
Telescope design promises to revolutionize amateur astronomy - Santosh83
https://phys.org/news/2017-07-telescope-revolutionize-amateur-astronomy.html
======
CydeWeys
As someone who has built his own telescope and been somewhat involved in
amateur astronomy, this sounds like marketing bullshit to me. It reads like a
press release. The first bullet point is especially damning; it's pure
marketing speak devoid of any substance. Aperture diameter _matters_ \--
that's the total amount of light available. It's why when you want a better
telescope, you go bigger. There's no way around that.

Bullet point #2 is nothing special; it's just using GPS for location and a
clock to automatically point your telescope at a specific object. This has
been around for a long time.

Bullet #3 appears to be talking about image-stacking, which, again, is a
technique already commonly employed -- put your telescope on a computer-
controlled equatorial mount, take many 30 second exposures (typically the max
allowed by a DSLR) over the course of hours, and combine them in software. And
I seriously doubt that you can get much utility out of stacking images taken
by different telescopes in different viewing conditions.

~~~
Jedd
> Aperture diameter matters -- that's the total amount of light available.

I think the point is the implied 'at that instant' which can be appended to
your statement. Aperture matters in the context of a specific shutter speed.

You allude to that 'aperture is everything' loophole in your comment on bullet
point #3, about image stacking.

~~~
CydeWeys
It also matters for resolving power though. You can take photos using a 1 m
telescope with a one second exposure that you could _never_ take using a 10 cm
telescope at any exposure length. Keep stacking the photos for years, you're
still not going to get the same detail.

This is why the latest generation of land-based optical telescopes have truly
mind-boggling apertures. Bigger is better in astrophotography, full stop.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_Large_Telescope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_Large_Telescope)

~~~
Jedd
Are you suggesting astrophotography has physical constraints that non-astro
photography does not?

More specifically, to your example, if a 1m (diameter?) telescope takes a
photo with a 1s exposure -- you're suggesting that it will resolve more detail
than one taken on a 10cm lens for 100 seconds?

~~~
gmiller123456
>Are you suggesting astrophotography has physical constraints that non-astro
photography does not?

No, he's saying the diameter of a lens affects its resolving power. This is
due to the diffraction of light bouncing off the lens. Larger scopes have less
diffraction due to the laws of physics.

~~~
CydeWeys
Lenses aren't used in "real" telescopes -- they're made out of mirrors only.
Does your explanation still work?

~~~
gmiller123456
The mirrors in telescopes are still lenses. You're probably thinking of
refracting lenses as being "real" lenses. But the parabolic mirrors used in
telescopes accomplish the same task. And, yes, diffraction is still just as
much of an issue.

------
dperfect
> Enhanced Vision produces extremely sharp, detailed images of even faint
> astronomical objects by accumulating their light and projecting it into the
> telescope's eyepiece.

So... it pretty much works the same way every other telescope works? I read
the whole article, but couldn't find a single detail about how it can actually
resolve better than other telescopes of its size.

The video shows an augmented reality overlay. If that's what it's all about,
then I'm really not impressed (if I wanted to see images other people have
taken, I wouldn't be using a telescope). Let's hope that's not what they're
referring to when they say "Our compact 4.5-inch telescope allows observers to
see objects fainter than Pluto."

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
I read it as image stacking and an electronic viewfinder. Presumably B&W only.

~~~
dperfect
Ah, that does make more sense, though you'd think they could mention it if
that's what they're doing :)

~~~
DigitalJack
It doesn't sound as magical if they say how.

------
freerobby
I've spent the last several months building a platform to solve problems #2
and #3 with a (mostly) software-based approach. The controller is built on a
Raspberry Pi, and it can control any servo-controlled mount or camera that is
supported by OSS tools like Open Sky Imager, PHD Guider, etc.

I think this is preferable to a pure hardware approach because people can use
their existing equipment, and they don't have to make a major upfront
investment in something proprietary. The initial cost (for the controller)
should be under $100.

My goal is to make astronomy more accessible to folks without deep pockets or
STEM backgrounds, and to increase the pace at which we make discoveries in
outer space. If anybody's interested in contributing to this project, or
participating in the beta, please drop me a line (@freerobby on Twitter, or
robby@freerobby.com).

More about my thinking, motivations, and plan can be found here:
[http://astroswarm.com/2017/02/12/making-space-easy-to-
study....](http://astroswarm.com/2017/02/12/making-space-easy-to-study.html)

------
simonh
Alright so according to many comments high end telescopes costing thousands of
dollars already have such features, or it possible to combine different
products and systems to do the same thing. Fine.

The article isn't claiming anything unique, other than providing this as a
single integrated product at an unprecedentedly affordable price. Is that
wrong? I honestly don't know. The way I read all the negging I'd assume there
are already products just like this at similar prices. Are there?

I honestly don't know. Just asking.

~~~
tkahnoski
Quick search on Amazon seems to reveal some results.

I am the target market for this. I recently rented a cabin that had a standard
telescope and although I knew exactly where Jupiter was it still took me 20-30
minutes to line it up just right. 5 minutes later a cloud moved over it. No
one else got to enjoy it.

I need something pre-assembled, easy to use, and at or below $1k. Although I
could deal with some assembly, this is not something I want to have to
troubleshoot when the sky is clear and the urge to stargaze strikes)

~~~
DanBC
There are plenty of options. Here's one: [https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-
Nexstar-Schmidt-Cassegrain-...](https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-Nexstar-
Schmidt-Cassegrain-Telescope-Case/dp/B00KWFFUS0/)

~~~
tkahnoski
Thanks for the suggestion. After poking around a bit I realized I probably
need to factor in weight as well. Good news for me since lighter is cheaper.

------
alkonaut
Here is a FAQ:

Q: isn't this physically impossible? Surely it has to be based on EVF with
Stacking/Long exposure?

A: well _of course_.

------
tbabb
This is an ad. What's it doing here?

------
mhb
Slightly more information:
[http://www.unistellaroptics.com/en/product](http://www.unistellaroptics.com/en/product)

------
nayuki
> Enhanced Vision produces extremely sharp, detailed images of even faint
> astronomical objects by accumulating their light and projecting it into the
> telescope's eyepiece. Enhanced Vision technology mimics the light gathering
> capability of significantly larger reflector telescopes

> Our compact 4.5-inch telescope allows observers to see objects fainter than
> Pluto and achieve sensitivity equivalent to a one-meter telescope!

These claims are impossible for a direct-view optical telescope. But do they
imply that they are accumulating photons on an image sensor and showing the
image to the observer electronically - basically long exposure photography?

On a side note, the web page hijacks clipboard copying and inserts a source
URL.

~~~
breck
Yes, looks like it's long exposure photography but with the resulting photos
displayed in real time:

"Turn Light Amplification on and the system will use its low-light sensor to
accumulate light through a series of short exposures. The resulting image is
projected into the eyepiece as the accumulation occurs, which means that once
you start Light Amplification, you’ll see something, but the object will keep
improving with time."

Pretty neat idea.

~~~
CydeWeys
That doesn't seem particularly revolutionary to me though. You can already do
this with existing software used for image-stacking, though not directly
through a viewfinder (though the "viewfinder" on a real telescope designed for
astrophotography should be a computer display anyway).

~~~
breck
That's a very good point.

I think what's revolutionary about it is the speed and simplicity. Sure, you
can do this already with image stacking software, if you already know what
you're doing or want to spend 600+ minutes learning how to do it. But this
promises to just point and shoot and see almost equivalent results in near
real time, a speedup of ~100x. So a two order magnitude speed improvement for
the novice is a big deal, imo.

~~~
CydeWeys
Yes, that does seem nifty. And it'll be good for pure stargazing scenarios, in
which you're not attempting to record an image. For astrophotgraphy, however,
it'll be a wash, as all you need a viewfinder for in those situations is to
ensure that you're pointed at the desired object; the final output is always
going to be best viewed on a proper display.

I suppose what this is really doing is bringing the benefits of some common
astrophotography techniques into casual stargazing, which is cool. Too bad the
press release doesn't explain it properly.

~~~
breck
> Too bad the press release doesn't explain it properly.

Agreed.

Wasn't until I read the actual site
([http://www.unistellaroptics.com/en/product](http://www.unistellaroptics.com/en/product))
that I got excited.

~~~
CydeWeys
Yeah, that's way better, and is actually something that might excite people
who are into astronomy. The original article was written by someone who simply
didn't know what they were talking about at all, and used copious marketing
speak to try to make up for it.

------
mcshicks
A few years ago I saw a project to 3d print high end telescopes using smart
phones to process the image at a maker faire. It was an open source design, I
think this one

[http://www.openspaceagency.com/ultrascope/](http://www.openspaceagency.com/ultrascope/)

For myself although I'm not an amateur astronomer I think I would be more
interested in something I could make/tinker with myself.

------
DuaneSand
Real-time image stacking can also subtract out light pollution. Imagine seeing
the full width of Andromeda, 6 moon widths across, above suburban school
grounds even on moonlit evenings. This will be an exciting way for kids to
encounter astronomy.

------
Giorgi
Soo... anything about price or ETA?

~~~
veli_joza
Right in the article. Crowd-funding starts this Fall, for "less than $1000".

------
barns-n-moguls
Advertisement for a toy, accidentally posted on wrong website.

