Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Skywatcher Quattro f4 Imaging Newtonian telescopes

FLO

Recommended Posts

MikeWilson

MikeWilson

Posted
Posted

Right Tim - I've got your notes. I will follow them when the scope arrives!

And yes, you're more than welcome to take a detailed look at the scope in person :)

I'm not so sure about doing a primary/secondary/focuser alignment test immediately, although a star test / coma test would be very interesting. I can run the .fits files through CCD inspector too.

And yup - I'm able to do a test with and without the coma corrector which should also be interesting. Probably not on first night though, since I'll be quite excited to do a few basic star tests and then have it on an object for a little real world test drive :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 475
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Macavity

Macavity

Posted
Posted

Some intriguing numbers and theory re. collimation tolerances:

FAQ about Collimating a Newtonian telescope

<whimsically> To achieve some of the figures would require "CNC machining"? :)

But I sense one has to really understand the precise significance of the various numbers.

- Even then one might STILL miss out on some dominant error... "Do the best y'can"? :eek:

Agreed re. DSLR use. On the other hand, I'm banking on the "basic precision" of the F4 GSO Newt being commensurate with the general precision of VIDEO astronomy. <G> The OTA has the virtue of being small (short!) and light. The price is right to ensure (fairly guiltless?) modifications. Add some "Bob's knobs", mebbe? To be really "punk", I'm thinking of buying a smaller, LIGHTER, replacement, (GSO) secondary. I'll ignore the extended back-focus, that rather resembles an, adjoining, small refractor... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tim

Tim

Posted
Posted

Have you flocked yours Paul? Or has it got baffles? Mine had a sort of charcoally grey silky finish which was lousy, but I flocked it with black felt stuff and that made a real difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Revs

Revs

Posted
Posted

Not yet (and no baffles, the ones with baffles don't have over-sized tubes so vignetting is an issue), but it's one of the next jobs. I'm thinking blackboard paint with a view to keeping weight down and the mirrors fiber free. Gonna do a bit of experimenting first though. Also I want to sort the tube strengthening first as I think the thing I'm making will be best on the inside of the tube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeWilson

MikeWilson

Posted
Posted

How do you apply flocking paper to the tubes with baffles?

I've bought a tin of blackboard paint so that I can hand paint the baffles. May as well hand paint the rest of the tube too.

All the best,

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeWilson

MikeWilson

Posted
Posted

4e56c104-8a36-c1a7.jpg

800mm!

4e56c104-8a87-bf89.jpg

Smooth but stiffer than expected (stiffer than a moonlite).

4e56c104-8ab9-f21c.jpg

Compared to my 150P, this appears to have a huge secondary.

Sent from my mobile using TapaTalk (so please excuse bad grammar & spelling!) :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deneb

Deneb

Posted
Posted

Congrats on your new scope Mike, as I expected the Focuser has still got those bog standard tightening thumbscrews, It would have been nice if skywatcher supplied a compression ring type focuser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeWilson

MikeWilson

Posted
Posted

4e56c104-8d5f-6a15.jpg

There are two locking screws for the focuser.

4e56c104-8db8-97b0.jpg

Also the centre of gravity appears to be an inch or so to the left of 'S' of the skywatcher logo.

4e56c104-8e13-7e73.jpg

These mounting rings grip the tube. They don't seem to want to go on any tighter than this. Am I right to assume carbon fibre being new rigid may mean I should/could tighten the rings more than I would on a steel tube?

Sent from my mobile using TapaTalk (so please excuse bad grammar & spelling!) :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeWilson

MikeWilson

Posted
Posted

@TJ, Macavity, Starlight

Yes - it's very exiting. I can't wait to test it. Unfortunately last night my EQDIR module died so my mount is a glorified static tripod at the moment. They're sending me out a replacement unit today so hopefully it will arrive in time for Saturday's session.

Congrats on your new scope Mike, as I expected the Focuser has still got those bog standard tightening thumbscrews, It would have been nice if skywatcher supplied a compression ring type focuser.

The focuser is an interesting one and time will tell so I'll have to withhold judgement on it for now. I'll post up a proper review after some tests (TJ, I have your notes to hand!).

The focuser is unlike the single speed Crayford that I'm used to. With that, when you lock down the focuser it is possible to still freely spin the focusing knobs without affecting the focus. This I like.

This focuser by comparison is just as smooth but harder to turn. Furthermore the locking screws don't have the same effect, they are - in effect - just for applying pressure to the tube.

Also note that the focuser does not extend very far. I'd guesstimate it's about 60-70% of the distance of the standard single speed Crayford.

Marring this otherwise generally positive experience, I'm perplexed with the tube rings. There is no way they can go on any tighter so I'm a bit concerned that piggybacking my ST80 on the top of the rings is going to make balancing the scope rather impossible.

More details to follow in a review later.

Clear skies,

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.