cmanley134
-
Posts
19 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Has anyone 3D-printed a dew shield for their scope? I have one of the floppy adjustable ones and I'd prefer something a little more secure with a consistent/repeatable fit. I don't have any 3D printing equipment myself but if anyone has the file I know someone who could do the printing for me. Thanks!
-
First image with the modified drawtube - this does have BXT stellar correction, but the change has definitely helped. Stars are nice and round and I've even seen a ~10% decrease in FWHM. Also tried a narrowband/broadband mix here which I quite like. Next up, secondary spider! I've received my CNC spider from Backyard Universe and just need to get it installed.
- 4,169 replies
-
- 6
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Thanks all - ended up taking 13mm off of the end, based on the difference between my focus point and the point at which the tube protrusion was no longer visible. Just need to finish painting the end and reinstall. I'm not a visual guy but I did see some reports that this mod can cause the tube to fall out when fully extended - I still have another 10+ mm on the end before the flat spot where the focuser makes contact starts, so I think I should be okay.
-
Great, thanks! Any special tools needed, or just hacksaw and sand down any rough edges?
-
Okay, here's another maybe dumb question - I'm using a reducing corrector and want to chop my drawtube. Looking through a Cheshire it seems that I need to take maybe 12-13mm off of the end to completely eliminate the protrusion. I really would prefer to remove the drawtube so I can clamp it and make the cut separately rather than removing the entire focuser housing/assembly. Once I get to the point shown here: Will the focus stop prevent me from removing the drawtube? If so, is there a way around that? The focuser is nice and square right now thanks to the previous owner and I'm quite leery of doing anything that will mess with that, given my relative inexperience. Thanks!
-
Necessary, probably not - that being said, it seems like the thicker vanes produce a nicer spike and that the extra stiffness will result in more consistent collimation. As I see it the main differences between this scope and similar higher end offerings are the focuser, mirror holders/cells and the tube material - the mirrors themselves are already excellent. My focuser is okay for my current image train, and if I get the nicer secondary spider sorted, there would be even less of a difference between this scope and any premium option I might consider upgrading to.
- 4,169 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Question regarding replacement of the secondary spider - are there any U.S. made options? Backyard Universe does the CNC machined spider but it's quite pricy and ships from overseas.
-
Finally capped off my efforts on M33 - finished with just over 13 hours of data that took a remarkable 16 hours (wow!) to stack in PI on my M1 Mac. That being said, the 2x drizzle and superior rejection/normalization process was worth it over my usual routine in Siril. Really pleased with how this came out:
- 4,169 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Question for those who are using a primary mirror mask - I've had a U.S. based seller (Spencer 3D on eBay) 3D-print one and he said he used PETG that is not a matte finish. Will that be an issue as far as causing internal reflections? Because I can always paint it before install.
-
Finally had a chance to do an extended integration on something - about 6 hours of 120s subs from my Bortle 6 neighborhood (2600MC, L-Pro). I may add more to this but I am really enjoying this little scope.
- 4,169 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
After my initial tests with the Stellalyra/GSO corrector I wasn't satisfied with the stars - picked up a Sharpstar 0.95x (TS Maxfield clone) and there is a massive improvement. FWHM is about 30% lower and the corners are excellent on my 2600MC Pro. Only managed to get 9x2 minute test exposures before the clouds rolled in but for 18 minutes I think this is neat.
- 4,169 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Well, first light was a success - got everything set up and captured 45 x 120s on M45 as my testing target. Lots of things went great! No light leaks, focuser had plenty of tension to hold the image train and I reached and maintained focus easily. Data was clean and easy to process. Star shapes need some fine tuning but this thing is awesome for the money.
- 4,169 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Spent some time messing with the new scope - got that third screw tapped with a cheap tap and die set off of Amazon and got everything put together to see if I could reach focus. It does seem like I need to have the focuser racked almost all the way out to focus on the trees across the street maybe 100ft away. I've had the experience with my refractors that the focus point is actually closer in compared to what I get when I try during the day, hopefully that is the case here. Do others with the GSO corrector find that their focuser is nearly fully extended? The good news is that the third screw is a major improvement - no more play in the image train. Looking forward to first light, if the clouds ever let up.
-
I was actually lucky enough to receive them with the scope courtesy of the previous owner, but I found them here: https://www.optechusa.com/products/hood-hat?variant=44409884082471. U.S. company so not sure if they ship overseas, but pricing is reasonable. I believe this is the second largest size (XXX-L)
- 4,169 replies
-
- 2
-
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Tried a test-fit with the corrector and ~75mm backspacing - with the camera rotated vertically where it has the most leverage, the focuser seems to be holding the weight. Definitely needs the third thumb screw though, as I can feel some play currently. I picked up a tap and die set so I'll be adding that this weekend.
