Gonzo

44 excellent pages to read, quite some amazing shots taken with that lens. Anyway, I've spotted someone (@mAnKiNd) using an OAG but that user hasn't visited this forum since October 21, 2021... Would anyone else using an OAG with that lens by any chance?

thanks, going for some Player-one cameras.

Is there a possibility to fit a filter between the camera and the Askar instead of placing one at the front? I can't see if if it's possible. This is without using a filter wheel or drawer, so a permanent filter setup.

Very nice images thanks for sharing. I have a few physical measurements to take before I commit to either the 135 or the 180. Both are looking good for what I want to do.

Cool thanks for the info about the filter. For the price of the FMA-135... it's not going to break the bank. I have seen some really nice images from an FMA-180, I 'assume' the FMA-135 is on par with it.

Thanks for the input, much appreciated. From the few posts I've found, some are placing the filter at the front and not near the camera as usual, any reasons why? Oh and there is this 3d printed bracket for the FMA-180 https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4762752 which is very similar to the 135 bracket. I might say something wrong, but I have the impression that the 230 is a competitor to the RedCat 51 somehow and as I already have the RC51...

I'm not suffering from light pollution where the observatory is, it's a bortle 3/4 location. As for the "OSC with dual or tri-band filter" this is where I'm a bit confused with filters on an OSC camera, aren't you reducing the effectiveness of your OSC sensor?

That's a cool setup there you got. 👍

I'm contemplating getting two Askar FMA-135 mounted side by side and a pair of Player-One cameras, the Saturn version. Reasoning behind is that we're getting less and less imaging time (crap weather) so I want to maximise every sessions, I do prefer wide field images hence my choice in the FMA-135 and it's an inexpensive scope (230 is too big and I have a RedCat 51 with a 533mc pro, I would have considered the 180 for it). To simplify my new setup I'm going with an un-cooled camera (we talked about it in this thread) I do not image in summer, only in the cold months of the year. I won't be using a filter wheel but a filter drawer, again for simplicity. The filter drawers can be remotely changed by making a simple phone call if needed... (Control room in the UK, Obs in Germany). I was thinking of the mono with a HA filter and the OSC as it is (with a simple UV/IR filter).

If one would like to setup a "light" wide field dual imaging rig, using two identical telescopes and identical camera sensor specs (in terms of physical size), which camera combination would you be better off with? mono+mono OSC+mono OSC+OSC

I've checked the CloudyNight forum, not much on it really. Same as for the FMA 230, it seems that the FMA 180 is The most popular of the series. It's only £289 at Flo for it while £359 for the 180. I've dismissed the 230 a I have a RedCat 51. I mean look at it, it's so tiny. It would do nicely for my new sub-micro-tiny observatory

Is anyone using an Askar FMA 135? Looking for general feedback about this one, I can find plenty about the FMA 180... and if anyone would have by any chance the 135 and 180... I'l be interested in a comparison. thanks

I've seen the design from DeepSkyDad and it's quite clever and complex at the same time with the belt system and actual stepper motor moving as you focus. I agree that with a belt system it removes quite a lot of backlash, but maybe something with little backlash can be achieved in the above design, maybe different gears teeth tolerances?

I asked that person, and here are the printed files https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5422376 for it.

An alternative to the autofocuser with belt. source: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/718608-askar-fma180-d40mm-f55-triplet-ed-super-apo/?p=10849882

Probably because we keep reading on forums the same response over and over: don't bother with an un-cooled camera, save and go straight to a cooled one. All the newcomers to the hobby go for that "cooled" camera, increasing the demand for it... Over on CloudyNights (and probably here too), there are countless stunning images taken with un-cooled cameras. The latest CMOS sensors are getting more and more efficient. Yes an un-cooled camera has cons, but ... they can work if you're on a "small to moderate budget" (not everyone can afford top of the range mounts/scopes/cameras).

I will get the Saturn-M SQR PlayerOne camera for my next little project. Anyway, that's it for this thread

It's a shame, I would have been interested in the uncooled version (and yes I've read all the typical answers such as "don’t bother just buy a cooled camera”)...

found the answer... the uncooled version is no more...

Any idea about when the uncooled version will come out and at what price please?

Hello, may I ask if you could please measure the overall length of this setup? From the back of the camera to the front of the FMA180. thanks

I'm just wondering if anyone has seen the following or heard of such issue please? The focuser has gone all of the sudden super stiff and some very thin plastic paper came out of it, and sadly the more you turn the more is coming out... I've contacted @FLO about this as I bought the scope from them just last month and the Redcat has never been used outdoor (bad weather and not enough time for it). It is a very bizarre issue, I'm puzzled as to what this plastic could be or the function of it. I have kept that bit of paper which I will include in the return box.

The 183 might be "old" but some can get some pretty good results with it ... https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/599475-sony-imx183-mono-test-thread-asi-qhy-etc/ ZWO183MM-Pro £947 (QHY / £980) ~ ZWO2600MM-Pro £2389 (QHY / £2094) Interesting to see the the QHY183 is more expensive while the QHY268 is almost £300 cheaper than the ZWO

There's quite a difference between the two...

From looking at the 294MM specs, probably a good camera if you own two scopes with different focal lengths. I've compared the 2600 vs 183 in the ccd FOV tool, the 2600 will be too large. The more I look into it, the more I lean towards the 183. Sure it's an "older" CMOS... but it's proven to work nicely.