About Smart Telescopes

Introduction

Recent years have seen the arrival of various versions of 'smart telescopes'. These instruments combine a number of elements of a visual observing system (minus a viewing eyepiece). Images are viewed on a connected smartphone - but can be saved on most instruments or even downloaded for off-line processing. Generally speaking these are altitude/azimuth instruments (although some can be coerced into equatorial mode) and so are subject to field rotation over time. To counter this various schemes of 'de-rotation' are employed usually in software using AI.

After a calibration procedure - where the instrument takes several views of the sky and 'plate-solves' (i.e., identifies what part of the sky it's looking at) - selection of an object from the installed database and activation of the 'go-to' function sees the telescope slew to the object's location - enabling image capture to proceed.

Once pointing at the selected object either images and videos can be taken or 'stacked' observations can be performed.

While this could be criticised as 'dumbing-down' astrophotography (and results cannot be expected to compete with the usual - but more expensive - observing setups) as a first introduction to astrophotography it has significant advantages - certainly as an auxiliary function in outreach scenarios.

Other factors - such as portability, ease of set-up (catching those cloud breaks) and with results perhaps acceptable compared to the level of time and funds that an individual is prepared to expend - make these instruments attractive to a wide audience - as evidenced by the very long waiting list at the time of writing (end 2023).

The latest entries into the smart telescope arena has caused some significant controversy - with commentary against, being largely balanced by positive reports. My own opinions are expressed below.

Smart Telescopes - Good or Bad ?

Two smart telescopes were acquired December 2023. They are the Seestar S50 and the Dwarf Lab II.

There's a timeless adage known as Miles Law, credited to Rufus Miles of Princeton University in the 1970s, which states that your standpoint is inevitably influenced by your position. The essence of this saying is that one's perspective is consistently formed by one's surroundings. I think that this adage is very relevant to the commentary surrounding smart telescopes - particularly the two new low-cost entries - the Dwarf Lab II and the Seestar S50. The following discussion is related to these sub-thousand dollar smart telescopes.

I have attempted to very roughly identify a couple of scenarios and offer my opinion about the usefulness of smart telescopes in each case (in bold). The mention of investment amounts is not to be taken as definitive - but merely a generalisation and thus always inapplicable to any particular individual.

The Aspiring Beginner Astrophotographer

This individual might have an interest in astronomical imaging - but does not possess any serious astronomical gear. Their knowledge of the sky might be minimal. They had bought a low-end small refractor to see if they might like to go further in astronomy - but were disappointed with the difficulty of chasing targets other than the Moon. Their online searches have revealed that in order to get some of the nice photographic images seen there, an investment in the thousands of dollars range is required. In addition they see that setting up such a configuration requires a lot of time and effort and requires a not insignificant amount of technical expertise - so interest withers and dies.

A smart telescope might be useful to this cohort - but a lack of experience in the practicalities of what the smart telescopes would be capable of may lead to unreasonable expectations and disappointment. However, if this is not the case, smart telescopes can serve this cohort well.

The Budding Astrophotographer

Due to some prior experience of terrestrial photography and possession of photographic gear (e.g., DSLR) - this individual has significant understanding about exposure times and perhaps even some low-light experience. Their interest in astronomy might even mean they have some knowledge of the night sky and basic astronomy terms such as, right ascension, declination, magnitude, nebula, star clusters, etc. They might already taken astronomical pictures using the astrophotography functions on their smartphones. While serious enough to expend the several thousand dollars for an entry astronomical setup - the prospect of assembling various components and the set-up required is daunting - only to be avoided by having a permanent observatory - involving more expense. Nonetheless they are drawn to the prospect of being able to acquire images of their own.

I think this cohort is in the 'sweetspot' for a smart telescope. They have enough knowledge to understand what the smart telescope is up against in terms of aperture and sensor limitations. It has been observed that this cohort has - in general - reacted most favourably to the capabilities of the telescopes. However, it has been noted that within this cohort there have been some unrealistic expectations and negative responses.

The Competent Astrophotographer

Having investing in gear in the range of upwards of perhaps five thousand dollars, this cohort has knowledge and experience well above that required to operate a smart telescope. They have already produced images of superior quality - well above that achievable by smart telescopes in the sub-thousand dollar range.

In this cohort responses have been split - where on one hand they are impressed with the smart telescopes' integration of all the various components into a compact package - but on the other hand the term 'toy' starts to appear in the commentary. Some positive comments have ventured to say that while these smart telescopes would not be useful for serious astrophotography - they are ideal for easily showing family and friends 'what's up there' as well as more formal 'outreach' activities.

The Expert Astrophotographer

This cohort have many years experience and the quality of there results are world-class. Their investment may reach tens of thousands of dollars. Their knowledge if astrophotography is deep and wide.

Here I have noted the highest level of negative responses - with the 'toy' label used frequently. Not all negative opinions, but noticeably more prevalent. Certainly I have witnessed some condescension. I have my own opinions why this seems to be the case - but I'll leave it as an observation.

My Conclusion (Opinion)

I think that whether smart scopes are good or bad depends in which cohort you place yourself.  I would class myself as a "Budding Astrophotographer" and so I feel I am lucky to be in the position of being 'blown away' with the results obtained from my Seestar S50. I have no perception of how limited the Seestar is in the realm of things - and I may never gain enough experience for the wonder and delight to fade away. I hope not - and always keep my "beginner's eyes".

The advent of relatively affordable smart telescopes capable of is certainly disruptive technology. There have been cries of indignation that it is now possible to bypass the long and arduous path to getting revealing images of the night sky and aspersions have been cast - i.e., not 'real' this and not 'real' that. Personally it reminds me of the advent of the printing press in 1440 - also met by much the same indignation. From Wikipedia...

"The arrival of mechanical movable type printing in Europe in the Renaissance introduced the era of mass communication, which permanently altered the structure of society. The relatively unrestricted circulation of information and (revolutionary) ideas transcended borders, captured the masses in the Reformation, and threatened the power of political and religious authorities. The sharp increase in literacy broke the monopoly of the literate elite on education and learning and bolstered the emerging middle class. Across Europe, the increasing cultural self-awareness of its peoples led to the rise of proto-nationalism and accelerated the development of European vernaculars, to the detriment of Latin's status as lingua franca. In the 19th century, the replacement of the hand-operated Gutenberg-style press by steam-powered rotary presses allowed printing on an industrial scale."

Personally I think smart telescopes are a great step forward. Of those who would cast aspersions I ask - "When trying to introduce someone with zero experience to the joys of painting - would you insist that before they put brush to canvas that they learn about colour theory, mixing paints to get various shades, the great masters, make them purchase expensive top-quality brushes and paint, and attend painting classes - or would you allow them to try their hand with an entry-level paint set from the general store, appreciate what they achieve and then let them progress (with guidance) from there if 'hooked' ?"

I think the key word for a beginner is - accessibility.

Related Note (To Myself)

I think it is important not to be concerned that the best I can do is well short of what others have achieved - even with the same equipment. It is easy to fall into that trap. By all means I'll try and improve my results - but when those efforts become less than fun I will rein myself in.

My favourite saying is "If you not having fun - it's a job - not a hobby"

Pleasing Mention

Nice to get a mention in the end-of-year summary from Bintel (First Solar image using the Seestar S50)...