Clarkey

I use a USB powered one for my 600D and run it from a powered hub, but you can also run it on a simple USB powerpack.

ACK-E8 USB Power Kit AC Adapter Replacement LP-E8 DR-E8: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

This is an equivalent for the 750D which runs off two USB outputs to achieve the required power.

Andoer Dual USB DR-E17 Battery Adapter compatible with: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

Great images.

Just showed this to my Astro obsessed 7 year old. He was very impressed to actually 'see' a nova. (Unfortunately when he gets older he will probably follow me down the AP rabbit hole, become destitute and end up living at home until he is fifty. Aaaarrrggghhhh!!!)

I think you need to use the reducer / flattener and use it at 180mm FL. That was how I understood it. (I'd be interested to know as I am considering the FMA180 as a widefield scope)

Thanks David. Really useful.

I had seen this method some time ago - probably whilst searching through the forums looking for the best system. I think I was put off by the necessity to dismantle the scope at the start, given the first rule seems to be don't move the central screw, so removing everything does lead to a certain amount of fear! Obviously this is in part to keep the mirror distance correct.

I think my plan will be to try the TSRCKOLLI (or Reego) as I have bought it. Also, reading through the method here, the Reego theory is similar - if I can get it accurate enough. It is basically a method of aligning the two mirrors without accounting for any tilt in the focuser. If it works great, if it does not I am in no worse a position to try the Es Reid method.

I have got a suitable tilt adjuster for the focuser, but my plan was to optimise the collimation first using a suitable method - then us the adjuster to compensate for any error in the alignment with the camera. Interestingly, when I queried the focuser issue with FLO I was told that the focuser are normally aligned correctly and I should be able to collimate using a Cheshire. It remains to be seen. Interestingly, if the alignment is correct then I have wasted a load of money on a posh LED light and a tilt adjuster!

If in a couple of weeks time you see an RC8 for sale in the classifieds, you know where it came from🤣

Happy Birthday to you.

Happy Birthday to you.......

As you say it's only money. Unfortunately I do have a Mrs Clarkey. But she is very understanding as long as my wages go in the joint account!

Interesting that I have just come across this post having been replying to a similar post regarding collimation.

Newton f5 - photo needed - Discussions - Scopes / Whole setups - Stargazers Lounge

I have a 200p which I always thought was quite well collimated. The cheshire and the laser (which was collimated) both gave good results and so I assumed everything was OK. Anyway, someone was asking about Reego collimators which I also have for collimating my RC8. When I used the Reego the result was not so good, showing the secondary was offset. So I decided to move the secondary away from the primary to give better results with the Reego. When I returned to the Laser and Cheshire they were a long way out. So I left the mirrors where they were and adjusted the focuser tilt. This (after a bit more tweaking) gave perfect collimation on all three methods.

So interestingly, the reego highlighted the focuser tilt which would not normally be easy to identify. Having done these tests I now have the 200p collimated better than it has ever been.

My question would be 'How do you know whether the focuser is tilted or not?' using a cheshire or laser?

OK. I have gone back to my cheshire and laser and this seemed miles out (even though the Reego said everything was spot on). So...

I left the primary and secondary where they were and adjusted the focuser tilt to line up without moving the mirrors. Going back to the Reego after this was marginally out so I recollimated the secondary. With the focuser tilt sorted everything now lines up perfectly - Reego, cheshire and laser. So the culprit for the disagreement between the different methods was the focuser tilt. This is one of the Reego benefits - it will collimate regardless of focuser tilt which is why I got one for my RC8.

So my advice would be get the Reego as close a possible (including moving the secondary as described above). Once this is done you can alter your focuser tilt to get it right.

By the way. Thanks for the post. Without it I would probably not have bothered with the Reego on the Newtonian. Now I have, it highlighted the focuser issue and the scope is now collimated better than it has even been before.👍

6 hours ago, GiorgioF said:

Did you check the 200p with the reego?

Yes. If the primary and secondary mirrors are aligned (as they are from you photo), the only way the reego can be off centre is if the secondary mirror needs to move slightly up or down the tube - or possibly it needs twisting in the holder. From the picture it is impossible to tell the direction of deviation.

I have just checked mine and the easiest way to determine which way the mirror is out is to look through the Reego and withdraw it from the drawtube whilst still looking. Then move the Reego slightly and you should be able to get it accurately aligned with the primary, secondary and centralised. The direction you need to move the Reego is the direction the mirror needs returning from. (If the Reego needs to move towards the primary to get aligned and centred, the secondary needs to move the other way). I hope this makes sense. I tried it with mine at it worked perfrectly.

6 hours ago, GiorgioF said:

Did you check the 200p with the reego?

Yes. If the primary and secondary mirrors are aligned (as they are from you photo), the only way the reego can be off centre is if the secondary mirror needs to move slightly up or down the tube - or possibly it needs twisting in the holder. From the picture it is impossible to tell the direction of deviation.

Although they quote these figures they will be peak loads. In reality when tracking the mount probably draws about an amp or 2. Again the dew heater controller can probably peak at 10 amps, but most dew heaters probably only draw about an amp at 12V. A bit more for other bits and pieces, but I doubt if your set up draws more than about 5 amps on average. (I've just got a new power supply for my kit with an ammeter built it so I will know for sure soon). With this in mind, if you want 8 hours worth of power you want 8x5amp=40 Amp hour. Ideally you probably want double this to prevent battery damage. There are lithium options, but the cost of these is pretty steep.

To connect to the leisure battery you could use metal hose clips - these will give you a good connection to the battery.

Having said a while ago about tweaking the APP sliders I have done that and also removed the gradients and calibrated the star colours. Following on from this I did a bit more 'tweaking' in Affinity including some binning a got the second image - albeit cropped. To be honest, there is plenty of detail here that can be teased out. I only spent ten minutes on it.

As has been said above - the data was pretty good to work with. A bit of a gradient, but nothing that was difficult to remove. As with all AP, there are multiple versions of the same image, most of which is down to personal choice.

I have just checked my Explorer 200p and it looks similar to your photo above. Looking at the secondary mirror on mine I can see it need to be rotated slightly and moved down the tube by loosening the central screw a turn or two then tightening the 3 collimation bolts. Looking at yours I think you just need to loosen or tighten the central screw (and the 3 collimation screws as required) to move the mirror a mm or two up or down in the direction of the arrow. Once the whole mirror position is adjusted relative to the focuser you can re-collimate.

Looking at the image above, it would appear that the secondary mirror needs to be moved up or down the tube (not sure which from the picture) until it is centred in the focuser. It maybe over time that the collimation adjustments have move the mirror slightly in the tube.

Fortunately I went on a spending spree pre and early COVID so I got most of my kit before the price hikes. I am also happy I have most of what I need so will not 'need' any new equipment. Of course there is the N+1 rule of astro.

I also have a financier (wife) who is beginning to catch on how much this stuff costs....🤣

I think that the suppliers are taking advantage of the situation. It is a sellers market at the moment and they know it.

It does improve slightly - mainly by reducing backlash. It also makes it quieter. I would say you can gain as much by adjusting the worm gear float. This alone will improve backlash significantly. I would say get an HEQ5 - they are good for the money. However, if you get a good deal without the belt mod get it anyway. You can always do it yourself later.

2 hours ago, Carbon Brush said:

I have never used this model of laser collimator

It's not actually a laser, but an LED collimator.

TS 2" Led RC Collimator | First Light Optics

I have just got one for my RC8 (when I am brave enough to collimate it!) I have not used it to collimate my newtonian, but I think the idea for the primary is to get it centred with the centre of the reego - using the red light. If you move the reego out, you should be able to line it up the secondary by keeping the spacing around the outside of the mirror equal all the way round.

To be honest a Cheshire is just as easy - which is what use.

From looking at the specifications there does not seem to much in it and the performance would be similar for AP. It appears that the GT-81 comes with a camera rotator which is a slight advantage. Ultimately I think it is down to your preference in terms of focal length and field of view. Check the pixel ratio with your camera - I suspect both will be slight over-sampled. Also depends what mount / guiding you are using. If you are guiding on a GEM then either would be fine. If you are running unguided then the short FL may be better.

As the imaging season has now closed for me, there is a little devil on my shoulder telling me to collimate my StellaLyra 8" Ritchey-Chrétien. I have used it through 'Galaxy Season' and got some pretty good results, but I do know the collimation is slightly out. Looking though a Cheshire the secondary mirror is a long way off centre and I can see some tilt in the primary. Although when imaging the results are OK, the stars at the outer edges are slightly mis-shaped. There are also some gradients with the reducer. (The reduced seems to exaggerate the faults).

Now I have read the numerous threads regarding the problems with collimation of RC's. I refuse to pay £500 for collimation gear when the scope only cost £800, so with this in mind I purchased one of the REEGO type collimators to check the set up and it shows it is a long way out. (I suspect the optical and mechanical axis are quite out of alignment). As I also have a new focuser and tilt adjuster on the way it seems like the right time to collimate.

My plan is to collimate as accurately as I can with the REEGO, then use the DSI procedure to get the final result. Any guidance or advice before I start would be appreciated.

Thought I would add my slightly different image to the collection. A 'close up' of the Coma Galaxy Cluster. Taken with an RC8 and ASI1600MM pro on the 16th April and processed in APP / Startools and Affinity. Captured with NINA.

Total image time 9hrs minus a few poor subs

40 x 3 min Red

30 x 3 min Green and Blue

80 x 3 min Luminance.

Pretty good for 45 minutes data. Have a play with the APP sliders - you can nearly always tease out some more.

As a laptop user I think the main issue is that you are limited to ZWO products and software. I did consider the ASIAIR but as I have some non-ZWO focusers it was a non-starter for me. I think in terms of functionality it is pretty we the same as a budget laptop. I set my rig up on the laptop and go to bed. I also have Chrome remote desktop so I can use my tablet anywhere in the house. Pay your money and make your choice.

I think if you are looking at imaging then spend the money on a decent mount. The 150PDS you have is quite capable of some decent images, but a good mount is a must. I think an HEQ5 would be the minimum you would want and can always be paired with a wide field refractor later when finances permit.

On 11/06/2021 at 21:57, Broadymike said:

Yes I know a properly set up laser may be quicker/more accurate but I like the getting stuck in approach

I'm not sure a laser is necessarily quicker or more accurate. However, I use the laser for last minute adjustments of the primary when it is dark in the field. In daylight I would use a Cheshire.

With regards collimation of the laser the cheap ones are usually miles out. I made a little collimation rig out of a few bits of lego and it is now spot on (or at least a mm or two at 8 metres).

I'm not sure about the 707 but I got a used 705 with an AZ3 mount (I was only after the mount for a lightweight set up)and it was pretty awful. Optically it was just about ok, but it was poorly made with masses of slop in the focuser and just felt cheap. I was thinking of replacing my ST80 with the longer FL 705 for use as a guide scope but it was not good enough.

Optically the 707 may be marginally better, but the build quality I suspect will be the same.

44 minutes ago, johninderby said:

Personaly I would have gone for the black. Less light reflections.

Needs flocking😁