Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-26-2014, 11:33 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Kendigitize's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Best affordable telescope for the Q

Looking into the possibility of a telescope and was wondering if the "Celestron NexStar 4SE Computerized Telescope" would be a good match with the Q. I'd like to use my K-30 on it, but it looks like the might be too heavy. Just started looking, so any suggestions would be great. Looking for under $500 range and I like the reviews and compact size of this model.

Celestron NexStar 4 SE 4"/102mm Catadioptric 11049 B&H


Last edited by Kendigitize; 12-26-2014 at 11:41 AM.
12-26-2014, 11:34 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 417
could you please post a link to it?
12-26-2014, 11:47 AM - 1 Like   #3
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
We started out with a Celestron C90, which is functionally a 1250mm/f13.9 Maksutov-Cassegrain MIrror lens that attaches byT-Adapter. Not fancy and certainly no computer controls but it has been fun for us. The main thing I found out is that a VERY solid tripod is essential. The model you are looking at is also a Maksutov-Cassegrain mirror lens but is a bit longer in reach at 1325mm f/13. The added computer controls should be nice and it comes with a telescope tripod which is a plus. I like OpticsPlanet better than B&H (love them for camera gear) for telescope stuff. Here is their page (same price but much higher knowledge base) with the full stats on the telescope you are considering.
http://shop.opticsplanet.com/celestron-nexstar-4se-telescope.html?
12-26-2014, 04:33 PM - 1 Like   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 62
We got a Nexstar 5 SE for Christmas. It holds the K-3 without issue. We have been playing with it and the 1 1/4" adapters. The direct to T is on the way. We will probably slap the K-50 on it when we go out. I want to try some wide field with the 3. In short, the mount (same as the 4) has no problem handling a much heavier camera. With a smaller OTA, you may need to adjust the balance point, but the mount shouldn't be a problem.

12-26-2014, 06:55 PM   #5
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 87
I have found that you have to base your choices on what kind of imaging you want to do.

I have 2 Nexstars and either will hold a DSLR, but single imaging over 30-60 seconds is about the limit. You can image longer with a dedicated video camera and get better results by stacking. High magnifications need really good mounts with excellent tracking and big apertures. The Nexstar 4SE is f/13, so you will need relatively long exposures to do any deep sky stuff. That means a perfect alignment and a rock solid mount. The moon and planets will image easily, but again you will get better results with video. My Nexstars are only really used for visual.

I have found most people like wide field imaging at the start and any decent small tracker will get great results using just regular lenses, especially older manual primes. I think you also have to consider the learning curve can be long and frustrating and small increases in imaging quality increase costs exponentially.

Pentax's O-GPS1 changed everything and brought quality wide field imaging at a very low cost.

I would recommend starting with the O-GPS1 unit on the K30 and mount on a really solid tripod and use the Astrotracer function.

Manfrotto 190XPROB Tripod with 804RC2 3-Way 190XPROB,804RC2 B&H

o-gps1 | B&H Photo Video

This setup is less expensive, faster to setup and extremely portable. You also get the added bonus of GPS and orientation tagging on your images. If you already own a decent tripod, than all you need is the module and you are set to go.
12-27-2014, 06:51 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Kendigitize's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Hamiltom Quote
I have found that you have to base your choices on what kind of imaging you want to do.

Pentax's O-GPS1 changed everything and brought quality wide field imaging at a very low cost.

I would recommend starting with the O-GPS1 unit on the K30 and mount on a really solid tripod and use the Astrotracer function.

This setup is less expensive, faster to setup and extremely portable. You also get the added bonus of GPS and orientation tagging on your images. If you already own a decent tripod, than all you need is the module and you are set to go.
I'm thinking of that option too, or perhaps the iOptron SkyTracker. I've got a stable tripod and get great results with my night time meteor shots and stacking shots, startrails, etc. I've got a nice 300mm Tokina prime and Pentax 2X-S converter and get some decent nebula shots with the K-30 and Q. Thanks for the info, I think that's what I needed to know.

[/url]
12-27-2014, 10:53 AM   #7
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 87
I have the Sky Tracker as well. It works well and I can get about 6 minutes at around 50mm. It is a little harder to setup and you need to check the alignment if you move the camera or change lenses. It is very sensitive to handling, but once you have it set up it will work for a long time. The battery door is a pain to use, so I just use an adapter in a portable powerpack. You will also need an external intervalometer and use a cellphone app to precisely set the polar alignment for your location. The bonus is you get continuous alignment for all the images in the series and no distortion caused by the tilting of the sensor at extreme wide angles.

On the other hand, the O-GPS1 requires no alignment at all and the Astrotracer calculates the maximum time you can get with the focal length you are using.

I find that for dimmer and smaller objects, the SkyTracker is the better choice because you end up with more usable data to stack images.

The next and most important is luck - you need to get it done before the clouds roll in.

Good luck and dark skies

Last edited by Hamiltom; 12-27-2014 at 11:00 AM.
12-27-2014, 01:36 PM   #8
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Hamiltom Quote
I have the Sky Tracker as well. It works well and I can get about 6 minutes at around 50mm. It is a little harder to setup and you need to check the alignment if you move the camera or change lenses. It is very sensitive to handling, but once you have it set up it will work for a long time. The battery door is a pain to use, so I just use an adapter in a portable powerpack. You will also need an external intervalometer and use a cellphone app to precisely set the polar alignment for your location. The bonus is you get continuous alignment for all the images in the series and no distortion caused by the tilting of the sensor at extreme wide angles.

On the other hand, the O-GPS1 requires no alignment at all and the Astrotracer calculates the maximum time you can get with the focal length you are using.

I find that for dimmer and smaller objects, the SkyTracker is the better choice because you end up with more usable data to stack images.

The next and most important is luck - you need to get it done before the clouds roll in.

Good luck and dark skies
I've looked at both and the other factor is cost. The SkyTracker starts around $399 for the unit (and is on sale now for $299) and there are add ons like the Polar Scope (runs $50-60), a 1.25-inch stainless steel tripod (adds around $100) or a kit with all of them for around $500 (on sale now for $399). The O-GPS1 runs $179-199.

There's a nice review of the SkyTracker at: http://media.skyandtelescope.com/documents/SKYTRACKER.pdf


01-05-2015, 08:58 AM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 283
I'm going to be using my Q10 with a little Celestron Firstscope 76 (when the Q-C mount adapter turns up, the other part to build a Q-1.25" eyepiece adapter didn't have to travel as far!)

I didn't want to try the K-5 or K-01 on the 'scope as they're big, heavy cameras which would probably overbalance the stand, but the Q10 weighs next to nothing. There are bigger and better telescopes but this little thing is much easier to fit in the car and transport to darker skies (my back garden isn't bad, but 20mins drive will take me to a location with pretty much zero light pollution). Just needs a handy picnic table to perch it on and it's ready.

I have a fairly decent 2x Barlow lens and a few filters, so will experiment and see what happens.
01-05-2015, 04:28 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Kendigitize's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 316
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Dangermouse Quote
I'm going to be using my Q10 with a little Celestron Firstscope 76 (when the Q-C mount adapter turns up, the other part to build a Q-1.25" eyepiece adapter didn't have to travel as far!)

I didn't want to try the K-5 or K-01 on the 'scope as they're big, heavy cameras which would probably overbalance the stand, but the Q10 weighs next to nothing. There are bigger and better telescopes but this little thing is much easier to fit in the car and transport to darker skies (my back garden isn't bad, but 20mins drive will take me to a location with pretty much zero light pollution). Just needs a handy picnic table to perch it on and it's ready.

I have a fairly decent 2x Barlow lens and a few filters, so will experiment and see what happens.
That's a pretty cool little scope! I would get one even if I wasn't taking pix. It does look like the perfect setup for the Q and you can't beat the price. It looks to be well built, as much as one would expect for the price. Unless it was bolted down, it does look like it would tip over with a full size DSLR. I also read that a 1.25" t adapter will vignette on a DSLR, but I imagine the Q's sensor size is fine.

Would it work to use the Pentax Q adapter with a Kmount to T adapter? Then you could get longer then 2 sec and another 5.5X magnification?

Good luck and post some pix when it's set up.
01-05-2015, 05:15 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 283
It probably would, it'd just cost a lot more than the 16 I've paid for these bits! Plus the K adapter is a much bigger and heavier setup, the C-mount parts will weigh very little. I have a moon filter which I'll probably use as I'm not sure exposing the Q sensor to the light of the full moon will do it any good, it's very bright and the camera won't be able to stop the aperture down to protect itself as it would with the 01/02/03/06 lenses.

I'm not sure if vignetting will be a problem, but suspect not. I know people use C-mount lenses on the Q with no problems in that department, so I'd have thought the adapter tube will be much the same.

The Firstscope feels better made than you might expect. The base swivel is reasonably smooth and the handwheel will lock the tube at the desired angle, it's better than most cheap camera tripods I've handled. The base and upright seem to be made from chipboard judging by the weight, so they're heavy enough to be stable.

There's a push-fit cap for the open end which doesn't feel inclined to fall out, and it comes with a couple of eyepieces. I don't yet have the accessory kit with the finder scope but will probably order one eventually, I tried a conventional finder scope only to discover that the mounting studs on the tube weren't long enough to go through its baseplate.

It's a Dobsonian-type mount rather than an equatorial, so tracking doesn't really work. However, it's much easier to set up and it doesn't get wrapped around itself, as my old Firstscope 114EQ was prone to doing. Still have that but it needs some servicing and repair work, and I'm struggling to find spares.

I'm sorely tempted by the genuine K mount adapter as I have a K 120mm f2.8 which I suspect would have great potential due to being small, relatively light, and fast. Maybe later in the year...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, telescope
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best affordable APS-C normal lenses? Bradley981 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 23 09-25-2014 02:25 PM
Sports on the cheap..Need a affordable lens for XC. Eric Auer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 08-30-2013 03:50 PM
Which SD card type is best used for the Q? kyuuan Pentax Q 27 11-08-2012 12:33 AM
Best affordable lens for weddings? NicK10D Photographic Technique 9 07-13-2010 08:01 AM
Best long (affordable) telephotos? Finn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 10-12-2007 01:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:39 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top