0.00
...
·
 |
|---|
I was deciding between a lunt 100 double stacked and a Lunt 50 double stacked, here’s the question. I know I will gain resolution with the Lunt 100 but I get the same exact FOV with a Lunt 50 with a 2x Barlow with an asi533mm where as the Lunt 100 has that same FOV without the Barlow, but the costs is huge. Is it really worth spending all the extra money on the Lunt 100? I don’t care about the universal feature with the Lunt 100 I have William optics scopes for nighttime so the Lunt 50 is perfect because it’s dedicated and pretty cheap. Am I real long gaining all that much going for the Lunt 100?
|
5.76
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
There does seem to be a bit more detail possible with the 100. https://www.astrobin.com/search/?q=&d=i&subject=&telescope=lunt+100&camera=&date_published_min=2011-11-09&date_published_max=2024-05-27&sort= https://www.astrobin.com/search/?q=&d=i&subject=&telescope=lunt+50&camera=&date_published_min=2011-11-09&date_published_max=2024-05-27&sort= |
11.43
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Conor Woods: In short buy what you can afford. Both scopes with DS modules will work great, the Lunt 100 is ofcourse always better given larger aperture. Will you see that detail improvement ? On average seeing probably not, but on those days where the seeing is really good yes the aperture matters. I use a Lunt 80 and on best days I can reach that diffraction limit with the 80m aperture, however on average days the difference would not really be noticed. Also choose a correct sampling for the Lunt, it matters a lot. A 533 works nice, with a barlow and 100 probably a IMX429 or IMX432 (I use this one with a 3x barlow). |
