Back to forums

Edge 9.25 without Reducer

Celestron EdgeHD 9.25" Equipment Reducer
AnaTaVJerry GerberBill Dirks
•47 replies•1.9k views
Jerry Gerber avatar
Jerry Gerber avatar
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry
Well Written
Peter Ambrose avatar
Peter Ambrose avatar
John Favalessa avatar
John Favalessa avatar
I had that same thought as I have a 9.25 with reducer with galaxy season is approaching.  Hopefully, we'll get some responses and images.  -john
Larry CABLE avatar
Larry CABLE avatar
slightly of topic but I wanted to mention that with the 0.7x reducer there are problems with (ZWO) EAF.

the brackets I have tried (ZWO and Starizona QuickSwitch) will not allow the reducer to be fully attached due to the diameter of the reducers "knurled flange" …

in conversation with buckeyestargazer their 3d printed brackets should allow the reducer to clear the bracket
Uhhjoe82 avatar
Uhhjoe82 avatar
Jerry Gerber:
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry

*** Hi Jerry, I have the Edge HD 9.25 and used the native focal length to shoot Stephen’s Quintet. It worked great! I don’t have any images posted here though***
Jerry Gerber avatar
Jerry Gerber avatar
Peter Ambrose:
Sure....I have a few here
https://www.astrobin.com/06zo1y/
https://www.astrobin.com/e7y0y0/
https://www.astrobin.com/fsz3mt/

Thank you Peter!  Just what I was looking for.  

Jerry
Robert Lowenthal avatar
Robert Lowenthal avatar
Larry CABLE:
slightly of topic but I wanted to mention that with the 0.7x reducer there are problems with (ZWO) EAF.

the brackets I have tried (ZWO and Starizona QuickSwitch) will not allow the reducer to be fully attached due to the diameter of the reducers "knurled flange" ...

in conversation with buckeyestargazer their 3d printed brackets should allow the reducer to clear the bracket

I used a Dremel tool with a stone grinder bit to pare down the ZWO bracket. It took about 10 minutes and fits well. 
(Since then, I upgraded to a MoonLite focuser. I’m willing to sell the ZWO EAF with modified bracket if anyone is interested)
Well Written Concise
Larry CABLE avatar
Larry CABLE avatar
Robert Lowenthal:
Larry CABLE:
slightly of topic but I wanted to mention that with the 0.7x reducer there are problems with (ZWO) EAF.

the brackets I have tried (ZWO and Starizona QuickSwitch) will not allow the reducer to be fully attached due to the diameter of the reducers "knurled flange" ...

in conversation with buckeyestargazer their 3d printed brackets should allow the reducer to clear the bracket

I used a Dremel tool with a stone grinder bit to pare down the ZWO bracket. It took about 10 minutes and fits well. 
(Since then, I upgraded to a MoonLite focuser. I’m willing to sell the ZWO EAF with modified bracket if anyone is interested)

thanks - I dont really want to start dremmelling anything - going with buckeyestargazers QUICK bracket
Lasse Skov avatar
Lasse Skov avatar
Jerry Gerber:
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry

I also have a few here:

https://www.astrobin.com/zzvgpa/D/
https://www.astrobin.com/ln5s8m/J/
https://www.astrobin.com/cri8wt/D/

Focuser: Primaluce Lab ESATTO 2" robotic focuser
Jerry Gerber avatar
Jerry Gerber avatar
Lasse Skov:
Jerry Gerber:
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry

I also have a few here:

https://www.astrobin.com/zzvgpa/D/
https://www.astrobin.com/ln5s8m/J/
https://www.astrobin.com/cri8wt/D/

Focuser: Primaluce Lab ESATTO 2" robotic focuser

Thanks Lasse!
AnaTa avatar
AnaTa avatar
Jerry Gerber:
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry

Images with 9.25” Edge without reducer are better compared to those with reducer. But, excellent seeing is required for imaging. Otherwise, chromatic-type aberrations could appear. Guiding is very tough as well. 
Clear Skies!
jbatlgaastro avatar
jbatlgaastro avatar
Roberto Marinoni avatar
Roberto Marinoni avatar
Some old images from me at native focal lenght:
https://www.astrobin.com/244949/?nc=&nce=
https://www.astrobin.com/354965/?nc=&nce=
https://www.astrobin.com/329919/?nc=&nce=
https://www.astrobin.com/337460/?nc=&nce=

Taken with manual focusing through Bathinov mask - I didn't have any automatic focuser at that time.
Jim Fordice avatar
Jim Fordice avatar
Kurt Clauss avatar
Kurt Clauss avatar
I have several with and without the reducer.  The biggest difference is the exposure times for the different focal lengths.
Jason Fleming avatar
Jason Fleming avatar
My Crab Nebula taken without a reducer: https://www.astrobin.com/98ext0/
Jim Fordice avatar
Jim Fordice avatar
I operate my 9.25 Edge at f/10 because I want to have a small FOV. Most of my images are of small objects (mostly globular clusters).
Well Written
Michael Miller avatar
Michael Miller avatar
TiffsAndAstro avatar
TiffsAndAstro avatar
TiffsAndAstro avatar
TiffsAndAstro avatar
Jason Fleming:
My Crab Nebula taken without a reducer: https://www.astrobin.com/98ext0/


Can't like it a second time, sorry
Bill Dirks avatar
Bill Dirks avatar
I'll chime in too. I have recently started using my EdgeHD 9.25 without the reducer for smaller galaxies. I seem to get significantly better FWHM without it (3.76µm pixels). I'll probably shoot galaxies or other small targets without it from now on, as long as the subject fits comfortably within the sensor field of view. All of the functions of the ASIAir work normally at the longer focal length. I almost feel like I've been doing it wrong all this time.

Aside, I use the Buckeye Stargazer 3-D printed bracket for for the EAF. No problems with interference with other accessories on the rear threads.
Well Written Helpful Insightful
V avatar
V avatar
Best deal about the EdgeHD's at native focal length is that you have a massive increase in sharpness across the entire field.

The Edge HD reducer has not, to my knowledge, gone through a single refresh of optical characteristics since its creation, whereas the EdgeHD itself has been through one refresh, around 2019.

EdgeHD's from ~2009-2018 seem to correct decently well, but there are some bad stars out towards the edge of the field.

EdgeHD's from 2019 to present at F/10, regardless of size correct very well out to the corners of a Full frame. Infact, my EdgeHD 8 runs out of image circle before the stars are uncorrected. They've got from what I've seen online, smaller spot sizes too.

The F/7 reducer, despite being at a perfect backfocus distance, increased my FWHM at focus by ~30% depending on the seeing. Images at F/7 are, for a lack of a better word, blurry compared to F/10.


Some images from my F/10 EdgeHD 8 and ASI2400, which the 9.25 should be a little better than:

M99


M42's core
Helpful Insightful Engaging Supportive
Gina Knight avatar
Gina Knight avatar
Jerry Gerber:
Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting the Edge 9.25 for a dark sky site.  I've been looking at lots of images taken with this scope, but the vast majority of images use the .7 reducer. 

What I am really interested in is seeing images taken with this scope without the reducer.  

Can anyone point me to images taken with the Edge 9.25 at native focal length?

Thanks!
Jerry


Hi - here are a couple more photos. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE using this scope at F10. I am still a novice but I like it better at F10 than at F7 with the reducer.

https://www.astrobin.com/fxwa9b/
https://www.astrobin.com/v53kx9/

Gina
Charles Tremblay-Darveau avatar
Charles Tremblay-Darveau avatar
I was thinking doing the same and match it with the 2400mc. The other option was to use the starizona f/7 reducer with the non-edge 9.25 and a crop sensor. I'm still kinda split between the two options.
AnaTa avatar
AnaTa avatar
Charles Tremblay-Darveau:
I was thinking doing the same and match it with the 2400mc. The other option was to use the starizona f/7 reducer with the non-edge 9.25 and a crop sensor. I'm still kinda split between the two options.

I think the best way is F10, conventional qhy268 camera and 2x2 binning (Qhy is excellent for binning). Clear Skies!