kirkster501

Ken I sometimes get this with my FSQ85 and with my TEC140. Note, sometimes, (i.e. intermittently). I am sure it is something to do with light refracting in the atmosphere before it reaches the lens and the light being split already by the atmosphere. Fringe killer in Photoshop sorts it straight away when it occurs.

Very nice. There is much more information in this data set. Rotate it 90 degrees too, it look much better.

Thanks, yeah, it might be a bit too colourful for some but I quite like them to be like this, especially the nearer galaxies with lots of Ha on show.

TEC140 and Atik 460 with Astrodon LRGBHa filters. I did the luminance (six hours of lum) and Ha in 2018 but only got round to getting the colour in March and April 2020.

90 minutes each of R,G,B and L all 5 min exposures from an old dataset all done in one night. FSQ85 at native with Atik 460. Thought I'd share because I quite like this one.

Very nice and fabulous detail and good job on committing so much precious time to one object - it shows. I agree with Adrian; for me personally it is a bit too red but that's my opinion and it's what you think that matters. It's your galaxy to present how you like. Bravo, well done

Welcome. Say hi to Kings Street for me

Utterly fabulous. Wow!

StarSpikes Pro mate (a photoshop plugin). The only way I could "disguise" the bloated stars in that image.

All with TEC140 refractor, Atik 460 and Astrodon LRGB filters. I hope you like them Abell 426 - The Perseus Cluster, between 230-280 million light years away Abell 2151 - The Hercules Cluster, about 500 million light years away. Abell 1656 - The Coma Cluster, about 340 million light years away. Some bright foreground stars make this extremely difficult and it is a bit beyond my processing abilities currently.

Thanks John for writing this up. I have found it extremely helpful since I am on the hunt for a Ha Solarscope too. I was looking for an 80 or 100mm version of the Lunt but this gets exceptionally expensive very quickly!

Made some major mods to my rig too. Doesn't get dark until too late to test at the moment though.

Still haven't bought anything as yet. Just doing white light still. I foolishly didn't pursue Mark's lovely Ha 60mm last week, with me holding out for a 80mm version, or even a 100mm. Silly me and shows if you snooze, you lose.....

I love my 140mm TEC140 F7. And I've been tempted by the 160mm TEC160, it's obviously slightly bigger and fractionally better colour corrected - even by the already superb TEC140 standards. If I had that 160 scope then I'd wish I had the 180 and if that why not the 200 or even the 250???? It goes on and on. The best scope is the one you *use comfortably* and *enjoy*. In every walk of life there is always something bigger and better.

Hi Dave, how are you getting on with the 2600? I am very interested in this camera myself.

I'm not using the TEC for the Quark, certainly not yet, and when/if I do I would buy an ERF. However, to address your point the TEC is completely fine for white light solar and a Herschel Wedge. Done so many times with Yuri's - the manufacturers - blessing. He says, and I agree (FWIW) that the objective is just like a piece of glass on the table. It is only when the rays come to focus when all the fireworks start. Yuri says he has folks using his TEC200s perfectly fine for solar.

I agree with that theory. Our brains and eyes are not accustomed to seeing things in one precise wavelength like that and our visual system has been trained all our lives to see in broadband. So it is unusual and unnatural to visualise what the narrowband filter is showing us.

Thanks guys. Just to clarify for a numpty like me... 🤣 So, for appertures up to about 120mm-ish no need for an ERF up front at the objective and the Quark is fine at the focus point but you need to put in one of these UV-IR cut filters in front of it? These are not the same as the night time UV/IR cuts filters? I have one of those already. For larger apertures you should use an ERF to drop the heat and energy coming down the tube? I like the idea of the quark because it gives me future options with my TEC as well as another more modest 100-120 mm refractor I'll get. At some point I might get an 80mm Lunt as well.

Really? This flimsy filter is taking the full focused light and heat from the objective....... I'm amazed the glass doesn't crack or fracture....????

You must be sure the focuser is absolutely orthogonal to the optical axis or else the method does not work and the rings can never be centred properly. Since I did those videos several others have replicated the videos and show the same method. Professional RC scopes are collimated in the same way that I illustrate in the videos.

When it doesn't work out it is because there are issues with the secondary mirror and/or the focuser is not square with the optical axis. These scopes are built to a budget. You can get a diamond or you can get a dog.

I sold my RC scope years ago now but at the time I did some videos on this and put them on YouTube. Search for Ritchey Chretien collimation authored by me (Stephen Kirk). I got into some arguments on Cloudy nights about this method that I withdrew from since I could not be bothered to keep arguing. It is reliable and works well if you follow it to the letter. Indeed, all I did was video record a method taught to me by some German astronomers who showed me. That said, you can achieve perfect collimation with just a Cheshire EP as I also show in those videos. I could deliberately mess up my collimation completely and then get it back in a few minutes. People get scared but all you are doing is adjusting the angles of a pair of mirrors..... it's not a nuclear bomb...! YOu are not going to damage anything. You're getting that effect because your primary mirror is not orthogonal to the secondary and so you need to adjust the primary so that the concentric rings that are projected onto the wall are *complete and equidistant circles* from the central shadow. Assuming that is that the focuser is orthogonal and the secondary is then adjusted.

Thanks guys. I don't fancy forking out £1000+ for an ERF for my TEC only to find its long FL means opportunities are limited. I have only done white light with the TEC and want to start modestly with Ha. So if I went for another 80mm or maybe a 100mm frac (preferably), I wouldn't need an ERF and could just use the Quark on its own? I read about the IR cut at the front of the diagonal. Is this just a standard IR cut like a Baader that could be similarly used at night time? Why wouldn't that shatter?

What about some of these specialised rubber roofing paints? https://www.rawlinspaints.com/roof-paints?gclid=Cj0KCQjwz4z3BRCgARIsAES_OVfjkB3ispZEvn9zouMN_yfiVdqpJYz-OpFM1_O2w1dae3KxjAbCHnwaAkzTEALw_wcB

... and I sold my lovely ED80 last year 🙈 Alright chaps, many thanks!