Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by simmo39

  1. Hi all, Well with the the little gaps in the cloud we have had over the past week I thought I would go and try and sort out my spacing problems and at the same time see what I could image. I think Im going in the right direction with the spacing and only need to do a few more adjustments then its onto the tilt/ droop problem. Anyway here is a quich H(HO)O image of the flaming Star Neb. 2 hours on each of Ha and Oiii. Could do with a lot more and then some Sii but it is what it is.

    Hints and tips welcome


    Thanks for looking.

    • Like 7
  2. 5 hours ago, A320Flyer said:

    I use an ASI1600 on a SW ED72 with the OVL FF and have the same issue. I have gradually increased the spacing and am currently at 58.5mm. Stars are much better now with only the very edge stars showing elongation. I have read elsewhere that the sweet spot is 60mm. The problem is that CCD Inspector reports the curvature getting worse but I see the stars getting better. Try increasing your spacing. 


    Hi Bill, thanks for the reply. I will increase as you recomend. I just dont understand how I got it right before and now cant sort it, Must be an age thing or gremlins!

  3. Hi, I have had this scope setup for over a year but since before Xmas I have had a lot of issues with tilt and droop of the focuser and now its compounded by spacing problems. I didnt have so much of a problem before ( the tilt was always there but never as bad as it is now ) Can somebody look at this Ha sub and advise me where Im going wrong? Am I to close for the FF or to far out ?

    The Scope is a SW 72 ED using a OVL FF at the moment the spacing is just about 55mm.

    Thanks in advance


  4. 1 minute ago, Lee_P said:

    Hi Simmo, your query inspired me to write a review, which I hope to post later today. To answer your direct questions now though:

    * My focusser is ok. Not A* quality, but does the job. I've installed a ZWO EAF and that works perfectly.
    * Yes, flat field as the 'scope comes (i.e. without the reducer). This is a benefit of its Petzval design; no backfocus to content with. More on that in my full review!
    * I'm not using it with the reducer, so can't really comment on that I'm afraid.
    * Yes, it's good quality for the money. I have encountered a few issues but have found solutions to all of them -- will give more details in my full review. I consider it a keeper for many years. Whether you would depends on what you want to use it for, exactly. I can advise more if you can give me any details.

    Hope that helps,


    Hi Lee

    Thanks for the quick reply, will look forward to reading your review. Im going to use the scope mainly for narrow band Nebula stuff, Im not realy a galaxy fan for imaging although i do have a go during galaxy season. I was thinking with the reducer I would find it easier to frame shots of the larger nebula. I was also thinking about going down the ZWO EAF route and you have answerd that for me. I will have a good read of your review but from what you have already said I think I will be saving some cash and investing in one. Just need to hope FLO can get stock soon.

    Thanks again


    • Like 1
  5. 1 hour ago, Lee_P said:

    Yes, I have this telescope. Might write a members' review here on SGL, as there isn't that much info out there about it. Happy to answer any questions you might have!

    Hi and thank you. I do have a few quetions for you. 

    How have you found the focuser? I have read of a few being a bit iffy

    As the scope comes did you find that you got a flat field of view? I would be using it with a ASI 1600 mm and with my present scope ( SW 72 ED ) I struggle with gettting round stars at the edge with an OVL flattener ( Im still trying to get spacing right but also think I have a little tilt in the set up.  )

    Have you used it with the 0.7 reducer they recomend? and again how was the stars? I must admit that one of the main reasons for looking at this scope was its ability to do a wide field shot when the need arises.

    And finally, do you think it is a good quality scope? I know that the price seems very good for what you get but im looking at it as a keeper scope for at least a few years.



    • Like 1
  6. 2 hours ago, tooth_dr said:

    Agreed it looks superb!  As an alternative  SharpStar 76EDPH f/5.5 Triplet ED APO Telescope | First Light Optics

    Hi, yes looked at that aswell, It is already on my list of options that I cant afford right now along with the scope in question. lol.  The Askar appeals due to the wide field option with the reducer. 

    I have found a little bit about it on CN where it seems to have its supporters but someone also complained about its focuser. Not that one bad review would influence me that much.

  7. Im still having problems with my set up and with the poor weather havent been able to solve the spacing problem, Any way we had a couple of clearish nights over the last few weeks so I set up at the only target that I can find that would give me a chance of finishing before it went behind the trees. I have had to crop the image a lot more than I would like due to poor framing by me and the said spacing problems. I have also stretched the data to within an inch of its life. So here it is: The Pelican taken with my SW 72ED and ASI 1600. Ha 57 x 240 s and Oiii 40 x 240s. Stired up and mixed in PI witha a bit of topaz de noise and a touch of Affinity.  

    Comments and tips most welcome.


    Thanks for looking.

    • Like 3
  8. 2 minutes ago, Adreneline said:

    Thank you :)

    I am really pleased so far with the RedCat; the build quality is really good and optically it seems to be performing. I think the move away from 135mm to 250mm is going to require me to sort out guiding on my CEM25-EC making my light-weight rig not quite so light weight!


    That is always the way! 

    • Like 1
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.