DayStar Quark Vs Meade Coronado.

[DeepSolar64]

I read a lot of horror stories about how bad Quarks can be and it's been said that only one of ten are good ones but yet some of the best images on here are taken using them. Meade Coronado etalons are also said to be much worse than their pre-Meade relatives but again I have seen some good images on here using them. Which are on average are the best of the two?

In order it seems that Solar Spectrum produces on average the highest quality commercially produced etalons followed by Solarscope and Lunt. Meade Coronado and DayStar follows up the rear with the Quark. How good are DayStar's Quantum etalons? They should be for the price much better than the Quark.

Anyway I am just curious. Does Meade Coronado Etalons win on average above the DayStar Quark or the other way around?

James

P.S. I didn't think about it when I posted this topic but it would be better placed in the Commercial Solar Filers/Camera/Hardware section of the forum. Alexandra or Mark please move it if you wish. Sorry.

[pupak]

You should have some relevant statistics. The experience of several dozen users only indicates where the truth lies.

[OlegLviv]

As for me, I had a Quark but I didn't like it at all, but before that I had a Coronado PST AND THE CORONADO PST ETALON SHOWED MUCH BETTER, BUT AMONG THEM LUNT IS THE BEST!

[Peterm]

While I can't directly answer the question, I wish I had never parted with my original Solar Max 40 as the visual views were astonishing. Both my Lunt 60 & 80mm are superb instruments both visually and imaging wise. I have recently bought a Quark C and am yet to test it but I will report back to Solar Chat on that soon.

[Montana]

James, I'm not sure you can compare tilt etalons with solid etalons, they are quite different in my experience and need their own particular way of getting to work correctly to the optimum.

All companies have produced their lemons regardless of the order you have shown above (from experience), all companies have produced gems too. It is quite difficult to say some are better than others.

Alexandra

[DeepSolar64]

I am just curious. I hear often how bad these are but yet again see good work with them. Overall I am satisfied with my Coronados but I do complain about uneven tuning and illumination in them, especially in doublestack. It’s not a big deal visually but it can be a pain while imaging. In single stack, especially with the 90 they do much better. The 90 is great on proms! I do notice Lunt significantly has more users on here than Meade Coronado. I am sure there is a reason for that!

Rear mounted etalons like Quarks and Solar Spectrum are different than front or internal mounted ones like Coronado, Lunt and SolarScope. One is generally a higher magnification closeup heated system and the other a more full disc tilted or pressure tuned system. The latter is faster and more portable. Maybe they cannot be directly compared?

James

[Dennis]

"In order it seems that Solar Spectrum produces on average the highest quality commercially produced etalons followed by Solarscope and Lunt. Meade Coronado and DayStar follows up the rear with the Quark. How good are DayStar's Quantum etalons? They should be for the price much better than the Quark."


As far as i read Solarscope UK is the top player when it comes to etalon quality. Never had the pleasure to look through one though.
About the Quark: yes, my experience was that most of those etalons out there shouldnt have passed qc. I would say all the good images are made with quarks that have been kind of selected from a bunch.
About the Quantum etalons: i think Rainer can tell you sth about that..

Once you get hands on a good quark, it is a really great value product. There is a reason, why they are so popular.

[rsfoto]

I would say all the good images are made with quarks that have been kind of selected from a bunch.
About the Quantum etalons: I think Rainer can tell you sth about that.

Hi,

Well yes I can tell a story. When I bought the PE Quantum 0.4Å US $ 12,500.00 etalon which now costs US $ 27,990.00 I also bought a Quark at a NEAF show and according to the owner Jen it was a selected one, a tiny red dot on the box as she said, but then here in Mexico trying to get something out of the Quark was impossible.

That was it ...

No QC at all at the Quantum PE 0.4Å and after I complaint they found out the PE was Blind more or less ... There is a posting somewhere about this here in the Forum

That was it ...

[DeepSolar64]

Dennis

" Cheap, Easy, Fun! " is what DayStar says about the Quark.

Rainer,
You are done with DayStar I presume. " That was it " Done!

James

[rsfoto]

Hi James,

Yes, I am done with DayStar. Perhaps a new one would have been good but the way they handled my complain was absolutely below par.

I found their test sh.i.t, sorry sheet ...

Allegedly a PE grade Quantum ... costing nowadays US $ 27,990.00 ...

DayStar_XmitCompare_Page_1.jpeg (311.78 KiB) Viewed 282 times

[christian viladrich]

Testing and measuring narrow band filters is feasible. It requires some care, and an adequate SHG.

You can see here an example of an excellent Quark and a very bad one :

http://astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/in ... lters.html