Still fighting the QUARK
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Still fighting the QUARK
As the replacement for my 'out of specification' Quark is supposed to be arriving at the weekend, I decided to give 'the reject' one more try.
As I was using the Equinox 120 for whitelight I plugged in the Quark plus the Grasshopper 3 and had a play
The results are not great - the uneven illumination and on/off banding were still obvious - but they give an idea of what this combination should be capable of:
Here's hoping the replacement Quark delivers the goods
As I was using the Equinox 120 for whitelight I plugged in the Quark plus the Grasshopper 3 and had a play
The results are not great - the uneven illumination and on/off banding were still obvious - but they give an idea of what this combination should be capable of:
Here's hoping the replacement Quark delivers the goods
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- swisswalter
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 17948
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 4:28 am
- Location: Switzerland
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi Mike
wonderful results despite the banding. I'm still struggling wiht the QUARK, don't know why.
wonderful results despite the banding. I'm still struggling wiht the QUARK, don't know why.
Only stardust in the wind, some fine and some less fine scopes, filters and adapters as well. Switzerland 47 N, 9 E, in the heart of EUROPE
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42280
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20448 times
- Been thanked: 10254 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Interesting shots Mike. I do hope Daystar can sort out the issues with varying bandpass and illumination across the field of view with the quark, I know it is their budget product but they really are onto a winner if it can be.
What problems are you having Walter?
What problems are you having Walter?
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
- michael.h.f.wilkinson
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 2559
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:36 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Tantalizing images. Clearly there is a huge potential, but the production seems to have teething and QC problems.
Solar kit: GP-C8 with Thousand Oaks Solar filter, APM 80mm F/6, Lunt Herschel Wedge, Solar Spectrum 0.3Å H-alpha filter, Beloptic Tri-Band ERF (80mm free aperture), Thousand Oaks 90mm ERF, Coronado SolarMax II 60mm with Double Stack Unit. Lunt straight B1800 Ca-K module.
- Montana
- Librarian
- Posts: 34563
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
- Location: Cheshire, UK
- Has thanked: 17672 times
- Been thanked: 8795 times
-
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 12900
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:02 am
- Been thanked: 171 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mike these are pretty good after what I get with the old Daystar Solaredi at twice the price i still think the Quark is bang for the buck or pound for you. Mine is an old tilt shift so its rarely on band still it fuelled my passion.
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Thanks for the feedback
Tantalizing is a very good word and perfectly reflects my experiences with the Quark
Sometimes the screen image looks really good with far more detail than I can see with the SM40 (not surprisingly) BUT once the final image is processed, it is usually ruined by uneven illumination (which I can fix to some extent) and on/off band variations (which I can't)
I have tried to use the 1280x960 ROI option with the Grasshopper - following Mark's suggestion to concentrate on small AR regions - as this reduces the variation across the fov but the problem is still very obvious in the last 2 images above
On the other hand, when I finished processing image 1 above it gave me a real 'wow' moment. Detailed surface structures, nice 3D effect, pretty proms and SPICULES!
Thanks for your comment Alexandra - I was worried that I was deluding myself
So, tantalizing indeed. If the replacement has sorted the banding issues without loosing too much resolution...... it could be awesome
I also look forward to comparing it to the Lunt 100 I have on order (November.......maybe) at about 7 times the cost.
And finally, the possibility of using the Quark to double stack the Lunt 100
It's good to see that Mark is making good progress with his Quark - I can see some brain-picking on the horizon
Here are a couple more tantalizing shots including some more nice spicules Rather over processed but interesting ?
Tantalizing is a very good word and perfectly reflects my experiences with the Quark
Sometimes the screen image looks really good with far more detail than I can see with the SM40 (not surprisingly) BUT once the final image is processed, it is usually ruined by uneven illumination (which I can fix to some extent) and on/off band variations (which I can't)
I have tried to use the 1280x960 ROI option with the Grasshopper - following Mark's suggestion to concentrate on small AR regions - as this reduces the variation across the fov but the problem is still very obvious in the last 2 images above
On the other hand, when I finished processing image 1 above it gave me a real 'wow' moment. Detailed surface structures, nice 3D effect, pretty proms and SPICULES!
Thanks for your comment Alexandra - I was worried that I was deluding myself
So, tantalizing indeed. If the replacement has sorted the banding issues without loosing too much resolution...... it could be awesome
I also look forward to comparing it to the Lunt 100 I have on order (November.......maybe) at about 7 times the cost.
And finally, the possibility of using the Quark to double stack the Lunt 100
It's good to see that Mark is making good progress with his Quark - I can see some brain-picking on the horizon
Here are a couple more tantalizing shots including some more nice spicules Rather over processed but interesting ?
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- swisswalter
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 17948
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 4:28 am
- Location: Switzerland
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi Mike
fine Quark additions
@Mark I have some sort of fog on the telezentric lens and encounter a huge drop on the transmission as well as some banding. That is judged on only two sesssions, so I have to repeat the tests to be sure that it is the Quark and not the seeing or something else.
fine Quark additions
@Mark I have some sort of fog on the telezentric lens and encounter a huge drop on the transmission as well as some banding. That is judged on only two sesssions, so I have to repeat the tests to be sure that it is the Quark and not the seeing or something else.
Only stardust in the wind, some fine and some less fine scopes, filters and adapters as well. Switzerland 47 N, 9 E, in the heart of EUROPE
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
-
- Ohhhhhh My!
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:25 pm
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Nice shots, Mike, some tremendous detail and very nice processing.
Good luck with the replacement Quark. My 'reject' Quark (different issue) has gone back now to SCS Astro, who kindly sent me the replacement in advance last week. I've not been able to play with it much yet, I am desperate to give it a proper check! As I type, it is bucketing down with rain!
Good luck with the replacement Quark. My 'reject' Quark (different issue) has gone back now to SCS Astro, who kindly sent me the replacement in advance last week. I've not been able to play with it much yet, I am desperate to give it a proper check! As I type, it is bucketing down with rain!
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mmmmm...... I'm sitting in the same rain waiting for the delivery of my replacement which is scheduled for today..... maybe?
I understand now the frustration you expressed here (and elsewhere) as I feel that I am on the brink of producing stunning results but...........
On one level I feel that I am expecting far too much of something which cost about half of what I paid for my SolarMax 40 many years ago
On the other hand I'm rather surprised that the manufacturers didn't anticipate that people like you and I would buy the Quark and be frustrated (or delighted) by the variations in production. I'm even more surprised that, after the initial quality control issues, they produced a whole batch with sub 0.3A bandpass (profession standard at bargain bucket prices) without realising that the 'out of spec' units would have 'unacceptable banding issues' generating even more complaints/returns
I think that Daystar have produced an incredible bit of kit - almost on a par with the pst in terms of a major breakthrough in affordable Ha technology - but not as convinced by their marketing/PR
If it had been advertised as a 'purely visual' filter I would never have considered it as I only do imaging. Indeed, that was the impression I got from the first adverts I saw in the Astro Mags But, having seen the stunning images you produced with the Equinox 120, I thought 'I have an Equinox 120 (and an 80) so for £800 I can produce stunning images'.........
As I have well over £5,000 invested in a Lunt 100 (promised delivery in October, then November.... maybe) the Quark is almost a 'toy' by comparison BUT...... the idea that it can produce images close to those I expect to get from the Lunt...WOW.
I'm also very interested in trying the Quark as a DS option with the Lunt as some seem to be doing.....
We will see.....
I understand now the frustration you expressed here (and elsewhere) as I feel that I am on the brink of producing stunning results but...........
On one level I feel that I am expecting far too much of something which cost about half of what I paid for my SolarMax 40 many years ago
On the other hand I'm rather surprised that the manufacturers didn't anticipate that people like you and I would buy the Quark and be frustrated (or delighted) by the variations in production. I'm even more surprised that, after the initial quality control issues, they produced a whole batch with sub 0.3A bandpass (profession standard at bargain bucket prices) without realising that the 'out of spec' units would have 'unacceptable banding issues' generating even more complaints/returns
I think that Daystar have produced an incredible bit of kit - almost on a par with the pst in terms of a major breakthrough in affordable Ha technology - but not as convinced by their marketing/PR
If it had been advertised as a 'purely visual' filter I would never have considered it as I only do imaging. Indeed, that was the impression I got from the first adverts I saw in the Astro Mags But, having seen the stunning images you produced with the Equinox 120, I thought 'I have an Equinox 120 (and an 80) so for £800 I can produce stunning images'.........
As I have well over £5,000 invested in a Lunt 100 (promised delivery in October, then November.... maybe) the Quark is almost a 'toy' by comparison BUT...... the idea that it can produce images close to those I expect to get from the Lunt...WOW.
I'm also very interested in trying the Quark as a DS option with the Lunt as some seem to be doing.....
We will see.....
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
-
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:33 pm
- Has thanked: 57 times
- Been thanked: 1190 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
what is F num of Lunt 100?
I assume your getting single stack model - true?
I got a member of my AA club has Lunt 100 with DS internal model
quark seems to work pretty well with my lunt 60 tilt tuning model - not perfect but decent
I assume your getting single stack model - true?
I got a member of my AA club has Lunt 100 with DS internal model
quark seems to work pretty well with my lunt 60 tilt tuning model - not perfect but decent
- swisswalter
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 17948
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 4:28 am
- Location: Switzerland
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi John
the LUNT 100 has f/7
the LUNT 100 has f/7
Only stardust in the wind, some fine and some less fine scopes, filters and adapters as well. Switzerland 47 N, 9 E, in the heart of EUROPE
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
-
- Ohhhhhh My!
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 4:51 pm
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi Mike
Great post and the images are among some of the best that I have seen from the Quark . I can relate to the title because I battle with my Quark every time I use it ! I was also sold by the initial advertising which stated that thie product will work with a range of refractors from F/4 to F/9 . This is true but the manual states that it will operate with a range of light from F/15 to F/30 but goes on to say that F/27 to F/32 gives the best performance . This narrows down the optomum choice of refractor to around F/7.5 . Your Equinox hits the optimum for the Quark and the detail in your images shows this very well . If your replacement solves the un even lighting and band I think you will have a winning combination .
I do believe the Quark is good value for the money but it is more fussy about the scope it is used in than Daystar suggests . Throwing a 4.3x barlow into the mix is a challenge for any scope and this challenge will increase when applied to smaller aperture ST scopes . My limited experience with my Quark is telling me that for decent results I need 3 things , an F/7.5 scope with optics that will handle the 4.3x , Good seeing conditions and a rock steady mount to deal with the long focal lengths the Quark requires .
I have also produced videos that showed lots of detail but got progressively worse when processing , it seems that the images are "soft" and lac the sharp details and contrast that I can get with my modded scopes . The Quark is good value for visual but the name of the product is right on when it comes to imaging , it has been like learning all over again .
Mike
Great post and the images are among some of the best that I have seen from the Quark . I can relate to the title because I battle with my Quark every time I use it ! I was also sold by the initial advertising which stated that thie product will work with a range of refractors from F/4 to F/9 . This is true but the manual states that it will operate with a range of light from F/15 to F/30 but goes on to say that F/27 to F/32 gives the best performance . This narrows down the optomum choice of refractor to around F/7.5 . Your Equinox hits the optimum for the Quark and the detail in your images shows this very well . If your replacement solves the un even lighting and band I think you will have a winning combination .
I do believe the Quark is good value for the money but it is more fussy about the scope it is used in than Daystar suggests . Throwing a 4.3x barlow into the mix is a challenge for any scope and this challenge will increase when applied to smaller aperture ST scopes . My limited experience with my Quark is telling me that for decent results I need 3 things , an F/7.5 scope with optics that will handle the 4.3x , Good seeing conditions and a rock steady mount to deal with the long focal lengths the Quark requires .
I have also produced videos that showed lots of detail but got progressively worse when processing , it seems that the images are "soft" and lac the sharp details and contrast that I can get with my modded scopes . The Quark is good value for visual but the name of the product is right on when it comes to imaging , it has been like learning all over again .
Mike
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mike; I can't argue with any of your conclusions
The Quark seems to work OK with my Equinox 80 (f6.25) and reasonably well with my little Lunt 60 (bought as a CaK scope) but with the Equinox 120 it really sings
I think that you are right about the 120 hitting the optimum f number and having sufficient aperture to cope with the x4.3 telecentric. As can be seen in the table below, my other refractors should work reasonably well but I think the total focal length is just too much for the Equinox 80 and Lunt 60 to cope with! Fortunately I have an HEQ5 Pro mount on a pier which provides a very stable foundation although it is still quite tricky to focus at the very high magnifications involved.
I bought a PG Grasshopper 3 camera recently and this seems to work very well with the Quark. Although the screen image does seem very flat, it is very easy to bring out detail during processing - especially if I record in 16 bit ser mode which allows me to capture disc detail and proms in a single capture. The first image above was captured this way.
We will see what the new Quark brings........
The Quark seems to work OK with my Equinox 80 (f6.25) and reasonably well with my little Lunt 60 (bought as a CaK scope) but with the Equinox 120 it really sings
I think that you are right about the 120 hitting the optimum f number and having sufficient aperture to cope with the x4.3 telecentric. As can be seen in the table below, my other refractors should work reasonably well but I think the total focal length is just too much for the Equinox 80 and Lunt 60 to cope with! Fortunately I have an HEQ5 Pro mount on a pier which provides a very stable foundation although it is still quite tricky to focus at the very high magnifications involved.
I bought a PG Grasshopper 3 camera recently and this seems to work very well with the Quark. Although the screen image does seem very flat, it is very easy to bring out detail during processing - especially if I record in 16 bit ser mode which allows me to capture disc detail and proms in a single capture. The first image above was captured this way.
We will see what the new Quark brings........
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42280
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20448 times
- Been thanked: 10254 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
I like the results i'm getting with my 70mm f6, it's easy to record disk and proms in the same exposure with the DMK, just keep things gamma neutral (100). I did try it yesterday for the first time with the Tal100R, but have to say i'm not enamored with the first (brief) results, I think the focal ratio is too much and image scale is then too high - it all goes a bit soft IMHO. Fingers crossed I shall be getting the skywatcher 80mm f7.5 as a Christmas present to myself in the next couple of months so will give that a test then. Longer term i've got my sights set on a 100mm f7 and probably a 152mm f6 for using with the quark.
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
-
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:33 pm
- Has thanked: 57 times
- Been thanked: 1190 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
We will see what the new Quark brings
g C did you send old one back first
ie what is return procedure
g C did you send old one back first
ie what is return procedure
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mark; having put together my little spreadsheet (see above) I didn't even bother to try with the Tal100RS.
Judging by the significant improvement I get by moving from the Equinox 80 to the Equinox 120 (with similar f numbers) I suspect that you would get awesome results from a 152 f6.
I'm a bit baffled by the results you and others are getting with 0.5 focal reducers. I have one and have tried it with the Quark and my Grasshopper but get horrible results. If I place it at the end of a 'normal' camera nose-piece I get a slightly distorted image (like a red blood cell face on) of the full disc with tilt etalon type banding : I bought a very short nose-piece which decreases the effect but shows some vignetting: Not sure if this is because the Grasshopper sensor is quite deep inside the housing...... I may see if I can find an 'intermediate' length nose-piece.
Judging by the significant improvement I get by moving from the Equinox 80 to the Equinox 120 (with similar f numbers) I suspect that you would get awesome results from a 152 f6.
I'm a bit baffled by the results you and others are getting with 0.5 focal reducers. I have one and have tried it with the Quark and my Grasshopper but get horrible results. If I place it at the end of a 'normal' camera nose-piece I get a slightly distorted image (like a red blood cell face on) of the full disc with tilt etalon type banding : I bought a very short nose-piece which decreases the effect but shows some vignetting: Not sure if this is because the Grasshopper sensor is quite deep inside the housing...... I may see if I can find an 'intermediate' length nose-piece.
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Re returns/swaps etc........
My problems were (are being) sorted by the dealer BUT..... he has pasted the 'official' Daystar position here:
http://solarchat.natca.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=12713
I was hoping to get my replacement yesterday but...... will be watching for the postman tomorrow
My problems were (are being) sorted by the dealer BUT..... he has pasted the 'official' Daystar position here:
http://solarchat.natca.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=12713
I was hoping to get my replacement yesterday but...... will be watching for the postman tomorrow
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
-
- Ohhhhhh My!
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 4:51 pm
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi Mike ;
Here are the scopes that I have tried my Quark with , I like your spread sheet so add these to it if you like . This could be benificial for Quark owners to help them decide on a suitable scope .
This is what I have tried ;
Orion ST 80 80mm x 400mm F/5 + Quark = F/21.5 results poor for imaging
Skywatcher ST 100 100mm x 500mm F/5 + Quark = F/21.5 results not much better
Williams Optics 110 ED APO 110mm x 655mm F/5.95 + Quark = F 25.5 results better but still room for improvement
Skywatcher Equinox 100 100mm x 900mm F/9 + Quark = F/38 results similar to my 110mm ED but more magnification
I have recently picked up an Orion 80 ED F/7.5 so with the Quark this will give me F/32 . I have not had a chance to try this one yet but will post my findinge here when I do . I see some holes in the cloud so the first light might be today .
There have been times when I have had un even lighting and band but this has not been consistent . In my case I believe this has more to do with miss alignment when used in my cheaper ST acro's , the lighting and band is much improved when used in my better scopes .
I have recently picked up an EQ6 to handle my 150mm Istar mod so my mount is no longer an issue , a pier to put it on would be the final toutch
Here are the scopes that I have tried my Quark with , I like your spread sheet so add these to it if you like . This could be benificial for Quark owners to help them decide on a suitable scope .
This is what I have tried ;
Orion ST 80 80mm x 400mm F/5 + Quark = F/21.5 results poor for imaging
Skywatcher ST 100 100mm x 500mm F/5 + Quark = F/21.5 results not much better
Williams Optics 110 ED APO 110mm x 655mm F/5.95 + Quark = F 25.5 results better but still room for improvement
Skywatcher Equinox 100 100mm x 900mm F/9 + Quark = F/38 results similar to my 110mm ED but more magnification
I have recently picked up an Orion 80 ED F/7.5 so with the Quark this will give me F/32 . I have not had a chance to try this one yet but will post my findinge here when I do . I see some holes in the cloud so the first light might be today .
There have been times when I have had un even lighting and band but this has not been consistent . In my case I believe this has more to do with miss alignment when used in my cheaper ST acro's , the lighting and band is much improved when used in my better scopes .
I have recently picked up an EQ6 to handle my 150mm Istar mod so my mount is no longer an issue , a pier to put it on would be the final toutch
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Here we go Mike: may be of some use to someone and others might like to add their own experiences?
Mike
Mike
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- Carbon60
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 14211
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:33 pm
- Location: Lancashire, UK
- Has thanked: 8420 times
- Been thanked: 8173 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Let's hope the replacement Quark gives you what you're looking for, Mike.
Stu.
Stu.
H-alpha, WL and Ca II K imaging kit for various image scales.
Fluxgate Magnetometers (1s and 150s Cadence).
Radio meteor detector.
More images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/solarcarbon60/
Fluxgate Magnetometers (1s and 150s Cadence).
Radio meteor detector.
More images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/solarcarbon60/
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42280
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20448 times
- Been thanked: 10254 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
I think the problem you may be getting with the PGR and the quark is because of its huge chip you aren't getting a flat field with it using your particular focal reducer. As a suggestion try the reducer with it with the 21 and 41 and see if there is a difference. It may be that a different reducer is in order, although yesterday I did google around for 0.5x focal reducer reviews and they are all much the same it would seem... I have suggested to Jen at Daystar a dedicated 0.5x reducer designed for Ha work would be a hot cake
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
You could well be right Mark. I've just checked and I was using the Grasshopper at full res (1920x1440) for both of the focal reducer shots shown above!
Recently, I have been using it mainly at 1280x960 as this reduces the uneven illumination with the Quark and results in much higher capture speeds as my hard drive can keep up with the data stream.
I did a bit of research and couldn't see any difference between the various x0.5 reducers so just assumed it was a positional issue. Changing to the short camera nose-piece did improve things and I guess that if I crop the second image above to 1280x960 it would be fine.
Still waiting for the replacement and forecast is vile so.......... don't hold your breath
Recently, I have been using it mainly at 1280x960 as this reduces the uneven illumination with the Quark and results in much higher capture speeds as my hard drive can keep up with the data stream.
I did a bit of research and couldn't see any difference between the various x0.5 reducers so just assumed it was a positional issue. Changing to the short camera nose-piece did improve things and I guess that if I crop the second image above to 1280x960 it would be fine.
Still waiting for the replacement and forecast is vile so.......... don't hold your breath
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
-
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 12:12 am
- Location: Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
- Been thanked: 1735 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
The main issue I had with my 3rd production run Quark was the subtle banding (3 pair of faint dark/light bands). I tended to ignore these because by placing them properly on the image, you could actually produce an impression of depth on some features. I do wish that they weren't there at all and thought about sending the Quark back at first.
Then, when I final got around to using the Quark with my LS152( at 3800mm ), the quality of the Quark became evident and decided to keep it, bands and all.
I only recently tried using a Teleskop Service camera tilter with my Grasshopper3 (2/3") and found that , in the few minutes I played with it, opening the plates about 1mm on one side while keeping the plates in contact on the other, changed the banding significantly to one lighter vertical band( 20% frame width) on one side with the rest of the image being uniformly darker. The air wedge(wide to narrow) in the tilter was lined up with the band orientation in the image(sequence of vertical bands along the long dimension of the frame). I did find that the pressure tuner could reduce the intensity of the brighter region somewhat.
I only spent about 5 clumsy minutes playing with the tilter due to clouding over.
I'm wondering whether I should attempt to achieve a uniform darker region over the image or a uniform lighter region. The advantage of a uniform lighter area is obvious with better shutter speeds.
I'll try the suggestion of a shorter nosepiece to lessen reducer problems, since I also get vignetting and spherical aberration when used with the long camera snout.
Lou
Then, when I final got around to using the Quark with my LS152( at 3800mm ), the quality of the Quark became evident and decided to keep it, bands and all.
I only recently tried using a Teleskop Service camera tilter with my Grasshopper3 (2/3") and found that , in the few minutes I played with it, opening the plates about 1mm on one side while keeping the plates in contact on the other, changed the banding significantly to one lighter vertical band( 20% frame width) on one side with the rest of the image being uniformly darker. The air wedge(wide to narrow) in the tilter was lined up with the band orientation in the image(sequence of vertical bands along the long dimension of the frame). I did find that the pressure tuner could reduce the intensity of the brighter region somewhat.
I only spent about 5 clumsy minutes playing with the tilter due to clouding over.
I'm wondering whether I should attempt to achieve a uniform darker region over the image or a uniform lighter region. The advantage of a uniform lighter area is obvious with better shutter speeds.
I'll try the suggestion of a shorter nosepiece to lessen reducer problems, since I also get vignetting and spherical aberration when used with the long camera snout.
Lou
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42280
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20448 times
- Been thanked: 10254 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Using a 0.5x reducer on a shorter nosepiece will result is less of a magnification factor - so maybe it operates at say 0.6-0.7x instead. When using a reducer it will amplify any banding etc, and the lower the magnifcation factor - eg 0.4x-0.5x the more any optical defects / banding etc will be amplified. Try using the reducer on your camera with your sm40 and that banding will really jump out at you. Don't also forget any reducer will have an operating range (of magnification) it is designed to work in, at the extremes of this range any spherical aberration will be accentuated.
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
All valid points Mark. With the Grasshopper the sensor is about 20mm inside the case compared to about half that for the DMK cameras. My short nose-piece probably just about compensates for the difference so I suspect it is working at close to x0.5. With the long/normal nose-piece I get a full disc with lots of space so I suspect it is down to x0.25 or less - well outside the design spec as you say and this probably explains the distortion.
Pity the forecast is rain and cloud for days
Lets hope for a few cracks in the clouds
Just been told my replacement is in the post and should arrive tomorrow Pity the forecast is rain and cloud for days
Lets hope for a few cracks in the clouds
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Thanks John; I'm also nervous about how the replacement will perform
Just arrived with Mr Postman so once the rain goes away (not for a few days I fear) I will find out
Just arrived with Mr Postman so once the rain goes away (not for a few days I fear) I will find out
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
The replacement has arrived
Managed to grab a couple of quick captures through the front door from the porch - only place I could get a view of the low sun
Seeing was dire - very difficult to focus etc
Put 4 frames together as a mosaic - also tried inverting for fun.....
Difficult to evaluate from such a short session with poor seeing and no time to try adjusting Quark settings
Managed to grab a couple of quick captures through the front door from the porch - only place I could get a view of the low sun
Seeing was dire - very difficult to focus etc
Put 4 frames together as a mosaic - also tried inverting for fun.....
Difficult to evaluate from such a short session with poor seeing and no time to try adjusting Quark settings
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- swisswalter
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 17948
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 4:28 am
- Location: Switzerland
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Hi Mike
Looks good so far
Looks good so far
Only stardust in the wind, some fine and some less fine scopes, filters and adapters as well. Switzerland 47 N, 9 E, in the heart of EUROPE
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
from 7 am - 7 pm http://www.nanosys.ch
from 7.01 pm - 6.59 am http://www.wastronomiko.com some times vice versa
- Valery
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 4059
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:13 pm
- Has thanked: 156 times
- Been thanked: 893 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
For the first test looks perfectly uniform over FOV.
And narrow enough band wide! I think you need prepare an expedition to the place where you can test it for several hours straight - with two telescopes and several scales - from FD to high resolution.
Valery.
And narrow enough band wide! I think you need prepare an expedition to the place where you can test it for several hours straight - with two telescopes and several scales - from FD to high resolution.
Valery.
"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.
Largest full size 185 - 356mm Dielectric Energy Rejection Filters (D-ERF) by ARIES Instruments.
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Thanks guys.
As I said, its very difficult to draw conclusions from one very short session under dire conditions.
I had to work quite hard to get a fairly uniform mosaic as some uneven illumination is present in each frame and, if processed hard, a hint of the on/off band pattern can be seen.
I have been working on ways of combining frames from my SM40 which also shows a quite obvious 'hot spot' that spoils the appearance of full discs and have found that producing the mosaic from 'raw' frames before any processing has been applied works best. I have also been experimenting with Lucy Richardson deconvolution in PixInsight and have found that this works better than the smart sharpening in PS which I normally use.
The difference can be seen here:
Valery: you are right, based on my experience with the first Quark unit, it will take several long sessions to try out different scopes and the 11 different tuning settings on the Quark. Unfortunately, having had the driest September for 100 years here in the UK, we are now paying for it with a long spell of clouds and rain. I was very lucky to grab a few shots yesterday in a narrow crack between between rain bands passing through.
Maybe I should 'prepare an expedition' to Pedro's part of Portugal where the sun seems to shine every day
As I said, its very difficult to draw conclusions from one very short session under dire conditions.
I had to work quite hard to get a fairly uniform mosaic as some uneven illumination is present in each frame and, if processed hard, a hint of the on/off band pattern can be seen.
I have been working on ways of combining frames from my SM40 which also shows a quite obvious 'hot spot' that spoils the appearance of full discs and have found that producing the mosaic from 'raw' frames before any processing has been applied works best. I have also been experimenting with Lucy Richardson deconvolution in PixInsight and have found that this works better than the smart sharpening in PS which I normally use.
The difference can be seen here:
Valery: you are right, based on my experience with the first Quark unit, it will take several long sessions to try out different scopes and the 11 different tuning settings on the Quark. Unfortunately, having had the driest September for 100 years here in the UK, we are now paying for it with a long spell of clouds and rain. I was very lucky to grab a few shots yesterday in a narrow crack between between rain bands passing through.
Maybe I should 'prepare an expedition' to Pedro's part of Portugal where the sun seems to shine every day
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
- Valery
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 4059
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:13 pm
- Has thanked: 156 times
- Been thanked: 893 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mike,
Do the basic things prior to long tests.
1. Place the wave length indicator to the position one click right from the middle. This will be close enough to unit's CWL, but may be help if you have some inclination in the train (focuser slop etc).
2. Use a small refractor <450mm FL - to see FD
3. Use at least 100mm F/8 refractor with 32 and 40mm eyepieces and "scan" the sun surface.
You will immediately see the non-uniformity in the FOV if this sample has the non-uniformity.
The next basic test is all the same, but with camera + Focal reducer.
Hope this help and you will be able to test even within an hour or two of clear sky.
Valery
Do the basic things prior to long tests.
1. Place the wave length indicator to the position one click right from the middle. This will be close enough to unit's CWL, but may be help if you have some inclination in the train (focuser slop etc).
2. Use a small refractor <450mm FL - to see FD
3. Use at least 100mm F/8 refractor with 32 and 40mm eyepieces and "scan" the sun surface.
You will immediately see the non-uniformity in the FOV if this sample has the non-uniformity.
The next basic test is all the same, but with camera + Focal reducer.
Hope this help and you will be able to test even within an hour or two of clear sky.
Valery
"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.
Largest full size 185 - 356mm Dielectric Energy Rejection Filters (D-ERF) by ARIES Instruments.
- marktownley
- Librarian
- Posts: 42280
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
- Location: Brierley Hills, UK
- Has thanked: 20448 times
- Been thanked: 10254 times
- Contact:
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Mike, the comparison image above, try photomerge on the raw frames then do all the smart sharpen etc on the mosaic image as a whole, be interesting to see if there is a difference...
Apart from that looks good!
Apart from that looks good!
http://brierleyhillsolar.blogspot.co.uk/
Solar images, a collection of all the most up to date live solar data on the web, imaging & processing tutorials - please take a look!
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Valery: thanks for the advice. I will try out your tests as soon as I can see the sun.
Mark: that is exactly what I did with the second mosaic. I fed the raw frames, straight out of AutoStakkert, into photomerge and then did all sharpening and other adjustments on the mosaic. I did try a version with smart sharpen but am finding that Lucy Richardson deconvolution in PixInsight does a better job on some images. Give me a few hours in the sun and I might have some conclusions.
One thing I have just discovered is that the replacement has one of the 'out of spec' 1.25" mounts. The original was a tight fit in most of my 1.25" diagonals but this one won't fit at all! Not a major issue as I use it in 2" diagonals/drawtubes on most of my scopes but it does stop me trying it as a DS on the SM40.
Mark: that is exactly what I did with the second mosaic. I fed the raw frames, straight out of AutoStakkert, into photomerge and then did all sharpening and other adjustments on the mosaic. I did try a version with smart sharpen but am finding that Lucy Richardson deconvolution in PixInsight does a better job on some images. Give me a few hours in the sun and I might have some conclusions.
One thing I have just discovered is that the replacement has one of the 'out of spec' 1.25" mounts. The original was a tight fit in most of my 1.25" diagonals but this one won't fit at all! Not a major issue as I use it in 2" diagonals/drawtubes on most of my scopes but it does stop me trying it as a DS on the SM40.
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
-
- Ohhhhhh My!
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:25 pm
- grimble_cornet
- Way More Fun to Share It!!
- Posts: 3537
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:10 pm
- Location: UK West Midlands
- Been thanked: 47 times
Re: Still fighting the QUARK
Thanks Luke - don't need to cross mine for you having just seen your first light
.
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/
.
.
Mike Garbett
Selection of Solar and Deep Sky images on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikegarbett/