Enjoyed your review of the SeeStar S50.
Although I'm a visual observer, I do have an interest in this unit and a few questions regarding it:
How well do the filters work in suburban skies, perhaps with an SQM reading of higher 18/lower 19s?
Are the DSO images in your review taken under dark sky conditions?
I've read the filters may induce halos around star images although I didn't see that in your pictures. Have you had any concerns about it?
Oops! For some reason, that comment was submitted before I was done writing.
I am fortunate enough to be living under Bortle 4 skies right now, so it works great.
However, many owners who live in Bortle 7 to Bortle 8-9, have always reported great results. This is due, of course, to the great properties of the duo band filter. I have never experienced any halos around stars at all, nor have I heard of anyone experiencing any adverse effects.
It is a very high-quality filter. I would describe it’s performance as effective, yet more subtle than the typical nebula filter. Duo band nebula filters in general, are a fascinating topic in and of themselves.
Thanks again, and clear skies!
-Al
Here's the review of it which clearly shows the halo effect on bright stars from the filters, as seen towards the end of the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEGgwP_RD0Y
I probably would have mentioned the lack of suitability as a planetary imager as well but given the size of the objective, that's intuitive.
Still, for what you get, a nice compact imaging unit with everything you need for a reasonable price, it's quite an attractive package...
Thank you. I agree, there have been many instances where I wanted to image an object which wasn’t in its database, and I was stuck. It covers M, NGC, and IC objects well; with a handful of SH objects.
Yes, you can - even a cheap carbon fiber tripod has worked well for me recently.
Clear skies!
I would add that the Seestar can act like an electronic eyepiece. I find I always have to choose between astrophotography or visual. I can't haul both rigs with me. I can set up my astrophoto rig, get it started on an imaging run, then "play" with the Seestar. The views on my iPad are better than my 16" Newtonian, and with color. I know plenty of visual observers will scoff at this, but there is room in this hobby for all opinions.
Thanks for your comment. Yes, I fully agree with the points you’ve made.
All the anecdotes, from other amateurs, a hard to ignore:
One fellow states that he can routinely “see” dimmer objects with the Seestar then he can with his 10 inch Dob.
Another young lady, states she gets better images with the Seestar, then she does with her fully equipped 4 inch Apo rig.
There are others as well…
Adding on to my previous comment. My daughter teaches astronomy at the local high school. The school is located about three miles south of LAX, the sky is not quite Bortle 9. I assist her with the night labs, which take place on the roof of the Math/Science building. We will be applying for a grant to purchase four Seestars. These telescopes have the ability to revolutionize urban astronomy teaching. This is not an exaggeration. We have five 8" F/6 Dobsonians for use at the labs. We can observe the moon, planets, some double stars, and a few open clusters from this location, not much. The Seestar will allow us to "see" many hundreds of otherwise invisible objects. Galaxies, globulars, and planetaries are within reach of the Seestar, even with our sky. Truly revolutionary.
Thanks again, appreciate the comment.
During the time that I was testing/reviewing the Seestar S50 I purchased – I was simultaneously assembling a traditional rig: while I had a ZWO AM3 mount (on loan).
I was very curious, to see from myself, what it was like owning/operating both AP solutions.
In my humble opinion: all of the extra complexity, effort, and learning curve of the full rig caused too much frustration – for such little gain an image quality. And that’s putting it mildly.
Some of the most astounding work by far, in comparisons with The Seestar S50, has been done by Amlan Mitra. Utilizing his Pro observatory - Pinebeltobservatory (on IG).
I was able to share a couple of side-by-side images of his, in a different presentation: The Seestar S50 VS $10,000 worth of equipment, as well as VS $20,000 worth of equipment. It boggles the mind. Best of luck to you and your daughter!
Clear skies and Best wishes!
I have had a Seestar S50 for a year. Just ordered a Vespara II. Will mount both on the pier when the visual equipment has been removed. Due to vision issues, I am no longer comfortable doing visual astronomy, but I can see great indoors, looking at my iPad!
Nice Review. I got one of these Little Scopes, a couple months ago. Since being involved in Astronomy & Astro-Photography for 40+ Years, This Little Guy is everything you Mentioned. The Big thing is A lot of People are now Getting involved w/Astronomy. Not to Expensive for First Timers. I am on, a couple Sites, that offer Questions & Answers. A lot of Questions are Things about Orbit, Distance and Size of Objects, you can Capture w/This Little Scope. I was Surprised, how Easy, it is to Set Up & Operate. When you have Thousands, Invested in your Gear, this Little Guy is Attracting a Lot of Newbies. Also Newer Models, I hear, are on the Drawing Board. Again, Great Review.
Although I'm a visual observer, I do have an interest in this unit and a few questions regarding it:
How well do the filters work in suburban skies, perhaps with an SQM reading of higher 18/lower 19s?
Are the DSO images in your review taken under dark sky conditions?
I've read the filters may induce halos around star images although I didn't see that in your pictures. Have you had any concerns about it?
I am fortunate enough to be living under Bortle 4 skies right now, so it works great.
However, many owners who live in Bortle 7 to Bortle 8-9, have always reported great results. This is due, of course, to the great properties of the duo band filter. I have never experienced any halos around stars at all, nor have I heard of anyone experiencing any adverse effects.
It is a very high-quality filter. I would describe it’s performance as effective, yet more subtle than the typical nebula filter. Duo band nebula filters in general, are a fascinating topic in and of themselves.
Thanks again, and clear skies!
-Al
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEGgwP_RD0Y
I probably would have mentioned the lack of suitability as a planetary imager as well but given the size of the objective, that's intuitive.
Still, for what you get, a nice compact imaging unit with everything you need for a reasonable price, it's quite an attractive package...
It would be nice if it were able to enter objects or coordinates for items not listed in its database.
Can you use a taller tripod?
Yes, you can - even a cheap carbon fiber tripod has worked well for me recently.
Clear skies!
All the anecdotes, from other amateurs, a hard to ignore:
One fellow states that he can routinely “see” dimmer objects with the Seestar then he can with his 10 inch Dob.
Another young lady, states she gets better images with the Seestar, then she does with her fully equipped 4 inch Apo rig.
There are others as well…
During the time that I was testing/reviewing the Seestar S50 I purchased – I was simultaneously assembling a traditional rig: while I had a ZWO AM3 mount (on loan).
I was very curious, to see from myself, what it was like owning/operating both AP solutions.
In my humble opinion: all of the extra complexity, effort, and learning curve of the full rig caused too much frustration – for such little gain an image quality. And that’s putting it mildly.
Some of the most astounding work by far, in comparisons with The Seestar S50, has been done by Amlan Mitra. Utilizing his Pro observatory - Pinebeltobservatory (on IG).
I was able to share a couple of side-by-side images of his, in a different presentation: The Seestar S50 VS $10,000 worth of equipment, as well as VS $20,000 worth of equipment. It boggles the mind. Best of luck to you and your daughter!
Clear skies and Best wishes!
Yes, totally agree - Having and using the expensive and time consuming equipment seems less appealing.
CS!