used with two types of telescopes, refractors and compound telescopes such as Schmidt-Cassegrain or Ritchey-Chretien. No retailers currently carry this product. The resultant reduction factor was measured to be 0.46x. Here, there was a subtle difference . I've looked through one from Meade and first impression was that it was like the Celestron version. Celestrons FREE planetarium app is an astronomy suite that redefines how you experience the night sky. Celestron or Antares f/6.3 focal reducer for SCT? No idea what the issue is. However, in principle, the reduction factor of a focal reducer can be varied by changing the distance from the back of the focal reducer to the camera or eyepiece. It's an either/or proposition: reducer and 1.25", or 2", but not 2" and reducer. You currently have javascript disabled. There may have been an almost imperceptible difference, but the Antares and Celestron were producing precisely the same reduction. I use the Celestron version and it seems OK for both visual and imaging. Also read the reviews here, including those at 4 stars.
There are many different types of focal reducers and they all effect. An eyepiece with a 27mm field stop yields a true field of 1.03 in the C6 at f/10. Focal reducers for these relatively fast ED refractors are generally for imaging only, not for visual observation. In the 1960s, Celestrons founder, Tom Johnson, created groundbreaking new telescopes never before seen on the consumer market. Housings, threads, reduction, correction, blah, blah, blah. Due to the design, the Reducer/Corrector lens does diminish a small amount of field curvature common to all Schmidt Cassegrain telescopes but does not eliminate it. I have an 8SE, and am thinking about getting a focal reducer. Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 1400 Learn More.
Watch this before you buy Celestron 8SE SCT, or a Focal Reducer or a Have always disliked the crude, noisy SCT threads, but I get it. Scope size might influence choice as well, as a C6 might benefit from the Antares' transparency, while larger scopes might benefit from the Celestron's higher contrast. Fortunately, my neighbors are not out in their backyards at 11 pm, or they may have thought I was torturing a small mammal. Just one question. Thanks guys, appreciate the feedback. Some faster refractors with a focal ratio of f/6, for example, only require field flatteners and not focal reducers. The new Lithium Phosphate (LiFePO4) battery chemistry has significant advantages over other battery chemistries, great for for those Astronomers on the go. Overall, this reducer does a phenomenal job at preventing gradients due to internal reflections from the camera sensor back to the glass in the reducer, as I suffered with the Antares reducer. There are also third-party vendors such as Hotech. ), ASI Air Plus - Connected items are 'greyed out', Cost of ordering used equipment U.S. - Can can more than double figure, Tuthill Isostatic Mount and Star Trap Power Module. Theres a long-running debate in these forums and even statements from some reputable dealers that the Antares is just a reducer (even though it is labeled Reducer/Corrector), whereas the Celestron is a true R/C, which flattens the SCTs naturally curved field and provides some edge correction. Therefore, a 55mm back focus with a filter that is 3mm thick added to the imaging train would become 56mm. Now, Celestron is using that same technology to allow star gazers to connect to the night sky and enhance their experience of the cosmos in fun and unique ways. However, because the field curvatures in refractors and SCTs vary a lot, I would predict unpredictable effects inre: field curvature. I have/had both the Celestron (Japan) and Antares units. * Not a Retail Store * 16313 Arthur StreetCerritos, CA 90703, USA, Availability: Item has been discontinued by Agena and we no longer carry this item. Thanks for the extremely valuable article.
Reducer - Corrector | Celestron In most cases, the easiest option is to choose the focal reducer made specifically for your telescope. Most manufacturers provide this specification. They usually have a 2" barrel that slides into the telescope focuser. What an enjoyable read and detailed comparison. InternetSales@optcorp.com, 800-483-6287
Upgrading the Focuser of Your Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope - Agena Astro The C8 has no noticeable vignetting with a 32mm Plssl in the f/6.3 reducer. I read another thread in a different forum about F6.3 reducer correctors and one amateur posted an image about glue coming out of an astromania f6.3 reducer which he planned to return. During check-out, you will be presented with several shipping choices and costs. All rights reserved. I don't know. 3.
0.5X focal reducer for Celestron, Meade, and Orion CCD imaging cameras DUE TO EXTREMELY HIGH DEMAND, WE WILL NOT BE TAKING NEW ORDERS UNTIL MONDAY, DECEMBER 14. When the camera sensor is placed at this distance, the reduction factor of these reducers is 0.75x. Sign up for our newsletter to get exclusive deals, observing tips, and new product announcements. These scopes are compatibles with focal reducers. The female end attaches to the rear cell of the telescope. The designed reduction factor (0.5x in the case of the GSO reducer example above) should be considered a rule of thumb or approximate value in most cases, rather than a very precise number. Most amateur astronomers are familiar with a Barlow lens (or a focal extender), a negative or diverging lens that effectively increases the focal length and the focal ratio of a telescope's objective lens. A f/10 focal ratio now achieves a f/6.3, while an f/11 focal ratio now achieves a f/7. But the diameter of the image circle decreases by a factor of 0.63 to about 24mm. A reducer is a set of converging (or positive) lenses that cause the light from a telescope objective to converge at a steeper angle to the focal plane as if it were coming from an objective with a faster (lower) focal ratio and a shorter focal length. All additional accessories mount onto the exterior/male threads. 2023 Celestron, LLC. If the focal reducer is to be used for visual observation, the visual back is threaded onto the eyepiece side of the reducer, and then a star diagonal and eyepiece are installed as usual. Its a good thing I have the super lube handy or my neighbors wont be happy with me.come to think of it, Im sure the small mammals here wouldnt be thrilled either! I wonder whether, for example, Antares focal reducer for SCT belongs to the latter category. Focal reducers for SCT, RC, and field-flattened Edge HD or ACF telescopes thread onto the back of the telescope tube with 2"-24 or 3"-28 SCT threads. The price for an item/offer must be listed and valid at the time of match. We have tested our current batch and it works with Meade, Celestron, and Baader SCT accessories. This should not be the case if they have their purportedly different focal lengths. Focal Reducer, 2", 0.7X. This focal reducer and field flattener consists of a four-element multicoated 40mm lens in a metal cell. Can you help me? In such cases, we will be happy to take the item back as per our standard return terms. This focal reducer from Celestron reduces the effective focal length by 0.63X Enjoy the wider field of view & faster exposure times at f/6.3 with f/10 telescopes f/11 telescopes, such as the C14 will perform at f/7 The Celestron f/6.3 Reducer has four fully-multicoated elements Reduce your exposure times by a factor of 3! I have the Antares and have no complaints. A few large telescopes and mounts are excluded from this free shipping offer. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. Images in the Celestron tended to appear ever-so-slightly dimmer (maybe? * Not a Retail Store * 16313 Arthur StreetCerritos, CA 90703, USA. Anyway, when purchased my R/C the "original" Celestron unit was not readily available and was offered instead the one sold under the shop's own label (in my case Tecnosky, but I saw the same product offered under TS label). Given the results of Test #1, I wanted to see if there was any truth to this assumption. This superb fully multi-coated multi-element focal reducer takes advantage of the latest computer aided design techniques to achieve the highest standards of performance set by the brand leaders at a fraction of the cost. Turn it on and push Align. In about three minutes, youre ready to observe! It must be in stock at the time of Price Match for us to make a guarantee. As per the OP I still can't see any reason to buy the Celestron for significantly more $$$. I doubt there is any difference between the Antares and the Celestron except price. Stars in the corner of the image frame are indistinguishable between the Antares and the Celestron. Many reducers, such as the Celestron HD focal reducer mentioned above, and many focal reducers for apochromatic refractors, are meant to be used within a few millimeters (or less) of the specified working distance to achieve the best possible image results. The design reduction factor of a focal reducer is the relative amount by which the effective focal length of the telescope is reduced when the focal reducer is used at its specified working distance or back focus. It's usually specified in millimeters. For both imaging and visual observing, these reducers also improve image sharpness at the edge of the field by correcting for coma and field curvature. And when used in some refractors, the field flattening is not as accurate as it is in the f/10 SCTs. Advanced designs for Schmidt-Cassegrain scopes such as the Meade ACF or Celestron Edge HD have optical elements in the tube to correct for coma and field flatness. You need to be a member in order to leave a comment. What I do know is that the Antares and the Celestron samples that I have perform exactly the same from the center right out to the edges. Wow, that is a very detailed discussion! Again, these focal reducers are often provided by the telescope manufacturer. Edited by bluewater, 05 September 2020 - 11:27 AM. 2.2 Using a Focal Reducer at the Working Distance, 2.3 Adjusting the Reduction Factor of a Focal Reducer, 3.3 Focal Reducers for Compound Telescopes, 3.5 Focal Reducers for Ritchey-Chretien and Field Flattened Scopes, 3.6 Focal Reducers in 1.25" and 2" Barrel Formats, 4. Celestron Reducer Lens .7x - EdgeHD 925 The EdgeHD .7x Focal Reducer Lens makes your EdgeHD 925 one full F-Stop faster than f/10, reducing your exposure time by half to capture the same brightness of object 5-element lens design Maintains similar. Unique focal reducer and field corrector lens accessory, Reduces the focal length and f/ ratio of your Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope by 37%, Provides a dual focal ratio instrument, without sacrificing image quality, Compatible with all Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes (see compatible list in description). Well done. Explore Scientific - Keys to the Universe Sale. But the smaller image circle means there is a limit to the field stop of an eyepiece that can achieve an unvignetted image. An image of about 24mm across, approximately, allows an observer to use a 1.25" eyepiece with a maximal field stop. Normal shipments will resume on Monday, March 6, 2023. nleash the full pointing accuracy of your Celestron computerized telescope with a specialized telescope control software suite. As often noted in reviews and forum threads, Antares products tend to have threads that are a little less precise, and this specimen certainly demonstrated this. Both exhibited consistent reduction, identical field flattening, and edge correction properties, and both were high quality optically and mechanically. Celestrons aplanatic EdgeHD optics revolutionized astroimaging. All Rights Reserved. Benefits limited to hardware and conditions? Your wishlist has been temporarily saved. I found both to be very good. As mentioned in Section 2 of this guide, the reduction factor of a focal reducer depends on its position in the optical path relative to the eyepiece or camera. Nebula Filters. Again, swapping back and forth for a couple of hours on M44, M35, and several brighter stars, I examined the shape of specific stars near the edge of the field with both correctors. JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. Contiguous US Customers:All items we sell ship for free within the Contiguous US. That said any comparison reviews are helpful. The faster f/ratio allows you to use slower film or shoot in lower light level situations and still properly expose your subject. They never really recovered from selling a few 15 years back with element reversed. Yellow and orange members of open clusters stood out a bit more as the various stars displayed their individuality. The working distance (backfocus) of the Celestron f/6.3 reducer is specified to be 105mm from the base of the male SCT thread on the camera side. Perhaps not exactly- there will be some uncertainty because of manufacturing tolerances and so forth, but it will be close. Focal reducers for many SCTs and their flat-field equivalents usually have a back-focus distance of 105mm. If you want to save a few buck watch the classifieds on CN. It has only one cover, which surprised me. Melotte 15 - First Process in PixInsight (easy! Sharpness is essentially the same. Antares or Celestron? StevieDvd Members 1,182 1,812 Location: Stevenage, UK Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) Don't know but your welcome to try out my Meade 6.3 sct reducer next time you are passing. riklaunim Members 559 3,445 Location: Poland Posted October 11, 2010 They are reported as identical. Go behind the scenes with Celestrons product development team and learn more about our award-winning and patented innovations. They both are great and I doubt my eyes could detect a difference in any one of them including the Japan version. Focal reducers also move the effective focal plane of the objective inward, that is, towards the objective (see Figure 1). The working distance or required back focus, explained above, is usually specified and is far more important in practice.
Antares f/6.3 Focal Reducer for Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes - Agena Astro There is a way to make subjective data more useful and that way is proper blind, or better still. All rights reserved. Thanks Peter! How about for visual observers? The reducer is we might presume designed to correct to some as yet un-measured extent, the image of a standard SCT. For example, many focal reducers designed for f/7 or f/8 ED refractors such as those from Tele Vue, William Optics, Sky-Watcher, and Meade are designed to have a working distance (or back focus) of 55mm. The click-lock with a 2 dielectric diagonal with a somewhat shorter light path, using both a 2 ES 28mm/68 and the same low-profile adapter with a 1.25 ES 24mm/68. Never noticed any anomalies with this unit. I wish there was.
Focal reducer for 8SE - Celestron vs. Antares - Cloudy Nights No small animals were harmed in making these observations. This appendix summarizes how this works based on simple equations from the book Telescope Optics by Rutten and van Venrooij. Sky recognition technology that has revolutionized the manual telescope by eliminating the confusion common among beginners and enhancing the user experience for even seasoned telescope users. They are designed (assuming you are referring to the f/6.3 version) for the f/10 light cone. Again, to my surprise, there was absolutely no difference between the Celestron and Antares on any star. However, it will not thread into William Optics accessories, and with GSO it is a hit or miss. It was also a little brighter in the center of the field with subtle darkening in the outer 20% or so. I think there may be some confusion here, because Antares makes a variety of reducers for eyepieces and scopes in addition to this SCT R/C but this definitely is a reducer/corrector. If I had to guess, the difference is maybe 10-15 grams. I have Hirsch focal reducer, which is yet another clone of the Celestron reducer. But I am rusty, can you condense a bit for me please? But is there a difference in quality between the Antares and the Celestron or Meade focal reducers? First, let's have a look at some key optical parameters are needed to understand focal reducers. Things change but when I rebought I got an Antares and it seems about the same to me. I had a Celestron, Antares and Hirsch for awhile and compared them over about a year. I only have the Celestron f/6.3. They are reported as identical. However, even though the imprint on the item states "Reducer / Corrector" please note that his is a reducer only. Unscrew that wide angle lens and put it away, then attach the ASI120 to the nose-piece that came with the camera and fit that into the eyepiece holder. This is especially true when these reducers are used with cameras with smaller sensors with a dimension of about 1/4 to 1/3 the diameter of the reducer, and with telescopes with a focal ratio of f/7 or larger. I have the Japanese version and although I haven't used it in quite awhile, the views through it were superb with no internal reflections at all. Our proprietary StarBright XLT optical coatings dramatically increase transmission, up to 97.4% on our Schmidt corrector lenses.
Astro-Tech Schmidt-Cassegrain f/6.3 Focal Reducer Field Flattener I am new to these optic topics, and I want to ask you what happens with Masutov like SW or Celestron 4 or 7 inches. The two samples I have PERFORM IDENTICALLY. Celestron or Antares? It threads onto the rear cell of 5" to 16" Celestron and Meade Schmidt-Cassegrain telescopes, making it possible to have a dual focal ratio instrument without sacrificing image quality. The Antares f/6.3 Focal Reducer for Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes is a low-price option for reducing the focal length of your Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope from f/10 to f/6.3. Easy solution found a very tiny dab of super lube on the threads and all was well and quiet.
Antares f/6.3 SCT Focal Reducer - Rother Valley Optics Ltd The Celestron is both a corrector and focal reducer and the Antares is just a focal reducer. Most refractor manufacturers such as William Optics, Tele Vue Optics, Explore Scientific, Sky-Watcher, William Optics, and Stellarvue make their own focal reducers optimized for use with their telescopes. Completely stuck, completely frustrated. Keep in mind that these differences were very subtle, and could be due to normal variations in coatings among different runs, and not necessarily unique to the brands. Rather than a direct side-by-side, I swapped the reducers so that I was using them on the exact same, well-collimated instrument.