RedCat51 WIFD vs TS-Optics 115/800 refractors in Bortle 9

[@GediAstro]

Here’s a small (non scientific) comparison of my TS115 and RedCat51 WIFD and what a Bortle 9 sky with poor seeing can do to the photos. Apologies for the bad colors, it appears I forgot to color grade the video! 😂🙈

[@pedzsan]

Did you shoot some things in log and not adjust it. The first clip for example looks really washed out. Interesting that you can get that quality of image with your skies. It gives me hope.

[@GediAstro]

@@pedzsan yes! I forgot to grade it 😂🙈 Bortle 9 is hard work but totally worth it! 😃 thanks for watching!

[@spindizzy8742]

I like the image made with the TS better, it shows more resolution, but for wide field images the RedCat is unbeatable. How do you have your image train mounted on the Redcat 51 WIFD? I have the same equipment with ASI2600MC Pro camera + EFW + extension tube, with a 56mm backfocus. The stars are a horrible shape at the edges of the image. At the store they told me to remove the extension tube, but that way I can't get the focus.

[@GediAstro]

@@spindizzy8742 totally agree with you. I’d like the RC8 too, but I don’t think with my seeing it would make any difference. For the image train, I have the same as you, and I don’t experience any horrible stars 🙁🥲 The RedCat should handle a full frame sensor as well so you shouldn’t experience horrible stars 😟 are you sure about the back focus distance?I can check my distance ring when I have the opportunity, but I think it is a 12mm distance ring in addition to the camera and the EFW. I haven’t removed the tilt plate on the 2600MM

[@GediAstro]

@@spindizzy8742 i checked now. My train is like this: Camera with tilt plate (17.5mm) EFW (20mm) M54-M48 adapter (2mm) Extension tube (16.5mm) giving me a total of 56mm back focus. Seems to be identical like yours?

[@spindizzy8742]

@@GediAstro I have exactly the same train of images (well, the camera is OSC), and the same 56mm backfocus. I will contact the store again, I bought the RedCat a week ago. I had the RedCat v2 for a while a couple of years ago and had no problems when using the ASI2600MC Pro for the first time. I guess I got a bad copy of RedCat v3 😭 Thank you very much for the help!

[@GediAstro]

@@spindizzy8742 best of luck with that! WO are reasonable and it shouldn’t be too hard to change the scope. ⭐️

[@southbronxny5727]

Can't beat the aperture of the TS and the slower speed that gives tighter stars. Maybe try a balance of gain and lower exposure time to get tighter stars on the redcat. Thanks for sharing.

[@GediAstro]

Stars comparison is always a bit tricky since they are subject to post processing. In this case I didn’t process the images identically and you can see less stars in the RC image. They are also RGB stars with less exposure time (like you suggest, which is a great tip! :) ) while the TS has “only” H-stars but processes differently. I think this comparison is a bit more valid by looking at the details of the nebula instead, but I think I’m gonna do a better, more strict comparison in a future video:) thank you for the feedback!

[@Upuauta]

I personally like the TS picture better than the RedCat. I find it more sharp and it has more fine detail. Also the RedCat image has a lot of the stars missing. But that is just my opinion.

[@GediAstro]

@@Upuauta I agree with you, the TS is better in my opinion too (although I love the uncropped RedCat image a LOT). Stars are related to how much I stretched each image. Thanks for watching!

[@anata5127]

Difference is huge. Data and SNR are well higher for TS. Are you surprised?!

[@GediAstro]

Yeah, but I was just looking at the details on this one. Data and SNR are dependent on the integration times and telescopes used. So you are right in that aspect :) But I was a bit surprised that the RedCat can deliver almost the same details as my TS, even in my Bortle 9 sky.

[@anata5127]

@@GediAstro Resolution and SNR are totally different. To see apparent differences in resolution, you have to go more than from 51 RedCat to 100 TS.

[@micnek]

Mycket intressant innehållsmässigt, men varför så konstiga färg och kontrast i videon? Ser ut som log-format direkt från kameran, eller?

[@GediAstro]

@@micnek åh nej! Jag glömde grade’a den 🙈🙈🙈🙈

[@markalot]

The color range of the video seems to be off. Full vs limited or the other way. Image is faded and at times hard to see. Never the less, I enjoyed the video :)

[@GediAstro]

@@markalot Yeah I forgot to color grade it 🙈🙈🙈 sorry about that and thanks for watching!

[@alexandreastronomy8022]

Great video but i think this is not the best way to compare astrophotography pictures. You should campare sub frames, unprocessed stack and then show us the final results beaucause processing is something different for all of us and results will always differ from one to another. Clear skies!

[@GediAstro]

Yeah, as long as both are processed the same, the comparison would be better. But if we focus on the details like I did in this video, it’s still a valid comparison from a seeing perspective. What do you think?

[@alexandreastronomy8022]

@@GediAstro Yes your comparaison is great, noting wrong with it and i like these kind of videos 😃 Keep it like this and just add sub frames and staked frames comparaison and it will be perfect 🤘🏻 Clear skies!

[@GediAstro]

@@alexandreastronomy8022 thanks for the tip! I’ll do an additional comparison in the autumn, I think your feedback is very valid! :)