Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Pier review

Kaptain Klevtsov

Recommended Posts

Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
Posted

My current setup is a two pier one, the HEQ5 sits on a taller mount than the EQ6 as I intended to use the bigger mount for the physically bigger Newtonian 'scopes and the lower capacity one for the lighter refractors. The low position of the EQ6 makes the focuser more easily accessible with a big 'scope. The downside of the low mount is that the 'scope can't see over the shed wall very well and this has left me in a quandry to some degree.

Do I:-

a) Put the EQ6 on a taller mount, or

:D Leave it as it is.

The taller mount would let me point the Klevtsov at lower down stuff and would be much easier to use the DSLR on as the camera would be more than half a metre off the floor. The taller mount would not allow me to use the big 300mm f/5.3 Skelescope as it would interfere with the sliding roof.

Increasing the height of the pier is a relatively trivial job as I will just make a spacer between the concrete and the underside of the exiting pier of the appropriate height. I already have the junk materials to make this out of.

Currently the Klevtsov won't go on the HEQ5 as its too heavy with the attached ST80 guide 'scope and needs three counterweights.

Any thoughts guys and gals?

Kaptain Klevtsov

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

Why not just put the EQ6 on the taller pier when you plan on using the tal for imaging and put the eq6 on the short pier when you use the newt? It can't be that much of a ball ache to move the mount head.... can it? Although I guess that means doing your polar alignment again

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well the fittings for the HEQ5 are smaller than those for the EQ6 which means they are not interchangeable. It might be a plan though as I hadn't considered that option. Just need a new top bit for the taller pier and off we go. More head scratching to do now, as I still want to have two mounts operational for the two nights of the year when I can do CCD and DSLR at the same time.

Its part of a cunning plan involving getting the colour data from the DSLR to combine with a luminance image from the 16HR, all at the same time. Maybe even use a double barreled 'scope setup if I can match the image scales, now there's another thought.

Kaptain Klevtsov

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astronut

Astronut

Posted
Posted

Is it feasible for a DIY dude such as your good self to make a pier with adjustable height (eg some sort of sleeve tube arrangement sliding on top of the main tube) or would this defeat the object? ie. introduce instability. Most tripods are height adjustable so I see no reason why a pier can't be the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naz

Naz

Posted
Posted

Is it feasible for a DIY dude such as your good self to make a pier with adjustable height (eg some sort of sleeve tube arrangement sliding on top of the main tube) or would this defeat the object? ie. introduce instability. Most tripods are height adjustable so I see no reason why a pier can't be the same.

Hydraulics?? an old car jack from your local garage KK, if it can lift a car, just think how much gear you could load on that, just got to sort out the tracking 8)

naz

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterN

PeterN

Posted
Posted

Hi KK,

Rather than add more weight to the HEQ5 when using the Tal and ED80 buy the extended weight Bar from AE and you will find it balances just fine with only two weights. Cost about £30.

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterN

PeterN

Posted
Posted

Hi KK,

The long shaft is now available price £29-95p. I have looked at one and they seem to be a nice answer to balancing with no more weight added to the mount.

How are you getting on with the Tal ?? Have you tried a Focal reducer on it yet. ?? I have a feeling there is not enough focus for that. I wonder if they modified the tube to allow the Crayford focuser. Did you ever measure the tube length ?? I have been looking at making a new back plate for mine with the six holes in for adjustments and with a 2 inch SCT thread on so I can add other bits to it but I have a sneaky feeling that the further away from the back plate I get the less chance of reaching focus I will have !!! How do you find it with imaging ???

Cheers,

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Peter, the shaft is available for even less (just a few coppers, but then there's the discount) at FLO as well.

Haven't tried a focal reducer as I might as well just use the Skywatcher Newt, but there's loads of extra travel left inwards with mine. The focal reducers that I have are a 2" Antares, which won't fit the 1.25" focuser, and the 1.25" one which doesn't work with either the DSLR or the Atik 16HR so I've not been down that route yet.

The big white tube bit is 340mm long, with 150mm of focuser on top of that.

Imaging wise its a nice focal length for M57 with the Atik 16HR and it lets me use a 4X Barlow for planets, so all in all quite nice. The focuser is easy to use and, because the light cone is very shallow up the focuser tube, easy to get nice focus with. I've had no bother with off-axis coma like I get with the Newt so that's as it says on the tin.

I think I'll stick with having it on the EQ6 as the focal length means that I need as low a PE as possible to keep the stars tight.

Kaptain Klevtsov

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterN

PeterN

Posted
Posted

Thanks for the info. It looks like you are enjoying the Tal. It looks like they have shortened the tube by 15mm which explains why you have the extra focus. My white tube is 355mm. That 15 mm will make some difference and based on the fact you also have that 75 mm of travel explains what they have done. I was going to see if OVL could get a new back plate with the Crayford but it won't make much difference without cutting the tube. Not some thing I Fancy doing. :D

BR,

Peter.

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.