Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Atreta said:

so i'd need just another 10mm

Hi. Yeah, the link I posted includes a 30mm ring which should be fine: low profile eos > 30mm m48 > GSOcc > telescope. The main problem with the GSO is that it needs over 5cm of front focus at the recommended 75mm spacing so you may need an extension tube to reach focus. HTH.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just a few of the goodies ive had from the 130pds over the past few months:            

All images have been made with a Canon450D (unmodded), on a HEQ5 PRO goto, 9x50 finder guider (QHY5). Me and my garden gnome: several M51 crops: M97 & 108: M81 & M82 (& NGC3077): M81

Not great pics from me, but this is what i got so far since beginning with AP in august this year. No guiding and maximum time of expousures 30 sek.

Posted Images

On 19/4/2017 at 16:01, mAnKiNd said:

However, since I use a IDAS LPS-D1 filter, which has a glass thickness of 2.2mm, then if I understand correctly, I can subtract that value from the total distance, giving me a "true" distance of 52.8mm, which is not a far cry from the recommended 52.5mm.

Hello Minos,

this is the answer i got some time ago from Ted Ishikawa of Hutech regarding the thickness of clip EOS filter:

"Hi Stamatis,
Current D1-EOS is 0.5mm thick.
Ted"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/04/2017 at 10:13, StamosP said:

Hello Minos,

this is the answer i got some time ago from Ted Ishikawa of Hutech regarding the thickness of clip EOS filter:

"Hi Stamatis,
Current D1-EOS is 0.5mm thick.
Ted"

Hi Stamatis,

Thank you so much for this information, it is very helpful! The TS website for this filter states 2.2mm under the specs. I will get in touch with them and confirm this as I bought it from them. I wonder if the 2.2mm is not for the glass thickness, but some other measurement. Thanks again??

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.
First time out last night and got everything running in the new obsy, took a little longer due to software issues so lost a little time.
Its been weeks since I have been able to do anything due to bad weather and its the first time I have actually attempted to image comets with the scope.

Comet C/2015 V2 (Johnson) - 7x180s, ISO1600, Canon 600D
590901ffdbe39_CometC2015V2Johnson.thumb.jpg.7f9eb1de4926e17f957b9dc42049123a.jpg

Comet 41P/Tuttle-Giacobini-Kresak -  4x180s, ISO1600, Canon 600D

590901fcdbc41_Comet41PTuttle.thumb.jpg.c7f22c5fc5d8bf14f1d195eb33b4b511.jpg

Now the obsy is build I am hoping to be able to get out a lot more now and have more imaging time rather than spending time setting up etc...

Thanks in advance

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2017 at 07:13, mAnKiNd said:

The TS website for this filter states 2.2mm under the specs.

Hi. Was there ever a solution or answer to this? I just installed a 1mm thick clip filter. Is this enough to make a difference to the cc spacing? TIA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, alacant said:

Hi. Was there ever a solution or answer to this? I just installed a 1mm thick clip filter. Is this enough to make a difference to the cc spacing? TIA.

If it's 1mm thick then it will require 0.3mm extra spacing.

Most likely it won't have any real effect, but I guess it depends how close you are to the limit before adding the filter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, richyrich_one said:

If it's 1mm thick then it will require 0.3mm extra spacing.

Most likely it won't have any real effect, but I guess it depends how close you are to the limit before adding the filter.

I have been wanting to better understand this as I self modified my DSLR removing both filters to make it full spectrum. I have a clip filter after the coma corrector.

I have been working on the assumption that if I have removed glass (overall) from between the CC and the sensor that this would result in the optimal spacing from CC to sensor reducing?

As such I am considering moving my CC closer to the sensor using the spring loaded adjustment screws on my 550D DSLR.

I have also been getting an effect that appears like squashed stars radially around the centre of the image, kind of the opposite to coma appearing squashed as opposed to stretched radially. I am lead to believe this is as a result of the CC being too far from the sensor and hence over compensating for the coma and going past round stars to stars that are squished in the opposite plane. This is again in line with my understanding that removing the filters will have reduced the effective focal length requiring that the distance to the sensor be reduced. 

Any opinions on this?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AdamJ,

FWIW, when I image with my unmodded 450D on my short refractor, i use a CC <70mm> CMOS spacing for good correction, but with my full spectrum 1200D, I use a CC <65.3mm> CMOS spacing. I believe the reason for this reduction, is as you've described it, in that all glass filters inside the full spectrum camera are removed, which reduces the effective focal length required. Therefore, if you minimise your spacing as you say, would probably work better. Try it and see :)

On a different note, a threaded connection to the focuser is assuredly always more likely to be optically aligned with the collimation than a clamped connection, with less flexure and more stability. I wonder if many of the aforementioned chromatic aberrations and bloating reported in certain CC's where also in part, due to being clamped in the focuser rather than threaded..

I understand that the drawtubes in Synta focusers found on the common newtonians utilise an M54x1mm female thread that usually houses the removable 2" clamp. Furthermore, all previously discussed CC's such as the SW 0.9x, MPCC, GPU aplanatic etc.. utilise a male M48x0.75mm to connect with a DSLR. Therefore, one would require an M54x1mm Male to M48x0.75mm female adapter, and they could adapt the Drawtube + CC + Spacer + DSLR combo in a threaded fashion. Uranium has successfully demonstrate this concept after loads of DIY with the SW0.9X CC.

Such an adapter would not only ensure an improved connection, but also would provide a little more backfocus, allowing the drawtube to be racked out further, thereby minimising the intrusion that causes D-shapes on bright stars and negating the need to trim it down. Fortunately for us, the Hungarians at Lacerta make such an adapter (I've ordered one!) and there is also a T2 version (though it looks less secure). 

Food for thought..

EDIT: I saw on another thread here that the good folk at FLO used to do a bespoke adapter service. Maybe that's still on?

Edited by mAnKiNd
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mAnKiNd said:

Hi AdamJ,

FWIW, when I image with my unmodded 450D on my short refractor, i use a CC <70mm> CMOS spacing for good correction, but with my full spectrum 1200D, I use a CC <65.3mm> CMOS spacing. I believe the reason for this reduction, is as you've described it, in that all glass filters inside the full spectrum camera are removed, which reduces the effective focal length required. Therefore, if you minimise your spacing as you say, would probably work better. Try it and see :)

On a different note, a threaded connection to the focuser is assuredly always more likely to be optically aligned with the collimation than a clamped connection, with less flexure and more stability. I wonder if many of the aforementioned chromatic aberrations and bloating reported in certain CC's where also in part, due to being clamped in the focuser rather than threaded..

I understand that the drawtubes in Synta focusers found on the common newtonians utilise an M54x1mm female thread that usually houses the removable 2" clamp. Furthermore, all previously discussed CC's such as the SW 0.9x, MPCC, GPU aplanatic etc.. utilise a male M48x0.75mm to connect with a DSLR. Therefore, one would require an M54x1mm Male to M48x0.75mm female adapter, and they could adapt the Drawtube + CC + Spacer + DSLR combo in a threaded fashion. Uranium has successfully demonstrate this concept after loads of DIY with the SW0.9X CC.

Such an adapter would not only ensure an improved connection, but also would provide a little more backfocus, allowing the drawtube to be racked out further, thereby minimising the intrusion that causes D-shapes on bright stars and negating the need to trim it down. Fortunately for us, the Hungarians at Lacerta make such an adapter (I've ordered one!) and there is also a T2 version (though it looks less secure). 

Food for thought..

EDIT: I saw on another thread here that the good folk at FLO used to do a bespoke adapter service. Maybe that's still on?

Same thing but cheaper from here. Got one, on practice not what I was hoping for.

 

Edited by richyrich_one
Comments added
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mAnKiNd said:

How so?

I found using the locking ring to adjust rotation difficult to tighten without the t-ring/cc connection loosening. I ended up adding a thumb screw that locked down on the cc thread and also gave a lever to help hold it when tightening.

I got it to solve my tilt problems but it didn't change anything. Still currently unresolved.

You are also forced to use the M42 connection to the cc so vignetting could be an issue.

I've abandoned it for now, I may try it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rich for taking the time to reply.

Vignetting with T2 did cross my mind when I was thinking of this adapter in use with the MPCC, as that's the connecting thread it uses. However, i'll be using the adapter with the GPU aplanatic CC, which has the wider M48 and would therefore avoid possible vignetting on APS-C sensor. This gave me hope that perhaps this Lacerta adapter is actually better suited for the GPU CC rather than it's advertised use with the MPCC. 

My concern is whether or not this adapter combination will give a secure enough connection to the DSLR flange ring, being that a 4mm long M48 male thread on the coma corrector hides approximately 2mm's inside the adapter. I think 2mm left over is sufficient to lock into the DSLR flange ring, but I don't think it will hold a lot of weight. Nevertheless, as soon as it arrives, i'll be using my 130PDS with DSLR + CC only, so not too much weight.

Thanks again

Edited by mAnKiNd
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the GPU CC wins again(are you listening Baader?!). The M48 thread on the MPCC finishes flush to the adapter forcing you to use M42 on the t-ring.

When using the locking ring, there is some play in both the thread on the ring and the draw tube, I was never confident that it was square when it was tightened. I guess it should be.

It always bothered me that I wasn't mounting the camera in the same manner as I was collimating. I tried to collimate with a threaded connection using a self-centering adapter but the results where never repeatable. This confirmed my suspicions about the adapter.

Hopefully you'll have a better experience. It seems when you start with the GPU CC you are already on to a winner.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

The M48 thread on the MPCC finishes flush to the adapter forcing you to use M42 on the t-ring.

??? The m48 connection works fine. It just needs a m48 to camera ring. Screw it home, it sits square and avoids the dark corners on the light frames. Any tilt placing it in the focuser however and you've had it. Which reminds me...

...+1 for the idiotic undercut on the Baader; I needed to remove the lining in the 2" adaptor so they the screws bore directly onto the surface of the cc, otherwise it 'pushes' itself outwards as the band is tightened against it. Hopeless! HTH and clear skies.

** the gpu can threaded only in its original configuration, not after sw have ruined it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, alacant said:

??? The m48 connection works fine. It just needs a m48 to camera ring. Screw it home, it sits square and avoids the dark corners on the light frames.

This in relation to the FUFMPCC adapter, are you using one?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

are you using one?

Dunno. The methods I've tried are:

1. mpcc - Baader t2 adaptor - t2 ring - camera

2. mpcc - m48 ring - camera

At both 55 and 53mm.

The only one I could get working without xs vignetting was method 2. HTH.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be many M54x1mm male to T2 adapters on sale, but I have only found the Lacerta adapter provides an M54x1mm to M48x0.75mm female thread, but that adapter sounds like it has issues with its rotating functionality. Baader makes these adapters but the M54 side has a 0.75mm pitch (for filters) not the 1mm needed for the Synta drawtube.

Perhaps the FLO bespoke adapter service is still in effect and people can order a straight-up M54x1mm male to M48x0.75mm female adapter (with no rotation functionality like the Lacerta adapter) for using M48 threaded CC's on synta focusers, like the one on the 130PDS. There should be enough market for this i presume, considering synta scopes are so widespread in the imaging world, and of which many imagers use M48 threaded CC's.

Edited by mAnKiNd
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, alacant said:

Dunno.

You cannot use the M48 connection of the MPCC with this and use an M48 t-ring, the thread is too short. If the GPU has a longer thread(I don't have one but sounds like it does) then it will protrude through the FUFMPCC enough to connect one.

You are right about the SW incarnation. Why did they do that?! Does that extra shoulder unscrew?

So get this one:

http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p6706_TS-Optics-GPU-Superflat-2--Komakorrektor-fuer-Newton-Teleskope--4-elementig.html

And not this one:

http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p5836_GPU-Aplanatic-Koma-Korrector-4-element-fuer-Newton-Teleskope-ab-f-4.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mAnKiNd said:

There seems to be many M54x1mm male to T2 adapters on sale, but I have only found the Lacerta adapter provides an M54x1mm to M48x0.75mm female thread, but that adapter sounds like it has issues with its rotating functionality. Baader makes these adapters but the M54 side has a 0.75mm pitch (for filters) not the 1mm needed for the Synta drawtube.

Perhaps the FLO bespoke adapter service is still in effect and people can order a straight-up M54x1mm male to M48x0.75mm female adapter (with no rotation functionality like the Lacerta adapter) for using M48 threaded CC's on synta focusers, like the one on the 130PDS. There should be enough market for this i presume, considering synta scopes are so widespread in the imaging world, and of which many imagers use M48 threaded CC's.

How would rotate the camera for framing the object?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

How would rotate the camera for framing the object?

You are correct, in that you wouldn't be able to rotate the camera and live with it's final position, which I do with my short refractor as I prefer the threaded connection to clamping but with rotation ability. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p5836_GPU-Aplanatic-Koma-Korrector-4-element-fuer-Newton-Teleskope-ab-f-4.html

 

In the technical specifications for this product, it specifies an M50 connection behind the M48 thread, see it in the picture. The SW seems to have a ring in place on the M50 thread, so I presume it unscrews..

 

EDIT: i meant this product, which is essentially the same as the above without the ring. http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p6706_TS-Optics-GPU-superflat-2--Coma-Correktor-for-Newtonian-telescopes--4-element.html

Edited by mAnKiNd
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By guydive
      Hey all,
      I'm considering the 250PDS. The main use is visual, and the second is EAA (I currently use a zwo183mm). 
      What I'm hesitant about is the primary focus. since It's mostly for visual, I'm wondering on how much back focus it has compared to the standard Skywatcher 10" dobsonians? with the standard dobsonias with the same optics and focuser you already need an extension tube for most eyepieces...
      Also, there's probably a "bigger" obstruction (bigger shadow on primary)? 
    • By AngHor
      I have a SkyWatcher AZ-EQ5 mount. It’s all working fine, except I have an issue with alignment. This applies whether I’m in EQ or Alt-Az mode.
      I set it up using  one or two star align without problems.
      However if I use the handset to GoTo another object, I usually need to do fine tuning adjustments to centre on the new object. But the mount disregards these adjustments, so if I use the GoTo system to centre on a nearby object, or revisit the original object a second time, it’s still off by the same amount.
      How do I tell the mount that I have centred on the new object and that it should now be aligned with that object ? 
      My iOptron MiniTower has a feature that does exactly this – once set up correctly and aligned, for each new object I go to there is an “ALIGN” option, and if I use this it now knows the correct position. Can I do this with SkyWatcher and Synscan ?
      Thanks. Angelo
    • By Planetarian
      Hi, I've got a Skywatcher Heritage 130p reflector, and if i insert anything less than 10mm eyepiece, the image won't get crisp. I guess it's normal, but as I'm very new to astronomy, I'd like to know what the sharpness depends on exactly. 
      Is that the focal length (how fast the telescope is? ) or the size of the mirror and how much light it gathers? Or both affect it the same way?  
      Are things the same with refractors in this regard? Thanks. 
    • By ThadeusB
      I have for sale my Skywatcher Startravel 120. Objective lens 120mm; Focal length . It is in excellent condition, clean and only very minor marks. Clean optics, no fungus. The focusser is the original one and works smoothly; 1.25" and 2" adaptors. With both caps.
      A very good starter scope, or good as a portable scope.
      Included accessories: red dot finder; 90 degree star diagonal; 10mm & 25mm EPs; mobile phone adaptor. All in as new condition.
      Please don't ask me to split this package.
      Price £140.00 no offers.
      It will be very well packed.
      Payment: paypal or bank transfer
      I can deliver by Hermes; I can get a quotation for this if you wish. Or you can make your own courier arrangement, or collect in person.
      Please PM me if you would like more information.









    • By Quentent
      Hi,
       
      So just today i got my new EQ3 mount and tripod delivered.
      Brought it out, balanced it leveled it etc etc.
      So i polar aligned it,  and selected 2 Star Alignment.
      1st star to align to: Betelgeuse.
      As soon as i hit confirm align the motors kick in but as soon as the mount starts to rotate the motors stop and the hand controller resets itself immediatly and starts initializing all over again.
      I discovered that moving Ra on its own works just fine as does moving Dec on its own but whenever i press for example the left and Up arrows at the same time the mount stops and the hand controller resets.
      Could this just be a problem with power draw? The Synpro box takes 12V DC and is supplied by a 12V DC car outlet type power source. However i changed this to a 3 Pin UK 12V 1A DC & AC plug.
       
      Im hoping the power supply is the issue and not something else.
×
×
  • 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.