Page 1 of 1
Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 1:08 pm
by 39N84W
Well I'm hooked. My PST is fun but I want more! Especially a better focuser.
My main interest is live imaging/outreach. I use an ASI 178mm.
I was thinking of a pressure tuned Lunt 60, but now I'm considering a Quark. I already have a 71mm f6 zenithstar doublet for this setup.
Having not used either of these I'm keen to learn the difference between them. Which one would you buy and why?
Nick
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:32 pm
by Brendan
Doing outreach I would go for the Lunt, waiting to come on band takes time with the quark, you are instantly observing with the Lunt.
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:56 pm
by 39N84W
I'm happy to wait the ten or so minutes for warm up time.
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:59 am
by Montana
The choice is yours really, each have there own pluses and minuses, you have to make that decision for yourself. But what about a Solarscope, they are very good too and so is the Coronado version. Have you looked at them all?
Alexandra
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:51 pm
by marktownley
Hi there, I think I would keep the PST as its great for full disk overviews and get the Quark as with that 70mm you will get some excellent views of the proms as we head towards solar minimum.
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:14 am
by MalVeauX
Get the Lunt if you're interested in full disc field of view at lower resolution.
Get the Quark if you're interested in looking at individual features, such as a big prom, or a big sunspot, in high resolution.
Very best,
Re: Lunt or Quark?
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:46 pm
by Astrograph
As has already been said, the Lunt will offer you easy full disk views, the Quark will be close up. Bear in mind you might have a few attempts at getting a Quark that is acceptably uniform. A Solarscope (as in the brand) will be 10x better quality than the Lunt (or a Coronado). If spending Solarscope money then also consider a Solar Spectrum rear mounted filter as they are 10x better than a Daystar IMHO. With the SS you can also balance cost / view by opting for an intermediate size like a 25mm. This will give you a good compromise between full disc and close up.
A good rule of thumb to gauge what sort of image size you can expect with a rear filter is to take the focal length of your scope multiplied by the telecentric needed (to get to about F30) then divide by 115. So for a 100mm F8 scope with a 4x that would be 3200mm / 115 = 28mm. This is the Sun's diameter in mm on the filter. Therefore you would need a 32mm filter to get a full disc.