mAnKiNd

What I wish I could see in the eyepiece https://www.astrobin.com/fu6fgr/

you mean the bracket that comes with the Pegasus Focuscube?

Cool the only two things to consider, is that you need to preset you aperture (I have mine at f4 for example) before you clamp on the ring. Also, the locking screw wont close the ring fully down, but has nevertheless been rock solid since the day I installed it without loosening up. HTH Minos

Finished another project with this gem of a lens Full details in the link: https://www.astrobin.com/g569tc/?nc=user Cheers, Minos

Hi Victor, the answer is yes, that's how I use it. HTH :) Minos

Thanks! ...by following this thread that lead me to this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/astro-essentials-samyang-lens-to-m48-adapter.html

Hello, first post in this thread. I've been following this thread for a while now and eventually built my own system around this lens, of which much information from here was super useful, so kind thanks to the community here for that. I've managed to complete a couple of projects over the past four months with it, and I'm supper happy with it's performance, ease of use and lightness. I have a Windows PC stick attached to the tripod so I can remote desktop into it and the whole rig is just a joy and a breeze to use! Thanks again everyone and hope you like the images. Any questions or comments welcome Best, Minos P.S. Full details in the AB links. https://www.astrobin.com/04ok4m/0/ https://www.astrobin.com/i0frda/?nc=user

Hi Steve, sorry I just saw your message and also for any confusion. I just measured the spare one I had (I printed two at the same tine and don’t want to disassemble the installed one) with digital calipers and the inside diameter is 121.5mm - so I stand corrected, not sure where I got 125mm, maybe I made a typo and missed the number one and decimal, or maybe I’ve been abducted by aliens one too many times lol In any case, at 121.5mm it completely mitigates flares, but feel free to experiment with larger inner diameters if you want to squeeze out as much aperture as possible Thanks for pointing that out and clear skies everyone. Minos

what's up with the Bayer Pattern: Gb B R Gr Does current software have an interpolation algorhithm for this and what are the benefits? I found this reference: https://www.imagesensors.org/Past Workshops/2007 Workshop/2007 Papers/070 Kim et al.pdf but I need to look into it some more....a bit of a futile exercise for me (academic I suppose) as not only do I not have the funds for this camera, but also I don't have a large and long enough scope for it

Details: https://www.astrobin.com/2mxllu/?nc=user Thanks for looking

For anyone interested into why I delved into testing these cameras without a filter, it's because I got these halos/reflections/wavelength-dependent microlens diffractions with my ASI1600MM-P using Astronomik LRGB 2c filters. The filters are fine, its the lack of AR coatings on the Panasonic sensor itself and its inability to mitigate bouncing light - this topic has been discussed to death on every forum, but I had to see it for myself and my setup. I suppose it still pertains here to the topic of "imaging with the 130PDS" because I imaged with it I wanted to see if the effect was still present without filters on the ASI1600MM-P, and it wasn't anywhere near the effect observed with the filters. I then snapped my ASI183MM-P to compare, but run out of time before I could test these filters with that camera - maybe later.. Having said that, the good thing with these halos is that they helped me recognize my focuser wasn't square, or my collimation was a bit off, or both, because the halo is not concentric to the star that was frame centered and I suppose it should be, so I'm spending some time to fine tune that.

Here's another sample demonstrating that the aperture mask works. I went out last night and tested the ASI1600MM-P vs the ASI183MM-P for reflections/halos/microlens diffractions WITHOUT a filter on a star with an apparent magniture of -0.04, just to test the isolated performance of the sensor's AR coatings without light bouncing back and forth from filters, but that test result is beyond the scope of this particular discussion. My point here, is that the photo below demonstrates that star shapes with the aperture mask look great, without the massive flaring from the upolished mirror edge, or ghost flares from the mirror clips that lie in the "flare path". Now the primary mirror mask I made is by no means a perfect mask, and there seems to be a little bit of flaring left, but that could be because of other optical elements, or due to imperfections in my "garage made" 3D print. Nevertheless, this is a huge improvement from a relatively cheap and easy mod. Cheers, Minos

That pretty much looks like the size of my mirror clips too. The problem isn't necessarily the size of the clips, it's the unpolished mirror's edge that's causing the flaring to spew in all directions when light hits it. As long as the clips are in the "flare path", they will cause that characteristic three-pronged ghost flare. Applying the aperture mask prevents light from hitting the mirror's edges, hence mitigating this "almost" completely. Hope this makes sense Minos

I would still think that you'd get Pacman stars with the drawtube protruding into the light path, because just like the spider vanes render diffraction spikes, so would the drawtube in taking a chunk out of that side - but I might just test that to see. I'd need to reorganize my imaging train so that the coma corrector is not sunk further down.

I knew nothing about 3D printing either, but I spent a day on tinkercad and sure enough, it was easy to do. Feel free to modify the ring to your liking: https://www.tinkercad.com/things/2AcLKhFYX4r