Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

this is the main message area for anything solar :)
Post Reply
Bruce Girrell
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:57 pm

Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

Post by Bruce Girrell » Mon Jul 02, 2018 2:35 pm

Has anyone here had the opportunity to test Daystar Quark Chromosphere and Prominence models side-by-side?

How much difference do you actually see? Are the proms really that subdued on the Chromosphere model? How much disk detail is lost with the Prominence model? Is it really worth buying two different versions? If you have (or have had) both models, would you buy them both again or simply choose one?

Any other comments on these products?

Thanks

Bruce G

User avatar
Valery
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:13 pm

Re: Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

Post by Valery » Mon Jul 02, 2018 3:39 pm

All depends of a given Quark uniformity. If we define that non-uniformity is the same magnitude, say, +/-0.1A , then the more narrow etalon, the high a relative non-uniformity. Say, the bandpass is 0,6A, then a relative non-uniformity is 0,6A/0.1A=6 . If the bandpass is 0,3A then a relative non-uniformity is 0,3A/0,1A=3. This is a huge difference especially when imaging with a contrast increasing.

So, all depends. If the Chromosphere version can be set a the tuning knob so that there is no too much non-uniformity then this one is OK for you. If not, better to go with Prominence version about 0,6A and better uniformity.

Hope this helps.

Valery.
Last edited by Valery on Wed Jul 04, 2018 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Solar H alpha activity is the most dynamic and compelling thing you can see in a telescope, so spend accordingly." (c) Bob Yoesle.

Largest full size 185 - 356mm Dielectric Energy Rejection Filters (D-ERF) by ARIES Instruments.

User avatar
MalVeauX
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 7:58 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

Post by MalVeauX » Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:46 pm

Hi Bruce,

This is the aged old question, and basically, almost everyone will advise you to go with the chromosphere model because you can see prominences with it just fine as well as superior surface contrast/detail. So if you have any interest in the surface, just go with the chromosphere model. You'll still see promincnes just fine! If your sole interest is the prominences and you have zero interest, ever, with the surface, then maybe consider the prominence version, but I can't really recommend going that way because inevitably you'll want to see surface detail too when there are no major prominences to look at. I imagine the prominence version would be slightly brighter, but, ultimately, I can see prominences with the chromosphere model just fine, plenty bright.

Personally I see no reason to bother with the prominence version, the magnesium version, nor the sodium version. The Chromosphere and Calcium versions are about all that's worth while, at least to me.

Here's an example from the Chromosphere version:

Image

Very best,

Bruce Girrell
Ohhhhhh My!
Ohhhhhh My!
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:57 pm

Re: Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

Post by Bruce Girrell » Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:40 pm

Valery,

I'm not sure that I comprehend what you are getting at. How does this nonuniformity show up in an image?
The Chromosphere model is tunable, but its FWHM remains constant at somewhere between 0.5A and 0.3A (depending on the individual unit), if I understand correctly.


Marty,

Thanks. I was leaning toward the Chromosphere because I had seen photos of proms made using it and they seemed fine, not like the detail had to be dragged out of the last couple of A/D bits. And a double stacked etalon also doesn't have all that much of an issue with the proms it seems.

User avatar
TheSkyBurner
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Quarks: Chromosphere vs Prominence

Post by TheSkyBurner » Wed Jul 04, 2018 8:08 pm

This is only speculation, but i believe the prominence version has a higher degree of tuning blue and red wing to see the doppler shifted prominence without losing it entirely from the image. The chromosphere version is basically on off tuning.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests