Jkulin

1 hour ago, SteveMunro said:

Thanks John; I'm a cinematographer so understand the importance of back focus. My issue is that the store advertises a Sony E-Mount as well as an M-48 adapter so, despite the e-mount being listed as specifically for my camera, the guy I spoke to said it "wasn't but [I'd] need something to sort out the back focus" which of course I know but he couldn't tell me what I needed to do it! So, I understand and thank you for your reply John but, I can't be the only person that has wanted to put this camera on a scope so what, specifically, do I need to do it? Is there anyone out there that has done this, e.g. this thread's creator? Many thanks, Steve.

Steve send @peter shah a message as he shoots widefield with a Sony and might be able to help you.

Steve, The back focus is the critical thing so 55mm from your CCD to the face plate of the Esprit field flattener, you will need that if you buy the scope. Remember to add extra for filters etc.

You will need to see if any of the photographic retails make a Sony T2-Adapter,  if not then you'll need to obtain a Sony>Nikon or Sony>Canon adapter and then you can use a proprietary T adapter to the Esprit, but watch your back focus as you really need to identify the CCD distances of your Sony.

I had to to do similar for my Leica, with a Leica to Nikon and then a Nikon T-Adapter.

Hope that helps?

Yep mine were a perfect fit, someone was selling a set of Williams ones on here, just remember to check whether the hole spacing is metric or imperial, the Williams was metric so I needed a metric spaced Losmandy bar.

On the top I had a SW Guide Mount setup, but took it off as I had planned to use my Moravian OAG on all three setups, but may revert back and just use the OAG on the RC.

I cannot for the life of me see why SW made such a poor setup, after all its fitted with a really good R&P focuser, quality optics but crap attachment to your mount.?

yep just nuts and bolts

Thanks Ray, Yes I removed my foot and used two willaims 101mm (i think) clamps to replace it on my Esprit 80 then used a Losmandy bar to mount my OTA, far better than to the original clamp.

I just carefully unscrewed the rear and removed the nuts and bolts, then covered with tape so that it could be reversed.

3 hours ago, newbie alert said:

They certainly have a stigma attached to them..stunning images but on the flipside a good few can't get on with them collimation wise..maybe one day once I've gained a good bit of experience!

I'd never had to collimate a scope before I got this and it was so easy, I coudln't believe what all the fuss was about. It could probably still do with a tweak, but I'm not that fussed.

14 hours ago, newbie alert said:

Lots of very good experienced imagers haven't got to grips with a RC...collimation has been described as the B swear word..

For me collimation is so easy and no different to any other collimation as long as you take your time.

I own a Howie Glatter and occasionally put it in and check and then I check on a star, here's mine that I checked in September, you just need to remember to slacken off the opposite collimation nuts before tightening on the opposite side and to do it with very tiny amounts like an 1/8th of a turn.

I don't use mine for visual, just AP and I find it brilliant, mines the 8".

There were as far as I can tell some inconsistencies with the quality of the GSO's some were exceptional and others not so, so make sure if you do buy one that you check it first and make sure it produces good quality stars.

Hope that helps?

Indeed the faster a scope the more susceptible it is to the temperature.

Only this week my mate Peter Shah sent me a curse as whilst he was chatting to me his F3.8 Newt had changed focus because the temp had changed marginally and he never checked his focus when he normally would.

I set SGP to refocus every 1 degree of temperature change and it is really is surprising how much difference it makes.

When you are ready the Lakeside worked out the best option for quality and price wise for autofocus and when you have used auto you will never go back to manual, it is just so accurate.

When I get a new setup or change a piece of kit and have to manually focus I use a Bahtinov Mask to get it as good as I can, then let autofocus take over, amazing difference.

3 minutes ago, souls33k3r said:

So now i'm at :

1. 54.8 out of 56mm required for my LRGB filters 
2.  55.17 out of 55.7mm required for my NB filters 

I think that is rather good and have a play, if you think a 1mm delrin will help then add it.

Glad I can help but as I say it was down to the professor who helped me out when I was doing my calcs.

Is the reducer a flattener as well, as although I did use my 80 without a flattener whilst i was waiting for it to arrive, it was much better with one.

I found F5 fast enough and didn't want the aggro of continually altering my focus.

42 minutes ago, souls33k3r said:

1) Is the FF (camera end) a male thread or a female thread? 

2) How critical is it to achieve 55mm exact?

Sorry never answered your question, I always get my knickers in a twist when working out which is male and which is female and will probably answer wrong, but I try to work on if it sticks out then its male and if something screws into it it's female, that's the best analogy I can work on lol, so to answer you question I think it's male ?

With regards to accuracy it depends how critical you are, I have some tilt in my RC that is irritating me and I will fix, but I know it isn't down to my back focus causing odd shaped stars, it's just another thing that you can tick, as you know yourself when that rare night is so clear you can dance amongst the stars and then you process the images and instead of being Fred Astiare you were Noddy Holder! ?

I'm not the expert, but if I may quote from some sound advice from @RayD when I was sorting star shapes out with my Esprits: -

Quote

Basically any glass in the light path effectively straightens it, and the nett effect is approximately 1/3 the thickness of the glass.  For example, the glass on Baader filters is 2mm, so you add 0.7mm to the distance needed (55.7 needed). However, Astrodons are 3mm, so you need to add 1mm (56mm needed).

Really sound advice from Ray that helped me immensely to get my stars in shape.

On 26/09/2018 at 17:54, souls33k3r said:

Shitzer   was hoping that some day i might stick a LP filter in it and start using the LRGB filters ... oh well, you win some, you lose some ... Cheers for clearing that up matey. Muchas gracias

 

I use a IDAS P2 LP filter on the front of my FW when using LRGB and it only adds 0.7mm to the back focus, so give that a go.

Just catching up with the imaging section as have been snowed under and then this pops up, just simply amazing, I don't think I have ever seen an M31 as good or detailed as this and I have seen some pretty amazing M31's.

Just superb!!!! Speechless.

I have the 100 and the 80 Esprits, both of them I simply love the quality and images.

The dew shield unscrews IIRC.

The standard focuser is good so order from Ian King a Lakeside Motor and controllers, dead easy to fit and works superbly.

I have the Moonlite on my 100 and the lakeside on the 80, both are now controlled by my Pegasus's control boxes which are brilliant.

If you notice your stars a little odd shaped then make sure your back focus is correct, @RayD helped me out tremendously to ensure that I got the correct back focus of 55mm which made an immense difference to my star shapes.

Yep I can't see my changing either of these scopes as they are just superb within my abilities.

Enjoy and good luck.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000VJE5SI/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I got mine on offer at £28

1 hour ago, FLO said:

Are you trolling us!

Blimey Steve, I was only trying to be helpful and deliberately not trying to wind anyone up, I'm surprised with your comments.

I wasn't suggesting that you buy the data from Scope Nights, I'm not that stupid, but obviously their data is represented in a more accurate way, whether it is because of their data source or because of the way the information is presented.

You offer a good product that could IMHO be better, that's all, I'll keep any future suggestions to myself in future.

Please remember that those who close their minds to suggestions more often are the one that miss out.

BTW I am also a regular client of FLO as well!

32 minutes ago, FLO said:

@Jkulin Clear Outside is a gift from FLO to the astronomy community. A thank-you for their continued support.

We have put a lot of thought and energy into developing it but we won't lose sleep nor be offended if someone chooses to use an alternative ? 

HTH, 

Steve 

Thanks Steve my intention was never to knock your "Gift" as indeed I know programming is a thankless task.

My reason for bringing it up was because I wondered if it was possible to pull the data that Scope Nights uses into Clearoutside as to me it seems very accurate, just a thought for the future.

Thanks Grant, I didn't want to take anything away from your company and apologise if it did, it wasn't my intention.

For me I have used both, all around the UK, France and Spain and Scope Nights, although you have to pay for it has proved so accurate, I'm not a programmer so bow to your knowledge: -

29 minutes ago, iwols said:

hi is this just an iphone app and not for the laptop?

I find it with both.

Scope nights is an iOS app and not wishing to take anything away from Clearoutside, it is so accurate, that I trust it completely.

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/scope-nights-astronomy-weather/id540120977?mt=8

They are looking at an Android App, but currently only for the iOS

I truly liked Clearoutside but found it inconsistent and a mate put me onto this and I have found it it 99% accurate with just the two minor failures, in fact I plan my days off around it.

Grant I used to use the Clear Outside app until I discovered Scope Nights about a year ago, Scope night has only ever been wrong twice but clear outside tends to be a lot more inaccurate, is there any chance that Clear Outside can tap into Scope Nights weather reporting sites as it really is brilliantly accurate.

11 hours ago, bottletopburly said:

THis ones quite compact by Peter shah 

 

Yep I thought I recognised it as @peter shah, I thought for a minute someone had nicked his.

It was the only thing I could find temporarily to point north whilst I set it all up, I'm good at improvising lol

3 hours ago, Nikolas74 said:

Thank you John , 

do you know if the dovetail bar (mounting shoe) is removable so i can use proper tube rings and dovetail bar ?

Nikolas.

 

Yes, I removed mine and then used Williams optics rings so that I could mount a Losmandy mount underneath and use a SW Guide Mount on the top, it made a massive improvement, just take your time and it works perfectly.

Attached a couple of pictures, not very clear but you can see what I have done.

Hope that helps?

Scroll down this thread and you'll see the link to m,y pier and photo's