Imaging with the 130pds

[edarter]

On 19/11/2023 at 16:46, sagramore said:

I've never tried it but a dew heater on the secondary might give just enough warmth at the open end of the scope to reduce humidity inside and help? At least you can buy those off the shelf. Otherwise a nice long dew shield could also help without needing extra power or wires so I'd try that first once it arrives!

I've got a primary heater but mounted it around the OTA at the secondary end and have never had humidity issues since (either with the secondary or primary), so that may be a simpler alternative as its a lot less hassle than fitting a secondary heater.

[cmanley134]

After my initial tests with the Stellalyra/GSO corrector I wasn't satisfied with the stars - picked up a Sharpstar 0.95x (TS Maxfield clone) and there is a massive improvement. FWHM is about 30% lower and the corners are excellent on my 2600MC Pro. Only managed to get 9x2 minute test exposures before the clouds rolled in but for 18 minutes I think this is neat.

[m1tch_87]

I have had my 130PDS for a bit and have done a few cheap mods to it, have attached a few images I have taken over the past few months setup is:

1. 533MC-PRO
2. ZWO EAF
3. 120MM mini camera with ZWO mini guidescope
4. L-Xtreme filter for narrowband
5. Skywatcher 0.9x coma corrector
6. EQ6R-Pro - guiding at around 0.5-0.8 after loosening off the overtorqued bearings from factory

Mods to the scope are:

1. Flocked tube
2. 3d printed mirror mask
3. Shower cap over the rear of the scope
4. Screwfix special dew shield

Western Veil nebula was shot last night and I feel that I have sorted out the diffraction spikes a bit now and mainly shooting 300s subs for narrowband, 60 seconds for broadband.

[Paul2019]

My cameras broken

But with one of the first clear nights in months that I've been free; I decided that I had to get out imaging.

I had a go with my guide camera ASI120MM, definitely not best suited for deep space imaging but hey work with what you got.

So I present to the SGL massive M57 taken tonight with a guidecam!

 

No filters, no coma corrector, literally camera in a 1.25" nosepiece. 

100 x 10s Lights 

20 x Darks 

30 x Bias 

 

Granted its not the best image out there but has kept me in the game until a new camera lands! I'm actually sort of surprised how it came out.

 

 

 

[woldsman]

Hoping to upgrade to a TS Optics monorail focuser but struggling to sort out a 3d printed base that fits the 130pds. Does anyone have a cls file and/or know the dimensions of the printed base? 

[cmanley134]

Finally had a chance to do an extended integration on something - about 6 hours of 120s subs from my Bortle 6 neighborhood (2600MC, L-Pro). I may add more to this but I am really enjoying this little scope.

[alacant]

On 05/12/2023 at 20:52, woldsman said:

TS Optics monorai

Hi

Why not the SW Quattro monorail? No need to adapt anything then.

[Whistlin Bob]

26 minutes ago, alacant said:

Why not the SW Quattro monorail?

Seconded! It's an excellent focuser 👍

Not been on this thread for a while- great to see yet more great images coming from the little newt.

[Richard Wesson]

22 hours ago, alacant said:

Hi

Why not the SW Quattro monorail? No need to adapt anything then.

I have been searching online for this and does not appear anywhere as a sepearte irem - the results all give SW Quattro Scopes, SW crayford focusers and the TS Optics monorail. 

[alacant]

1 hour ago, Richard Wesson said:

does not appear anywhere

Hi

Discussed, with links to retail outlets, here.
HTH

**edit:

JTOL, I wonder though. Once you have factored the extra cost for the focuser upgrade, coma corrector and the 130ds itself, it would probably be more economical to go for the Quattro 150 in the first place as it carries said as standard, is faster and has a wider field of view.

Edited December 9, 2023 by alacant

[Spaced Out]

On 08/12/2023 at 18:22, alacant said:

Hi

Why not the SW Quattro monorail? No need to adapt anything then.

Will the base fit the 130PDS tube ? I remember having trouble finding a new focuser + base that would just bolt on because of the smaller tube size. Didn't look at a SW quattro tho, think at the time I assumed it would just be the same as the PDS unit.

[cmanley134]

Question for those who are using a primary mirror mask - I've had a U.S. based seller (Spencer 3D on eBay) 3D-print one and he said he used PETG that is not a matte finish. Will that be an issue as far as causing internal reflections? Because I can always paint it before install.

[alacant]

On 10/12/2023 at 22:47, Spaced Out said:

Will the base fit the 130PDS tube ?

It is the focuser which is substituted. The base remains in place.
HTH

Edited December 15, 2023 by alacant

[Ratlet]

7 hours ago, cmanley134 said:

Question for those who are using a primary mirror mask - I've had a U.S. based seller (Spencer 3D on eBay) 3D-print one and he said he used PETG that is not a matte finish. Will that be an issue as far as causing internal reflections? Because I can always paint it before install.

Probably not if it is mounted close to the mirror and the rest of the tube is flocked.  I'd give it a coat of blackboard paint anyway.  At least then if you do have an issue you won't have to worry about potential reflections from the mask.

[Whistlin Bob]

I've not been posting too much here lately, because back in March I decided to double down on the little SW Newt concept and got myself a 150 Quattro. However, once I'd got the new scope bedded in I then mounted side by side with the 130pds, and for broadband imaging I use the 2 together- the 130 has a Canon 550d with Homebrew cooling which I use to get the RGB, and then grab the L with the quattro and an asi1600. Here's what it looks like:

I would have to say I'm having a ball with this setup. Getting the 2 scopes aligned is tricky (especially as collimating either of them moves them out of alignment- I've just bought an adaptor to help with this), and the quattro is a more sensitive beast than the 130, but once they're both tuned in, the rig really hoovers up the photons. Hopefully no-one minds me posting finished images here- half the data is still coming from the faithful 130 after all  

Here's the Cocoon Nebula:

Here's my take on the Iris nebula:

This is the Cosmic Rosebud- a reflection nebula in Cepheus:

Here's NGC891 - an edge on spiral in Andromeda:

and this is probably my favourite from the rig so far- M33. This was from a 90 minute clear spell a few weeks back, so I got 3 hours data:

 

Edited December 17, 2023 by Whistlin Bob
Type

[cmanley134]

Finally capped off my efforts on M33 - finished with just over 13 hours of data that took a remarkable 16 hours (wow!) to stack in PI on my M1 Mac. That being said, the 2x drizzle and superior rejection/normalization process was worth it over my usual routine in Siril. Really pleased with how this came out: 

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by cmanley134

[sagramore]

Hi everyone. Long post coming as it's the first time I've had anything to contribute for a *long* time. Weirdly, I discovered by coincidence that the last time I imaged anything was exactly 1 year ago to the day - and my offering, below, actually has data from two sessions, 365 days apart 😂

So I *finally* used one of my days off to be productive and installed the mirror clip mask that I printed almost a year ago. I also took the opportunity to dramatically tighten my focuser because I realised it was slipping pretty badly with the camera and filter wheel on it and I could very easily move it in and out by hand despite the auto focus motor attached, which was not ideal. Lastly, despite having owned this beautiful scope for years it was the first time I've ever done a *proper* cheshire collimation following Astrobaby's guide. Everything here was taken using the 130PDS with the primary moved up the tube to help with the focus tube protrusion. I am using a ZWO ASI294MM Pro with filter wheel, attached via a Skywatcher 0.9x coma corrector. I am using the LRGB/Ha/SII/OIII filter set from ZWO (7nm band pass on the narrowband), and the ZWO EAF to focus. Guiding is done with a piggy-backed Startravel 80 and ZWO planetary cam. All mounted on an NEQ-6. All my image acquisition is with Astrophotography Tools and guiding with PHD2.

Pics of the mirror clip mask installation:

 

My first question, therefore, is would you all mind taking a look at the following few frames and telling me whether you think the collimation, clip masking, focus, and coma corrector spacings look "ok" to you? I often find it hard to be sure and I'm a bit worried the star shapes aren't quite right, especially at the edge of the frames. I have a collimation star test, in-focus, and then near and far out of focus. Then I have two single full frame luminance filter images. Both are 300 seconds guided at 120 gain and 2x2 bin and are "out of the camera" unstretched, just converted to high quality jpg.

 

Collimation star test:

Mirror clip masking test. Before on the left, after on the right. NB. Not the same star, just a bright one with similar acquisition settings:

A couple of full 300 s guided luminance frames:

I hope they look OK, particularly the collimation, but I'd be happy to hear if anyone has any thoughts! I also think the clip mask has helped with the uneven halos around bright stars, but I don't have a perfect before/after to check really.

 

Then, as I found myself set up and with clear skies for a short time, I set about collecting some actual data. One of the things I thought I'd try was adding a bit more time to my Horsehead/Flame image that I happened to be imaging a year ago to the day. I'm also experimenting with a new PC and freshly installed software. Stacking here was done in Siril with Sirilic and once I had the RGB composite (as SHO, hubble style), I shoved it into Photoshop and used levels and curves and selective color as well as some of the Astrophotography Tools tool set. Overall I think a) I pushed it a bit too far like I always do, but b) I like it more than my previous attempts. It's a total of 3h20 data across all three filters, but they're not even. Lots of artistic license taken to get the nice hubble colours but otherwise I'm still honing my craft when it comes to image processing. Astrobin link with more details here: https://www.astrobin.com/ivagmc/

 

That's all for now. Thanks a lot for looking and any comments gratefully received.

[lrosellpardo]

Perseus double cluster, EQ5 + SV405CC + UV/IR CUT + Baader MPCCIII 

Edited January 2 by lrosellpardo

[cmanley134]

Question regarding replacement of the secondary spider - are there any U.S. made options? Backyard Universe does the CNC machined spider but it's quite pricy and ships from overseas.

[woldsman]

Does anyone know how to connect a Baader MPCC mkiii coma corrector to a Baader T2 20-29 varilock extension? UPDATE - resolved. Thread on the varilock was damaged.

Edited January 21 by woldsman

[Whistlin Bob]

On 09/01/2024 at 02:03, cmanley134 said:

Question regarding replacement of the secondary spider

I'm afraid I can't answer your question, but I do wonder how necessary they are. I wasn't happy with the appearance of the stars on my 150 Quattro, but used some calipers to ensure the vanes were precisely adjusted. They've stayed true for about ten months so far.

[cmanley134]

23 hours ago, Whistlin Bob said:

I'm afraid I can't answer your question, but I do wonder how necessary they are. I wasn't happy with the appearance of the stars on my 150 Quattro, but used some calipers to ensure the vanes were precisely adjusted. They've stayed true for about ten months so far.

Necessary, probably not - that being said, it seems like the thicker vanes produce a nicer spike and that the extra stiffness will result in more consistent collimation. As I see it the main differences between this scope and similar higher end offerings are the focuser, mirror holders/cells and the tube material - the mirrors themselves are already excellent. My focuser is okay for my current image train, and if I get the nicer secondary spider sorted, there would be even less of a difference between this scope and any premium option I might consider upgrading to.

[cmanley134]

Okay, here's another maybe dumb question - I'm using a reducing corrector and want to chop my drawtube. Looking through a Cheshire it seems that I need to take maybe 12-13mm off of the end to completely eliminate the protrusion. I really would prefer to remove the drawtube so I can clamp it and make the cut separately rather than removing the entire focuser housing/assembly. Once I get to the point shown here:

Will the focus stop prevent me from removing the drawtube? If so, is there a way around that? The focuser is nice and square right now thanks to the previous owner and I'm quite leery of doing anything that will mess with that, given my relative inexperience. Thanks!

Edited January 19 by cmanley134

[8472]

No, you can completely remove the drawtube from the focuser, from your picture.

[cmanley134]

6 hours ago, 8472 said:

No, you can completely remove the drawtube from the focuser, from your picture.

Great, thanks! Any special tools needed, or just hacksaw and sand down any rough edges?