Miguel1983

59 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

So that does sharpen and correct star shapes, but leaves nebula and structures alone….
The issue with this, is not having control on the amount of correction, to the stars, I tend to use the full setting but lower the sharpen non stellar option, and reduce the new 0.5 default of star sharpening, down to 0.25, and seems to work well….your mileage may vary….

it is my experience so far that "correct only" makes star shapes better but dus not do any sharpening, but that can also just be my misguided perception 😅

22 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

You can’t have star sharpening on 0 if using “correct only’ as its greyed out, and internal defaults are used….so stars will always be altered when using correct only….

You're correct off course, I should have said I that I only check "correct only"

Not had any issues with AI4.

I don't use star sharpening i'ts too much and indeed you could end up with artifacts.

So sharpening is set to zero en check "correct only" ☑️

These are APSC corners on my RASA 11 V2

Not corrected

Corrected

Sunday there were a few clear hours in the evening.

I chose to let the RASA 11 capture 1min subs on M31 using the Omegon VeTec 571C.

In total I captured 3h55m of data.

No filter and no guiding.

AstroBin

Good suggestions from Vlaiv.

Just like to point out that no filters have been added yet, so the budget of €2000 is a very hard target to aim for.

If you swap the HEQ5 for a SW Star Adventurer GTI you would gain some budget back but at the cost of having no more room to grow and being limited to a small wide field refractor.

Also, I have no idea how the adventurer GTI is for AP.

The HEQ5 is sure bet, no question.

9 minutes ago, symmetal said:

That's looking very good. Tilt looks well corrected. Luckily the Baader tilt corrector makes it fairly easy to adjust. I aligned mine such that the 3 tilt adjusters are at 12, 4 and 8 o'clock with respect to the sensor and adjustments are fairly predictable if you remember the RASA image flips left and right. 🙂

You don't seem to have any noticeable coloured flares around the edge either, so maybe you won't need to add an internal black tube. It's dependant on where the brighter stars outside the FOV are positioned of course, and on mine M101 and M51 showed significant flares before adding the tube.

I should think you're well pleased. 😊

Alan

Thanks !

that's a good tip aligning the tilt-plate on the sensor, didn't think of that 😶.

Miguel

Little update on the RASA 11.

Last week the weather was OK enough to finish tuning the scope and shooting some testshots.

This is a 31x30s stack of M31

Worked on tilt for hours using Hocus Focus in NINA looking at the numbers after each run, but in the end I just took looping exposures and tuned it on the fly looking at the stars, this went faster then using Hocus Focus.

Iy's not perfect yet, but I think we can agree it's pretty close.

And this is a 60x60s stack of NGC281 RGB (Omegon 571C + CLS CCD)

On 03/10/2023 at 18:41, symmetal said:

Looking good Miguel. 😃

Not sure if your dew band will have much effect that far back, but it may not need to. 😉 I 3D printed my dew shield and made it shorter than normal to avoid it hitting the shed roof . What's the weight of your counterweights? Mine's on an EQ8-R and it has three 10kg weights further down the shaft than yours are. Also where's your guide scope going to fit?

Alan

I was planning on 3D printing a dewshield, but it just a little bit to big to print in one piece. 
I have 2 12kg weights on there.

No guider needed —> 10micron mount.

Miguel

Some updates:

The Baader UFC components arrived today

Installed a mini PC and PPBa on the scope (needed to print some new mounting accessories).

With a personalized touch

Installed the curved ring to minimise star diffraction.

With my pier in the lowest position I'm almost touching the ceiling, just checked that because that's my flats position with my Geoptik flat panel, so I'll need to tilt the scope a bit hoping the dew shield is up to the load.

 

Oh my god, the horror 😱.

i have been thinking on a tube for the UFC system too, we’ll see if it’s necessary. 

6 minutes ago, symmetal said:

As long as it's secure when done up properly is the main thing. Hope it fits well with the UFC plate. I noticed on your video that the ring holding the clear filter in the front of the lens group is protruding beyond the front face. On mine it's slightly recessed when done up. I have the UFC system too. The vignetting is rather severe using the stock M48 adapter, particularly with a full frame camera and the UFC system is much better. The Baader adapter plate isn't conical like the M48 adapter so sits flat against the front face. The protruding ring may fit inside the opening on the Baader plate though as I had to make a conical insert as mentioned below I'm not sure.. There also looks like a flexible, possibly anti-reflective insert sitting inside this ring too which wasn't on my RASA. 

If using the UFC system with external filters you'll want to remove this clear filter anyway. I found quite noticeable relections and coloured spectral flares from bright stars outside the camera FOV when using the UFC system. The Cloudy Nights forum has many posts about this issue and seems to be reflections from the edges of the lenses in the lens assembly which are not visible using the M48 adapter as they are blocked by the vignetting.

Removing the clear filter from its mounting ring and fitting the mounting ring back in place helped as it obscures the edges of the lenses to some degree, but to fix it properly I 3D printed a tube with a conical front end which sits snugly inside the UFC aperture from just before the UFC filter holder up to the front edge of the removed clear filter holder. I then sprayed the inside of this tube with one of the rather expensive 'super' black paints. The tube has 0.8mm thick walls so is rather fragile but when fitted in place shouldn't need handling very often. This fixed the issue for most images, though a bright star on the edge of the scopes 52mm imaging circle may still cause some issues.

You will probably have some tilt issues unless you're very lucky, due to the extremely narrow depth of focus, and the UFC tilt adapter is worth getting, though it is rather expensive for what it is. Much easier to adjust compared to the camera front tilt plate though.

Don't rotate the camera to frame the shot either or you will almost certainly introduce some new tilt. Align the sensor long edge parallel to the RA movement direction and leave it there. If the framing isn't what you want just do a mosaic of two panels. At f2.2 it doesn't take long to complete a panel even with narrowband. 🙂

Good luck.

Alan

Alan,

thanks again for the reply.

The protruding element you noticed isn't the clear glas filter, it is al felt covered 3D printers ring to cover up the treads inside the cell, the clear glas filter is already removed.

I have done my research a bit and saw that there are possible reflection coming from those treads.

the 3D printed ring is just not pushed back all the way in the video, it's flush in normal circumstances.

I have ordered the full set UFC pieces, so the 42mm camera adapter (Omegon Cam) , slider base, 2" filter slider, tilter, variable (15-20mm) adjustment ring and 2 x 5mm spacers and the telescope adaptor UFC 70.

 

Just printed a cable router too, but waiting until UFC pieces get here to finish up.

 

It's a fat scope, even on a GM2000

I ran a pointing model yesterday, and I've got to say, Celestron most have done a good job redesigning the mirror support/focusing mechanism on the V2, I've got a very good pointing RMS.

The model was comparable to that of my Esprit 120.

IMG_6822.HEIC IMG_6825.HEIC

1 hour ago, symmetal said:

Ah! I'm with you now. Yes that's certainly not right. Mine was fairly stiff to turn when new but freed up after a few tries. Is it a new RASA 11 or a previously used one? If new contact your seller who should sort it out. If used do the threads look well worn. A replacement locking ring may help. Hope you can get it sorted quickly.

Alan

Alan,

it is brand new, maybe a design change from Celestron to add some more play in the ring ? Maybe some users had binding problems ?

You can see how much play I have in the attached video from my first post.

I do have to say when all is well centered it does lock up well and the ring doesn't move anymore.

I have the UFC system incoming so I'll see how I do with that adaptor.

Maybe a 3D printed shim can help, we'll see.

 

16 hours ago, symmetal said:

Congratulations on getting a RASA 11 🤗

Are you saying you can't screw it on any tighter than you have it. It should keep screwing on until the inside edge of the retaining ring meets the lens group front surface, so I'm not sure why you can't screw it on any tighter.

Note that the inside edge of the retaining ring has a surface at 45 degrees or so to the lens assembly front surface.  When you drop the M48 adapter inside the retaining ring its edge should be free to move up and down over the over the 45 degree surface until the retaining ring is screwed onto the front lens group, when the adapter edge will sit flush against the lens group with the retaining ring holding it firmly. The 45 degree surface allows the m48 adapter to move left,right,up and down while being tightened, and end up coaxial with the lens assembly rather than possibly having it sit slightly off centre when tightened which may be the case if there was no 45 degree angled surface to ride on.

When new the edge of the M48 adapter may be too sharp, where instead of riding around over the 45 degree surface it digs in and jams causing it to end up tilted when screwed onto the lens assembly. It can then have some wobble in the adapter until it unjams and sits correctly. Mine initially did this and I just ran a piece of fine emery paper around the edge of the M48 adapter to remove the sharp edge and allow it to move freely which fixed it.

Alan

Thanks Alan,

yes I've seen that the knurled retaining ring has a sloped surface to centre the camera adapter.

A same slope on the camera adapter would be a better design.

But what troubles me more is the amount of play the retaining ring has on the treads of the lens cell.

It can actually skip treads when tension builds up and the camera adaptor is not perfectly centre.

 

Hi,

i received my rasa yesterday and i’ve been fiddling with it.

one thing that troubles me is the retaining ring on the front lens group.

It is a very loose fit and it seems to be very hard to fasten it properly with the camera adaptor.

any suggestions ?

 

 

 

Small update,

after I bought the mount I had 1 clear night, so I set up for some AP.

All went fine and I went to sleep, when I returned in the morning I found the mount dead.

Turned out I had a bad sample, that is to say, I had a mount with a faulty main board.

I contacted Pegasus and they replied very fast, so I sent the board to Greece the same day and received a new board 6 days later.

The new board is fitted in the mount but now I'm waiting on another clear night.

Also I did not receive that special nut to connect the adapter plate to the Pegasus carbon tripod.

Seems several other people did not receive the nut as well, but Pegasus sent it along with the new board.

So Pegasus clearly has some growing pains to attend to with quality control and packing.

But at least their service is fast and they are easily reached.

You can feel they are good people, ready to help you out if needed.

23 hours ago, Graeme said:

 

It would be a struggle for me to get the sign off for that level of expenditure!

A truly beautiful build and a pleasure to see the photos. Recessing the roof rollers is a good idea to keep the gap small. The two stage, below and above ground level pier block design gives you a huge mass. Will the total mass of concrete do away with the need for pier block isolation?

Graeme

 

22000 kg of concrete won't jiggle ! 😆

13 minutes ago, Andy ES said:

Sorry to be so crass, but just wondering how much this project would cost, apologies if this is private of course.

That all depends on design, size, location, choice of materials...

But ballpark for a similar size and finish between €30k and €45k.

In 2019 i made my own ROR/carport and I had to calculate the cost for the insurance and I came up to about €45k.

1 hour ago, Andy ES said:

Very impressive.

Looks like a fantastic quality build, built to last.

I want to ask the embarrassing question, but better not...

🤔

What's on your mind ?

 

1 hour ago, Earl said:

Im curios why the warm room has to be accessed via the scope area, would not a separate external door into there would be more practical ?

That was my plan also, but the client is king ☝🏻

10 hours ago, Mike Q said:

What he said

I wouldn’t mind 😅

10 hours ago, Mr H in Yorkshire said:

Thermowood - is that heat treated to make it inedible to insects etc? That build is a serious bit of woodwork and construction.

Thermowood is made from European coniferous wood.
Characteristic is the heating process that makes the wood insensitive to moisture, fungi and other influences.

Hello, In 2019 I built my own observatory.

An astro-friend asked me if I wouldn't want to build a new observatory at his place to replace his current one.

As this is a welcome change from the usual projects I do I said yes off course !

We discussed the requirements and soon we had a design ready and construction could start.

You can follow the construction below

1) digging

 

2 ) Formwork

 

3) Rebar

4) Getting pumped

5) Concrete done

6) 2 concrete blocks for piers and insulated blocks placed for the walls

7) Timber !

8 ) Dropped it off on site

Bad weather....

9) Timber goes up

10) Sliding base for the roof

11) Vapor barrier

12) Some Hulk-timber is needed

13) Roof frame is up

riding on these wheels

14) Roof structure

15) I feel hot

very hot...

need some Polar Bear...

16) Brooms for draft and bugs all round

17) Cladding in thermowood

 

18) Roof is done

19) Pathway to the stars ?

20) Outside work is done

 

 

16 hours ago, R26 oldtimer said:

I don't think that it will be a straight fit. The pegasus tripod has a Nyx top, while the sw mini pier has to sit on an eq6 top. You'll need to remove the bottom adapter from the mini pier, place a pegasus eq6 to nyx adapter on top and run a m12 long bolt all the way through, from the tripod spreader to the mount itself. Not sure on the stability, so better consider getting the rods.

We'll see, the mini pier has a "puk" in the bottom, one side is formed to drop in the hole on a EQ6 tripod but the other side is flat.

This is the normal way you would put it on the tripod (the mini pier is upside down here, and I see they have altered the design of the black "puk")

And this is if you flip the black "puk" (and how it looks on mine, so the old design)

Not sure the new design allows you to flip it...

I pressed the button on this mount and decided to get the carbon fiber tripod as well.

Because of availability I had to spread my order over 3 shops, the mount head I've ordered from Astroshop, the tripod from Univers-Astro and the universal adaptor from Optique Unterlinden, none of them had these 3 items in stock.

For the carbon tripod I ordered a weight bag on Amazon to attach to the legs for some added stability. 

My EQ6R-pro was sold recently so I didn't have the tripod anymore but last week I found a used Celestron tripod which is the same as the Skywatcher one, and even better, it's black so it matches the NYX-101 better.

I also still had the mini pier for my Skywatcher tripod so that's a plus too.

For peace of mind I spray painted the mini pier black yesterday 😅.

I'm kinda hoping the mini pier wil fit the carbon tripod as well so I won't have to buy those rods from Pegasus.

For use at home I have a fixed pier in the garden with a EQ6 top plate. 

So the tripods are just for on location.

I'm looking into buying one of these mounts.

The carbon fibre tripod with half pier (the rods) looks a bit flimsy to be honest.

I was thinking about the tri pier from TS-optics.

How is the zenith position with regards to gear hitting the tripod ?