I am planning to buy either the quattro 200 or the apertura 200, i am leaning towards the quattro 200 because it is accessible for me as i can easily get it shipped from China. What worries me is that there is no discussion regarding this scope. How is that possible. I am beginning a discussion forum where we can discuss the pitfalls of this scope. TIA
Is the Quattro 200P Too Perfect to Discuss? Or Are We Just Tired of Collimating?
Engaging
It’s a SW one, same mass-produced hit and miss quality and some homework to do to fix it. Luckily enough there is an entire cottage industry out there dedicated to fixing them.
Hello Hassaan,
I wanted a 200mm newtonian for astrophoto for about a year. I checked many discussions/content available about it. From the quatro to the very expensive artesky 200.
I ended up buying a tecnosky carbon series 200 which is another rebrand of the GSO carbon 200 (same as apertura).
From the content I read about the quatro, there was too much modifications to do in my opinion (RAP focuser, CNC spider, back cover….). I mean the price of those item (especially a good RAP 2 inch focuser) would make the “cheap” quatro almost the same price as a GSO. Also, I think a carbon fiber composite tube is a nice advantage for this aperture size.
I’m really happy with the tecnosky carbon series 200, I’ve been using it for about 2 weeks, I’ll publish my first light soon (I need two more good nights). I also added a primary mirror mask (cheap 3D printed), the mirror came with new springs for primary collimations screws but I did not changed them yet).
About collimation, as I feared this might be an issue, I bought the Ocal camera. The process was very confusing at the begining, but I now understand it and was able to achive a very good collimation that holds for multiple nights (I move the scope in and out every night).
I hope it helps!
CS
Helpful Engaging
I have been using the quattro 150 for about 3 years, the condition of the scope now is very bad and want to change to a new scope. i have done all major mods like the cyck v5 focuser, longer dovetail, cyck spider, skywatcher cc, mirror mask everything to it.
my plan is to retire the 150 and move the focuser and other mods to the new scope. will have to buy the cyck spider veins though.
i am not afraid of fiddling around with the scope. My original question is are the problems the same?? if so then i can easily handle this scope.
most of my modifications done to the scope along with the technical knowledge is all transferable to the new scope
That is the main reason for considering this scope. As for the GSO variants the obvious carbon fiber body is a huge plus point. but i am thinking of buying a carbon fiber tube for the quattro aswell
ValeryL · Jun 10, 2026, 08:24 AM
About collimation, as I feared this might be an issue, I bought the Ocal camera. The process was very confusing at the begining, but I now understand it and was able to achive a very good collimation that holds for multiple nights (I move the scope in and out every night).
I hope it helps!
CS
As for the Collimation, i have also just got the OCAL 4.0 and am still learning the ins and outs of collimation. was using a GSO laser before.
Io volevo un 8’’ F4 e alla fine dato che il Quattro SW ha bisogno di diverse modifiche per essere ottimizzato ho deciso di prendere il Tecnosky Carbon Series.
Ma non vale assolutamente i soldi che costa.
Lo specchio secondario produce dei riflessi ed è necessario montare una specie di copertura nello specchio (GSO lo sa e sembra che migliorerà questo aspetto) mentre il focheggiatore di serie seppur valido non è all’altezza di un treno ottico pesante (nel mio caso ASI2600mm con EFW36 e OAG).
Tuttavia alla fine delle varie ottimizzazioni e della collimazione (con OCAL4) produce delle belle immagini ma ripeto secondo non vale i soldi che costa (soprattutto per il problema al secondario) e se potessi tornare indietro prendere l’SW Quattro e modificherei quello perché alla fine avrei speso meno.
Chiaramente essendo un F4 8’’ permette di produrre belle fotografie con pochissima integrazione.
Ad esempio questa sono appena 3 ore di integrazione ed è un HOORGB con pose da 180s per HA e O3 e 30s per l’RGB. Da un cielo bortle 4 urbano, in un terrazzo, ripreso da 8 a 45 gradi circa sull’orizzonte.
https://img4.r3-it.storage.cloud.it/uploads_hr/5309970_large5721.jpg
Well written Helpful Respectful Engaging