Carrey mask with wires

[jimao22]

And finally a test at bin 1x1.

We know that binning increase the light on the sensor (making some super-pixels) but we loose resolution.

So let's see what is happening with the clear sensor, bin 1x1, same star, 0.5 seconds - not wired (1) and wired (2) mask:

With more resolution, we could focus more precise.

I hope I gave you some ideas about this subject. Is an item easy to be made and very useful if you don't use FocusMAx or some other automatic focusing method.

Best regards,

Cristian

[Cath]

Very good results!

Would it be a simple case of just scaling your Carey mask design down for smaller apertures (like for my Canon 500D) ? .. would it use the same number of veins etc ?

[jimao22]

I think so, just try it.

[JamesF]

I was *so* expecting this thread to be about Stanley Ipkiss

Very interesting though. I've read so often that the obstruction widths for such masks need to be related to the dimensions of the telescope yet they persist in working regardless of the sizes used.

James

[GeoC]

Very interesting results. Seems like Carey masks have been around for a while but somewhat eclipsed by Bahtinov: http://www.btinterne...y/careymask.htm. I wonder why, as they do seem more accurate than Bahtinovs?

Please note that the above link no longer works.

The new address is http://geoastro.co.uk/careymask.htm

[sabin_fota]

I managed to repair my wired Carrey mask and I made and an Bahtinov wired mask.

Here are the results:

wired Carrey mask

defocused frame to see the patern

wired Bahtinov mask