MalcolmM

1 hour ago, inFINNity Deck said:

Hi Malcolm,

at least that shows that the bright spikes are not caused by the scope. Could you produce another image with the scope, but with the camera at a different orientation (or even several images with various orientations)? If the dark spikes still are perpendicular to the bright ones, then we know for sure that all artefacts are caused by the camera.

I have no experience with DSLRs in astro-imaging, so the next could be totally wrong/rubbish: I presume the camera has a flip-mirror? Could it be that it does not fully fold away and that we see reflection of it?

How come the orientation of the bright spikes when used with the 200mm lens is mirrored to those when using a scope?

Nicolàs

 

That's a great idea and I'll definitely try that as soon as I get another clear night. Last night was the first time I'd clear skies in weeks! 

The inverse lighthouse beams do not bother me and I'm a visual observer just dabbling in AP for fun but I'm intrigued as to what's causing the spikes! @inFINNity Deck thanks again for taking the time to help me 

Malcolm

Hi,

Just as an update I cannot see any obvious obstructions in either the camera or scope (pics attached - though very difficult to see!).

Also I have attached a picture that was taken with the camera and a 200mm zoom lens. No telescope. The same artifact appears there too.

Malcolm

Thanks for all your replies so far. I'll check the scope and the camera for any obstructions when I get home from work.

Malcolm 

Hi,

I have never used the SW so I can't compare! All I can offer is my very biased opinion that the FS60CB is fantastic! Like you I got an FC100DC earlier this year. I liked it so much I got the FS60CB as a travel scope. It's brilliant. I love it and it gets more use than it's big sister  for the reasons you mention.

I actually got the FS60Q and later got the 76 objective unit as well. Somewhere on this forum I have expressed my opinions in more detail.

So in summary, I would have no hesitation in saying get the Tak, but I'm biased and can't make any comparisons for you.

Good luck whichever you choose,

Malcolm

Hi,

Would someone be able to tell me what is causing the spikes in the bright stars in the attached pic? This was taken with a Nikon attached to a Tak FS60CB directly. No flattener. It's 10 x 10 sec exposures at ISO 1600 on an alt/az mount stacked in Sequator. Though I have seen something similar just using the camera plus a 200mm zoom lens which might imply it is the camera itself?

Many Thanks,

Malcolm

What drew me to Takahashi was that after much research on this forum and others and other websites too was that it seemed to me that those who owned Takahashi literally fell in love with them and many who did not own one would have loved to have one. There just seemed to be 'something'  about these scopes. I bought one, loved it so much I bought another and then started on the Takahashi eyepieces and accessories 

So I've very definitely caught the bug! I love looking at them, through them and reading about them and reading about other people's experiences of using them! For me they are scopes for life, have a personality and I get huge enjoyment out of owning a couple!

Malcolm

Thanks for all your comments. With the lack of decent skies, I can only get my astronomical satisfaction by gazing longingly at my scopes, hearing others talk about their enjoyment of Taks and enviously reading about bigger Taks like the FS128 @F15Rules 

Malcolm

Observing weather has been atrocious for me over the last few months and so I have taken to just using my FS60CB/Q and running outside to get a few minutes here and there between the clouds!

I managed to grab 10 minutes on the moon the other night; I just took telescope as was and ran outside ... 'as was' happened to be in Q mode with a Tak 28mm Erfle in the diagonal.

I was absolutely astonished at the amount of contrast this combination gave me. So the magnification at x21 was much less than I would normally use on the moon but the image was so sharp and contrasty I just soaked up the view for 10 minutes until the clouds came in. I never even thought to go in and get a more powerful eyepiece.

I was so impressed and taken with this high contrast combination I simply had to share  

Malcolm

Thanks for the reassuring reply @Highburymark. I do not think the tuner is loosing pressure so it's good to hear that winding it all the way in is fairly common.

I'll simply have to experiment with different eyepieces; lack of clear skies has hampered me so far.

I too don't particularly like the helical focuser but given that it 'does the job' and I have been very extravagant on new kit over lockdown it'll have to do for now

Malcolm

Hi,

Does anyone use this combination (Lunt LS50THa & 3-6mm Nagler Zoom)?

I find I have to rack the focuser all the way in to get focus. I feel I am probably not at 'perfect' focus because I cannot rack the focuser in any further to obviously defocus. i.e. I can only defocus on one side of the 'in focus' point.

I hope this explanation makes sense! Has anyone else found the same issue?

I also find I have to have the pressure tuner wound pretty well fully in to get the surface detail and proms. Is this normal? I have seen elsewhere on this forum that some people have to wind the pressure tuner pretty well fully in.

I should caveat the above by saying I have only used this scope a couple of times and it took me 3 sessions before seeing the proms and surface detail. But when it all comes right the views are fascinating! I can get good focus and fantastic views with a Type 5 Nagler 16mm, but this obviously gives quite low magnification.

Many Thanks,

Malcolm

I do the same as @Tiny Clanger for grab and go. Photo tripod, small refractor (Tak FS60CB) permanently attached, carried outside with the tripod leg sections fully closed up (or if extended, one leg folded in).

I also have a 4" refractor but it gets taken out in 2 stages; tripod then scope. The combination is just too big to fit through doorways without being bumped!

Regarding storage, I'm afraid I'm a drooler, so the scopes are left out in full view gathering dust  Though I like the sound of  @Franklin's idea of covering it with a sheet.

Malcolm

Sorry, it was my confusion I rushed in too quick with my reply. My own opinion; I think the FS60CB/Q is such a fabulous scope it deserves great eyepieces. It was largely due to @JeremyS that I discovered the delights of owning a Takahashi so I would be very happy to take his advice on eyepieces for them!

Malcolm

I must admit I have never used a 24 Panoptic but I only ever hear good things about it. I would think long and hard before selling it. It must give a pretty good wide field view with the 60CB?

I have the same scope setup and whereas I prefer the Tak TOE eyepieces for high power it's hard to beat the Nagler zoom for versatility. You can change the magnification easily to match the seeing conditions. So I would recommend the Nagler zoom  and maybe a budget one for low powers? Possibly even sell the Celestron as it's 7.5 is quite similar to the Nagler's 6mm? 

Very excited to see my first prom through a Lunt 50!

It took me three sessions, countless searches on SGL for advice and a bath towel over my head!

One quick glimpse at very low magnification before the clouds covered the sun.

But it was definitely there  and really was very thrilling when, with a final turn of the pressure tuner, the surface turned dappled and the prom appeared!

Malcolm

38 minutes ago, jock1958 said:

Ah that’s what I do more or less, I swapped out my helical focuser for the much better (IMO) Baader quick lock and if I’m using the WO nosepiece I screw it into the end of BV. 
Recently I’ve been using a 2.5x TV power mate and 15mm TV plossls which gives me approx 150x. 
There is a way you can directly connect the WO BV to the 1.25 Baader prism diagonal but not sure how to do it? maybe sometime in the future I’ll invest in some Baader MB 2’s with the very connective T2 system 🤔

Pic below of latest configuration, it’s a bit tail heavy but I just rebalance to compensate. 

Wow - that is some set up!

LOL we are going down the same path only you are ahead of me!

I find the helical focuser a pain and of limited use and was considering getting the click lock. I do like the Tak stock focuser though you need very deft movements to get focus sometimes - I see you have a 10:1 focuser?

I also have been admiring the Baader Max Brights but have seen some reviews suggesting that optically they do not provide much of a jump in views. So the verdict is still out on that one.

I have also considered the Power Mate but I have found I cannot use my Celestron barlows at all anywhere in the light path and I have them up for sale! I wonder would the Power Mate work in my configuration given it is optically different from a barlow? It would be yet another expensive suck it and see

Malcolm

4 minutes ago, jock1958 said:

Ah that bit of tube, I don’t have that on my DL and as @Saganite says it’s an easy way to swap from one configuration to the other for DC owners.

As a matter of interest how do you attach your BV’s directly to your diagonal, do you need an adapter ring?

 

 

I should have been more explicit! No, I have a T thread to 1.25" Helical focuser. And then the Binoviewer just slots in. I'll attach another pic which might make it more obvious, written English was never my strong point You can see the WO 1.6 nosepiece attached to the other end of the diagonal

Malcolm

7 hours ago, Space Hopper said:

In my experience most 'imaging optimised' refractors should be able to binoview natively as they usually have a big focusing range to allow for 

cameras, filter wheels, OAGs etc.

And you know you have plenty of in-focus range when you can add a Herschel wedge into the train and STILL reach focus with no gpc etc.

I'm told the D in FC100DC stands for digital (i.e. imaging) but I have very little focus range. I suppose that's why Tak sell so many extenders etc. Dunno about you but ever since buying a solar filter I seem to just get wet from standing in the English rain

Malcolm

2 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Hi Malcolm

Glad you’ve found a way of gaining a couple of inches of in focus, which tube are you looking at removing? 

Your right native will give you lower powered views with a wider FOV to a point, my WO BV’s have their limitations which include the reduction of light passing through them that’s why I tend to use them for high powered viewing of bright objects.
Another thing to consider is apparent vignetting on eyepieces greater than 25mm although I haven’t noticed this with my 26mm plossls,  let me know if you have this with your 28’s?
 

Hi, I have attached a pic. The bit ringed in red is the bit that can be removed apparently; I have not felt the need to try this yet - call me vain but I love the  look of the scope as is   I alternate between cyclops and bino mode and have a way of doing this which works for me. I have my WO Binoviewers permanently attached to a Baader prism and the 1.6x nosepiece is permanently attached to the prism on the scope side. So when I want to change from cyclops to Binoviewer mode, I just remove my Tak prism and eyepiece and plug in the Baader. I need the Baader as the Tak prism does not have the standard thread to take the nosepiece.

I must say I have not noticed any vignetting with the 28's but maybe if I look for it I'll see it  

I just did a wee check there in daylight and if by vignetting you mean a dimming of the image at the edge of the FOV then there was nothing obvious to me; that's not to say a more experienced observer would not notice it!

It was a bit of trial and error getting to this point, but for me anyway, that's all part of the fun of this hobby!

Malcolm

Hi @jock1958 and @F15Rules, thanks for your explanations and pictures. I believe I can remove part of the tube between the main tube and the focuser which will gain me a couple of inches of light path and allow me to reach native focus without the nosepiece.  In fact it might have been one of you that told me about this in another thread. I'm reluctant to do this at the moment as I currently get what I need. I assume the only benefit for me in achieving native focus would be lower magnification and wider FOV? Using a couple of Tak 28mm Erfles I can get a reasonably wide FOV. However if I want to go wider in the future you have given me the information I need

Malcolm

26 minutes ago, bond19 said:

 

Thanks chaps. I’ll speak to the team at FLO and mention your suggestions and see if I can get this to work . I’d love to be able to view natively with the Binoviewer. I can only imagine how the many star clusters will look. 

Not sure what you mean by 'natively'. I should have mentioned I also need to use the x1.6 WO nosepiece (comes with the Binoviewers) attached to the scope side of the diagonal in order to achieve focus. It's all to do with how much in focus your scope has and how much extra light path the Binoviewers add. A chat with FLO would definitely be a good idea and prevent a bit of trial and error!

3 hours ago, bond19 said:

Hi Malcolm.

I too am considering changing my 2" diagonal to achieve focus. Can I just clarify is the Badder diagonal you use a 1 1/4"?

Hi, I use a Baader T-2 Prism Star-Diagonal 32mm with a Baader Nosepiece 1.25" - T2 and Baader T-thread to 1.25" Helical Focuser. The helical focuser is a bit of a faff as unless you loosen the Binoviewers, they spin with the focuser! All bought through FLO. Hope this helps!

7 hours ago, Stu said:

Very true in all you say there. It took me about six pairs before I got ones which I liked and worked better for me than cyclops. The last point about focusing and lining up each eyepiece is critical I think, adjusting the inter pupillary distance so you see the full field stop in each eyepiece makes a big difference.

Yes, I too agree. They definitely take a bit of work to get set up correctly. I have had mixed results, sometimes I can combine the images easily and sometimes it just does not happen. Everything came together for me the other day which is what prompted me to start this thread.

So it has been trial and error for me up to now, but thanks to all your replies, I now have some theory behind it all and some techniques to get it all to work. Just waiting now for the clouds to go so I can put it all into practice!

Malcolm

1 hour ago, mikeDnight said:

Hi Malcom,

 I'm not sure about the Bortle rating of my sky. I did try to find out a few years ago, but I don't think its accurate as I've seen things beyond what I imagine I should. I think it was similar to yours. The nebulosity around some of the Pleiades is something I see regularly and without much effort. At first it looks like a light mist around the brighter stars and you might first think youre looking through a slightly misty sky, but looking at other stars of similar magnitude there's no haze visible. The longer you look, especially if you shield yourself from surrounding light, the more extensive the nebulosity becomes. The Pleiades is now with us again so you'll have plenty of opportunity to bag the nebulosity visually. It may help if you use an eyepiece in the 20 to 10mm range in your 4", as this should give you a dark enough sky background to help the nebulosity stand out. Longer focal length eyepieces may show a lighter sky background and so wash out the subtle nebula.

Thanks for the tips Mike. That's one of my goals now this winter; to look for the nebulosity!

1 hour ago, mikeDnight said:

That's a good catch of objects and a nice report. The nebulosity enmeshing the Pleiades is certainly visible in your 102mm refractor, and can be seen in smaller instruments too. I believe its visibility is an indication of transparency and so if you're seeing nebulosity you have a reasonably good sky. Below is a sketch I made of the Pleiades a few years ago, using a 100mm refractor. 

 

Hi Mike, that's a fabulous sketch.

I have never seen any nebulosity with my 4" refractor, though I am in suburban skies (Bortle 5 I think). Can you remember how dark the skies were when you made the sketch? I would love to glimpse the nebulosity visually; I did manage to photograph it recently which I was very chuffed at!

Thanks,

Malcolm