Skyline

18 minutes ago, adyj1 said:

What license did you specify when uploading to Thingiverse? If you said 'non-commercial' then you can pass this information on to the Auction site and they should hopefully take action.

Non Commercial and have reported one of the sellers.

I would like to bring your attention to people selling 3D Printed Masks on a well known Auction site.

Some of these sellers are taken off 3D designs of other websites then printing them and selling.

Some of these designs are mine, which I have uploaded to thingiverse. 

I am wondering to take them off.

Your opinions would be helpful.

Thanks.

My latest incarnation with the Evolux62ED, taken with a ASI1600MM Pro, hardly get time to image with Mono.

My C100ED, has very favourable optics, seldom goes out for imaging.

But its a fantastic scope for visual, even @Grump Martian had a peek through it.

I will 3d print one for you. Please PM me your details. 

Thanks.

It could also be down to the reducer you was using, the SW version also has an ED element.

An update on the 3D Printed Bahtinov Mask and Riser should anyone want them.

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5402686

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5402464

Thanks

I can happily say, mine does not exhibit this problem. I am using the optical matched reducer/flattener for the 62. I cannot comment on other reducers as I do not own any to try out.

I have posted up subs on my short review without them processed indicating the CA your experiencing is not evident.

You might have had a bad scope, you should approach your seller for a replacement or a refund, whatever your happy with.

With regard to it using Premium Glass or not, that's the purchasers choice.  The same thing not long ago was said about the Evostar 72ED, but still it has been proven to be a good scope for imaging.

What happens if someone trips on one of your scopes ?

11 hours ago, Grump Martian said:

I have the Starfield 102 mm f7 from FLO. A fabulous refractor. I also have a matching Seymour white light solar filter. The views of Sol are great. Get one.

You caved in.

To be honest about it. My Quattro 150P holds collimation quite well, hardly need to tweak the primary. 

Well on this reducer it is.

I found the backspacing of 55mm when using a DSLR is not correct. As you zoom into the image the coma is apparent. As you see in your Sadr image.

Try 56mm with a DSLR.

On 19/12/2022 at 15:14, Roy Foreman said:

Not had a chance to use this scope since the images above but it seems a nice little scope and well put together. And very light.  As a fast scope you will need to ensure that it is well collimated. The procedure is no more difficult than any other newt. One must have accessory is an upgraded eyepiece holder as the standard one is a bit wobbly ! 

It only covers APS-C and the focal reducer works with other newts as well which is a bonus. I am very pleased with the scope and hope to get lots more use out of it when the clouds finally go away.

Hope this helps.

What backspacing did you use on the reducer, I am trying to still tease out the slight coma in the corners using a ASi1600MM?

ThaNKS.

9 hours ago, Oxize said:

They said, once tighten, it was rock solid right?

Yes, I was using mine last night. I find just positioning the reducer on the rotator then leaving it there. It makes tear down and setting up your imaging train a lot easier. 

My latest image, test run with the ASI1600MM Pro. Using 55.6mm spacing and Optolong 7nm filter.

On 22/12/2022 at 18:54, Oxize said:

 

@Skyline, do you know something about the field rotator?

That comes supplied with the reducer. Can introduce tilt if not secured central to the imaging train. Otherwise you'll have to use a 2" nosepiece at the end of your equipment - telescope side.

I have a Mini PC with Ubuntu 22.04 running Indi/Kstars/Ekos. Then remotely connect using WIN10 with Kstars.  Much cheaper then Jumping in bed with just ZWO.

This is a very good book on Star Testing, also available at a well-known  online bookstore.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/star-testing-astronomical-telescopes-a-manual-for-optical-evaluation-and-adjustment-second-edition-book.html

Nice rendering of M31.

The handle:

Carry-handle for Sky-Watcher Evolux 62ED & 82ED | First Light Optics

A question I would like to pose:

Depending on what Bortle sky you image in, does it make any difference what camera is better to use?

For example, would an OSC 533MC Pro better perform under Bortle 4 skies then if you would use it in Bortle 7/8? The same question would apply if you were using a Mono.

Thanks.

The Evostar 72 and 62ED are great scopes. I have had the ED72 and recently bought the 62Ed.

I have been using the 2" version for years as a sight tube including on my quattro 150p.  I use a good quality Cheshire for primary alignment.

I think there is a 2" version now which the concentric rings now are glow in the dark?

A gentle brush with a Brillo Pad will definitely remove those sluggish marks. 

On 13/03/2022 at 17:37, AbsolutelyN said:

I've been looking at the recent addition of f/4 Newtonians from First Light Optics under the Stella Lyra brand and am curious as to how they compare the SkyWatcher Quattro scopes.  One thing in particular that stands out is the mirrors themselves .... they are BK7 whereas SkyWatcher use Pyrex. My very basic understanding is that BK7 has different thermal properties. In terms of using the scope for astrophotography is the difference negligible or is the mirror quality significantly different? Any thoughts much appreciated. 

Skywatcher are using Borosilicate Glass in their Quattro 150P.

https://www.skywatcherusa.com/collections/telescopes/products/quattro-150p-imaging-newtonian-6

Anyone?