Clarkey

Fair enough - I don't own one so it was my assumption. The 8" is flat for an APS-C size sensor so I thought the 6" would be too.

You shouldn't need a reducer / flattener - the RCs have a pretty flat field. The only reason for using a reducer would be to alter the pixel scale on the camera or to increase the 'speed' of the set up. My RC8 is F8 and gives a pixel scale of about 0.48"/pixel. With the reducer this goes nearer to F6 and 0.74"/pixel. For the RC6 the pixel scale is 0.57"/pixel with 3.8 micron pixels, but rather than add a reducer you can always bin 2x2 to give a good pixel scale and aid SNR.

I have the non-reducing flattener which is 'optimised' for DSLR but I am using it with a 1600MM pro. The 55mm is from the shoulder of the M42 or M48 adaptor. In theory the standard spacers for ZWO 55mm backfocus should work. I did have to add a couple of additional spacers to add about 1.5mm additional distance on mine - but other than that it works well. (Depending how fussy you are, it is not perfect in the corners - but pretty good).

Yes. You will NEED a new scope😁

You can also buy adjustable 2 hole wrenches but I'm not sure if they will reach into the recess enough.

Just realised this was for my AZ-EQ6 - but it is the same idea. If you need to you can add a central nut.

I recently re-built my HEQ5 and made the tool from a piece of angle steel and a couple of bolts through it. (It was actally the wall mount for shelving brackets so I didn't even need to drill it). Very simple and cheap.

Neither set of bearings had any obvious lateral movement - new or old. But the old bearings in the worm carrier were pretty awful when turning the drive wheel. Lots of stiction and very uneven. The rest of the bearings did not seem too bad, but as I had pre-purchased a complete set I was intending to change them all. If there is no improvement I would be very surprised. I also found the belts to be a bit loose which would also affect performance. The performance of my HEQ5 had definitely dropped off from new and I am hoping this will make a significant difference. Yes, the bearings were from R&M. The worm bearings are actually ceramic - not because it is necessary but it was what they had in stock. It may be a while before I get to test them as I have put all my gear away for the summer now - no astro darkness here until the end of August.

FWIW I have just finished stripping down and replacing all the bearings on my HEQ5. The small worm bearings were very rough (although this might be because I had over-tightened the end float). Whether this will improve the performance significantly is a question that will need to be answered when there is some darkness to work with. I was getting some quite bad guiding spikes similar to yours - but not as regular. My overall RMS was well below 1" but I would like to get it < 0.5 if possible.

Take the summer off😁. That's what I do. It is the last day of astro darkness here tonight.😭 Solar imaging?

I have used a bit of box section aluminium along the top before now. Works fine and a lot cheaper than astro kit.

Yes - the last two reviews are not good. Given it is the optics it is not encouraging. Personally I would save a few more pennies and buy the SM 90mm triplet. I got one before Christmas (at the lower price) and it is excellent. I'm not convinced of the need for a carbon tube - in fact I would prefer aluminium for the better cool down time, but it is excellent. (There is a TS version in aluminium but it takes away the 'local' advantage of FLO).I have not used it much yet (due to galaxy season) but I am looking forward to putting it through its paces after the summer. There is a thread on it in the FLO section:

Thinking about this a bit more I was wondering how you are guiding - I assume a directly from the PC using a EQDIR cable. If so, it looks to me like a dodgy connection. Every so often the mount tries to correct then stops again (in addition to the normal PE).

Certainly in the later logs, but the first guiding log (after the calibration) seems to be guiding initially. At about 22:13 it seems to stop guiding. Looking at the text log, guiding is stopped at frame 68.

Unless you spend a small fortune there are always potential quality issues with any 'budget' scope and you can be unlucky. (Even TAKs have been known to be faulty) I think the main thing is to buy from a trusted retailer who will sort out and resolve any problems. When I purchased my first imaging scope (SW ED80 and flattener as you have) I had major problems trying to get a good image. I tried various things and communicated with FLO - assuming I was doing something wrong. Eventually I returned the scope and flattener and it was inspected by Es Reid who determined it was a bad batch of FF's - all at FLO's expense. So personally, I would make your choice and buy from your local shop and worry about the problems IF they occur. As for spares and replacement parts, I am not sure how many spares you would really need? Most stuff can be replaced or sourced somewhere and providing the optics are good there is nothing to worry about. Look at the images and if YOU are happy, then jobs a good'un.

You might be right. Just going by what I have heard directly - but as I do not have any W/O kit I have not looked in detail. However, if you live round the corner from FLO, you can always take it back if it is a 'duffer'. Having said this, if buying from W/O is a worry there are plenty of other similar options.

Just for info there is a GT81 on Astro Buy and Sell if you were interested. Other end of the country though.....

I doubt optically there will be much difference. If it was my money I think I would probably go for the WO simply because you virtually never hear anything bad about them. Also, if you are local to FLO it makes sense.

What about the TS 80mm Triplet. Need to add VAT to the price but still a good options: Teleskop-Express: TS-Optics PHOTOLINE 80 mm f/6 FPL53 Triplet Apo - 2.5" RAP Focuser They also do a 70, 80 and 90mm triplet similar to the StellaMira: Teleskop-Express: Triplet FPL-55 Apos with top mechanics and certificate

I have 2 of the Senso Sesto units which have been good, but the ZWO EAF or others would also work well. To be honest I think it is down to what peripherals you are using with and whether they are compatible. In most cases the focusers can be moved from one scope to another relatively easily.

I think you are right. Did not look so black on my other monitor. Looking at your image I definitely need some more time on this target, especially at F8.

HI, I had a quick go with the stack and I could not get a huge amount more than you. I had to stretch it to within an inch of it's life and add a load of denoise. (I should add that I normally use mono so pure OSC data is a bit of a novelty). There is the data there and I think if you add another night of integration time you will probably get a better result. 5 hours with a small scope if not that much data in my opinion. Personally, I rarely image less than 8 hours on a single target - often double that unless using the F4 scope.

You might be right about cloud. The FWHM was not brilliant. As I normally image while tucked up in bed, I don't see what goes on....... @Laurieast and @wornish - Thanks for your input and attempts to improve. There is certainly more in the inner areas, but the outer 'glow' is not too good. Also, both images are quite badly black clipped. I have done similar to some areas of the image and it is better, but I still do not like the outer. I'll keep trying and see if I can get it better. It might just be I need some more integration time next season. New - slightly improved version:

There won't be any awards for this one but I thought I would put this on the forum for any guidance. This is M94 which I took a couple of months ago. I have processed it on multiple occasions but really struggled to get a good background the the outer 'glow' Any ideas on improving would be appreciated. Imaged over 2 nights with an RC8 @ F8 with a ZWO 1600mm pro in LRGB. L=264 mins, R=122 mins, G=88 mins and B=76 mins giving just over 9 hours in total. Seeing was not great and I have had to really stretch some areas to get a reasonable output. But for 9 hours I would expect better.

You are making me feel much better about my kit now! I dread to think how many scopes you have.