2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

this is the main message area for anything solar :)
Post Reply
User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

Hi guys!
Last weekend i have tested Valery's (@Valtori) Solar Spectrum Observer Series 1,5 0.3A filter and compared it with my Quark Combo.
Setup: Aries ERF, C11hd, Baader TZ3, SolSpec/Quark, asi174mm. To keep comparison clear i didn't even move mirror focusing knob.
SolSpec was 3 times brighter(10ms@150gain vs 20ms@240gain) if compare best tuner positions, but during capture Quark looks more contrast.
Processing results:
Just 100 frames in stack is enough for SolSpec to have excellent SNR, whereas 800 frames stack of quark is still quite noisy.
SolSpec still looks little bit wider, but it's high transmittance makes it much better than quark.

Here is very similar processing, best single frames and flats:

Quark combo
Quark combo
Quark combo
2021-07-17-0435_1-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_AS_F800_l5_ap2814_LR100.png (1.91 MiB) Viewed 977 times
Solar Spectrum
Solar Spectrum
Solar Spectrum
2021-07-17-0519_0-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_52c_AS_F100_l4_ap2801_LR100.png (1.93 MiB) Viewed 977 times
Quark combo best frame
Quark combo best frame
Quark combo best frame
2021-07-17-0435_1-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_F_00000174.png (4.66 MiB) Viewed 977 times
Solar Spectrum best frame
Solar Spectrum best frame
Solar Spectrum best frame
2021-07-17-0519_0-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_F_00004541.png (4.71 MiB) Viewed 977 times
Quark combo flat
Quark combo flat
Quark combo flat
2021-07-17-0435_9-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_flat20.png (829.11 KiB) Viewed 977 times
Solar Spectrum flat
Solar Spectrum flat
Solar Spectrum flat
2021-07-17-0520_5-C-Ha-Sun_Halpha_flat.png (813.08 KiB) Viewed 977 times
Setup
Image253.jpg
Image253.jpg (191.33 KiB) Viewed 977 times


User avatar
ffellah
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 11172
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: Westport, CT USA
Has thanked: 9145 times
Been thanked: 6025 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by ffellah »

An interesting comparison, Csve, thank you.

Franco


User avatar
pedro
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 12256
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 8:26 pm
Location: Portugal
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 6577 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by pedro »

Great comparison. The SolarSpectrum 0.3A wins hands down


User avatar
marktownley
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 42272
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:27 pm
Location: Brierley Hills, UK
Has thanked: 20440 times
Been thanked: 10245 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by marktownley »

Excellent results and looks a great place to observe for good seeing.

Maybe you can describe the post processing you did to get from the raw solar spectrum image to the finished result.


Image
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!
User avatar
Montana
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 34563
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:25 pm
Location: Cheshire, UK
Has thanked: 17672 times
Been thanked: 8791 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Montana »

Very interesting!!

I have exactly the same as you C11 / ARIES ERF / SS 0.3A / TZ3 / ASI174 and I use gain 120 and get 8-9 ms. So very close to your settings. I also noticed that my images weren't very noisy compared to when I use the same set up with WL and CaK. This I don't understand, I thought my ASI174 was really noisy, but not with the Solar Spectrum. Any thoughts?

It is great to see these comparisons and really helps. I love the observation point and I think it wonderful you can meet friends and observe together :)
Superb images too!! I hope you had good fun :)
:bow :hamster:

Alexandra


User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

marktownley wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 12:05 pm Maybe you can describe the post processing you did to get from the raw solar spectrum image to the finished result.
Thanks.
It's very simple this time, to make better comparison.

1. Deconvolution in AI5
AI5.png
AI5.png (18.93 KiB) Viewed 902 times
2. Some pixel math in pixinsight (all further processing in PI):

Code: Select all

($T-mean($T))*(0.05/sdev($T))+0.5
This equation centers histogram and make it's width same for any image. Very usefull for batch processing.

3. Moving peak to 0.25 intensity with histogram transformation
2021-07-23_12-35-33.png
2021-07-23_12-35-33.png (47.82 KiB) Viewed 902 times
4. Doubling local contrast at histogram peak
2021-07-23_12-38-04.png
2021-07-23_12-38-04.png (121.45 KiB) Viewed 902 times
That's all. I also usually make HDR at setp 3.5, but it is not fine for contrast comparison of 2 different ethalons.
The procedure was absolutely identical for both images despite initial contrans and brightness difference.
Last edited by Csve on Fri Jul 23, 2021 10:30 am, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

Montana wrote: Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:32 am I also noticed that my images weren't very noisy compared to when I use the same set up with WL and CaK. This I don't understand, I thought my ASI174 was really noisy, but not with the Solar Spectrum. Any thoughts?
Thanks.
Asi174 still have quite large well capacity at gain 120, if you fill it, single image SNR is quite high.
Montana wrote: Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:32 am I love the observation point
Local seeing is very important i believe. Forest surface should be even better, as it heats less than grass field, but some turbulence can appear on the border.


User avatar
MAURITS
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 8507
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:37 pm
Location: Belgium
Has thanked: 2412 times
Been thanked: 4786 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by MAURITS »

Thanks for the comparation Csve, this is exactly what I hoped to see.
I am very interested in the Solar Spectrum 0,3A too.
My Quark's are very very good but not the image quality as the Solar Spectrum.


Regards,
Maurits

Vista del Cielo Observatory

www.vistadelcielo.be
User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

Quark image is worse than i expected. I'll try to repeat comparison this Saturday.
Last weekend we also (with LeoD) have compared Lunt LS80 double stack and this SolSpec in 130mm refractor. Results coming soon.


User avatar
MAURITS
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 8507
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:37 pm
Location: Belgium
Has thanked: 2412 times
Been thanked: 4786 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by MAURITS »

Like this thread.


Regards,
Maurits

Vista del Cielo Observatory

www.vistadelcielo.be
thesmiths
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 1054
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:13 pm
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 1487 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by thesmiths »

This is very interesting. Is the major difference the higher transmittance, therefore a shorter exposure time and lower gain?

It also looks like the quark may also have some additional optical imperfections (slightly worse focus). The bandwidth does not look very different between the two etalons.


Simon2940
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 604
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 5:43 pm
Has thanked: 1071 times
Been thanked: 1985 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Simon2940 »

I'd like to see the 0.3Å solar spectrum compared to a Daystar Quantum 0.3Å

The Quark is known to be a more budget friendly point and an easier way for those who own the right type of scope to be able to try out solar.


User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

thesmiths wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:54 pm Is the major difference the higher transmittance, therefore a shorter exposure time and lower gain?
I think so.
Simon2940 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 11:58 pm I'd like to see the 0.3Å solar spectrum compared to a Daystar Quantum 0.3Å
So do I, but i know nobody who has quantum in Moscow.


User avatar
DeepSolar64
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 18823
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2019 12:19 am
Location: Lowndesville S.C.
Has thanked: 17572 times
Been thanked: 16694 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by DeepSolar64 »

Nice images and comparison and what a wonderful observing site!!

James


Lunt 8x32 SUNoculars
Orion 70mm Solar Telescope
Celestron AstroMaster Alt/Az Mount
Meade Coronado SolarMax II 60 DS
Meade Coronado SolarMax II 90 DS
Meade Coronado AZS Alt/Az Mount
Astro-Tech AT72EDII with Altair solar wedge
Celestron NexStar 102GT with Altair solar wedge
Losmandy AZ8 Alt/Az Mount
Sky-Watcher AZGTI Alt-Az GoTo mount
Cameras: ZWO ASI178MM, PGR Grasshopper, PGR Flea
Lunt, Coronado, TeleVue, Orion and Meade eyepieces

Image Visual Observer
" Way more fun to see it! "
User avatar
Carbon60
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 14209
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:33 pm
Location: Lancashire, UK
Has thanked: 8418 times
Been thanked: 8163 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Carbon60 »

An interesting and useful comparison. Thanks for the PI Pixel Math equation. I’ll give this a try.

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/
User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

DeepSolar64 wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:31 am Nice images and comparison and what a wonderful observing site!!

James
Thanks. This site is near the SVO Airport. 55.933500, 37.403505
Carbon60 wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:18 am An interesting and useful comparison. Thanks for the PI Pixel Math equation. I’ll give this a try.

Stu.
You’re welcome
Don't forget to fine tune the constants:
0.05 - Resulting histogran width
0.5 - Resulting histogran center


User avatar
Rusted
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 1738
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:00 am
Location: Central Denmark
Has thanked: 8016 times
Been thanked: 1938 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Rusted »

Thanks you for sharing these comparisons. :bow

The first Quark image simply looks out of focus to me.
While the SS is sharply focused.

The first Quark image has lots of over-sharpening & noise artefacts.
Typical of poorer seeing demanding extra processing to bring out missing detail.

Was there a difference in timing between capturing these two images?
EDIT: I see there was. 04.35-05.19. 44 minutes difference is not minor.

The overall background detail is "messy" on the Quark. Sharp on the SS.
The flecking on the spot penumbra easily shows the clearest difference between the two.

Just my personal opinion. Feel completely free to disagree. ;)

Forgive me for being a complete and utter pedant. :roll:
It seems obtuse to have your telescope looking directly over a bare earth track.
When you have a huge field of naturally cool plants to choose from.

The bare earth will produce ground currents out of all proportion to the cooler, surrounding foliage.
I'd avoid pointing the telescope over that tree too.
Its vertical height enjoys greater solar heating [and convection] than the lowly plants. :mrgreen:


http://fullerscopes.blogspot.dk/

H-alpha: Baader 160mm D-ERF, iStar 150/10 H-alpha objective, 2" Baader 35nm H-a, 2" Beloptik KG3,
Lunt 60MT etalon, Lunt B1200S2 BF, Assorted T-S GPCs or 2x "Shorty" Barlow, ZWO ASI174.
AndiesHandyHandies
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Way More Fun to Share It!!
Posts: 1444
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 6:46 am
Location: Derbyshire UK
Has thanked: 3292 times
Been thanked: 1887 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by AndiesHandyHandies »

I agree about the tree. Had the same issue at the start of my session today. Also a big gravel pile a bit later.


RodAstro
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:51 pm
Has thanked: 286 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by RodAstro »

I also agree with Rusted's points.
Just thinking though what are we trying to prove?
Is it that the Quark is good for the money, ore something else.
Quarks are just good seconds and random, Just depends on what you want out of one, In the right hands and with a good setup they can be made to give very good results.
The Solar Spectrum on the other hand is a first grade unit that when setup, you also need a TZ, is over thirteen times the price of a Quark.
Should we not really be testing like for like and see how the Solar Spectrum compares to a Daystar Quantum 0.3A?

Rod


User avatar
Csve
The Sun?
The Sun?
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:08 am
Location: Russia, Moscow region
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 52 times
Contact:

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Csve »

Rusted wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:51 am It seems obtuse to have your telescope looking directly over a bare earth track.
When you have a huge field of naturally cool plants to choose from.

The bare earth will produce ground currents out of all proportion to the cooler, surrounding foliage.
I'd avoid pointing the telescope over that tree too.
Its vertical height enjoys greater solar heating [and convection] than the lowly plants. :mrgreen:
Dirt road and single trees impacts seeing much less than asphalt and buildings.
I just placed telescope at a good plane area with low grass, there is no such place on the other side of the road. Perfectionism is not the best policy.
RodAstro wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:08 am Just thinking though what are we trying to prove?
Just comparison, make your own conclusion.
RodAstro wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:08 am Should we not really be testing like for like and see how the Solar Spectrum compares to a Daystar Quantum 0.3A?
That would be great.


Grakrob778
Oh, I get it now!
Oh, I get it now!
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2020 3:39 am
Has thanked: 52 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by Grakrob778 »

RodAstro wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:08 am I also agree with Rusted's points.
Just thinking though what are we trying to prove?
Is it that the Quark is good for the money, ore something else.
Quarks are just good seconds and random, Just depends on what you want out of one, In the right hands and with a good setup they can be made to give very good results.
The Solar Spectrum on the other hand is a first grade unit that when setup, you also need a TZ, is over thirteen times the price of a Quark.
Should we not really be testing like for like and see how the Solar Spectrum compares to a Daystar Quantum 0.3A?

Rod
Price of Quantum 0.3A (??mm) is almost $17k. SS SO 1-5 (25mm) 0.3A is $8k. RG18 0.3A is less than $3k here in USA. Quark is $1200. TZ-3/4 are $400. More like 4x the price of a quark and with 0.3A (plus guaranteed quality) not (maybe) 0.5A and lackluster QC. I think an ION comparison would be a better comparison for money spent.
PS I'm fully biased and have a RG18 on order :)
Not trying to argue, just pointing out the prices.. :seesaw


Lunt 80Tha B1800, Lunt Ca2K B1200, Solar Spectrum RG18 0.3A, Skywatcher EvoStar 150, ASI 1600MM & 174MM
torsinadoc
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 843
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 1640 times
Been thanked: 878 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by torsinadoc »

Thanks for the comparison and the PI equation!


RodAstro
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:51 pm
Has thanked: 286 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: 2021.07.17 SolarSpectrum 0.3A vs QuarkCombo (C11-TZ3)

Post by RodAstro »

Hi
Sorry I didn't realise there was a smaller Solar Spectrum didn't pop up when I googled it.
Big price differences over here though Quark £995, Solar Spectrum RG18 £4699, Solar spectrum 46mm 0.3A £13,349, Daystar Quantum SE 0.3A £9.958.
I still want the 46mm Solar Spectrum though as I could Just get a full solar disk through it at f30.

Cheers Rod


Post Reply