Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Imaging with the 130pds


Russe

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, tony8690 said:

If I had a 130 psd and a eq5 with synscan would I be ab.e to do long exposures? 300 seconds +

 

thanks

t

I had the eq5 pro with a 6" c6-n and d1100 without a guide scope. If you are imaging galaxies then you may get 300 subs but you will get star trails so will need to be heavily cropped and you will have to dump allot of lights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tony8690 said:

If I had a 130 psd and a eq5 with synscan would I be ab.e to do long exposures? 300 seconds +

 

thanks

t

I have an NEQ6 and with really good polar alignment I could push up to 120-180 s without guiding. I don't think you'll get much better than that without guiding, but with guiding the sky is the limit!

 

On 25/09/2017 at 17:49, lnlarxg said:

Quick question on this thread regarding the 130pds, with a canon 550d DSLR, are there any focusing issues in achieving prime focus?

I already have a canon t-ring adaptor (baader super low profile one) and a 2" eyepiece to t-thread adapter. 

Reason I ask is having researched SGL and found lots of threads regarding prime focus with Newtonian telescopes not having enough inward (towards the scope) travel on the focuser for DSLRs to achieve prime focus.  I am certainly having this trouble with my 200p dob.

thanks 

This is my setup and you definitely don't have any focus issues. One issue you can face though is that the focus draw tube protrudes a long way into the aperture, which can give your stars a slightly funny shape with a "bite" taken out of them. I performed a relatively simple and reversible (non-destructive) mod to move the primary a little way up the tube and this fixed it for me. This wasn't my idea though, so I take no credit for it - there is a guide on how to do it by one of the other users in this thread a (large) number of pages back. 

TL;DR - Focus will be fine, but it can be improved even further with a small mod!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, spillage said:

I had the eq5 pro with a 6" c6-n and d1100 without a guide scope. If you are imaging galaxies then you may get 300 subs but you will get star trails so will need to be heavily cropped and you will have to dump allot of lights.

i know its a bit of a silly Question but how do you get setup with a guide scope??

 

Thanks,

T

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I run eqmod through my computer which allows me to use phd2 for guiding. 

Guiding can be done with a converted finderscope or something like a st80 or a off-axis guider (oag)

This has a guide cam which is attached to the pc and phd2 then keeps the mount in position using a star by sending instruction to the mount motors.

hth

Spill.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm I may be making a belated return to this thread before long since I've flogged off most of my optics now - leaving just the Star71 and the 130pds.

I think I'll be just sticking to small telescopes from now on since I just don't  (or wont) have the storage space soon for anything bigger. 

But I'm happy that others have taken up the baton and put together some great images with that little telescope.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2017 at 18:14, Adam J said:

I don't think that the spacing is correct from the shape of the stars I would guess at it being too much. Are you calculating the spacing to the M48 or the T2 thread on the MPCCMk3?

Hi Adam,

I'm calculating it from the M48 thread.  I guess I will have to do some more testing with that part.  I think I need to correct the tilt first, which I am kind of dreading, since I am worried about adjusting the focuser with the camera attached.  Lack of on hand accesss to people who know these things isn't a fun thing. :)

Hi Susaron,

I wish it was easy to get the moonlite, its on my list, but I always have to worry about shipping and customs costs. :hmh: Out of curiosity, which tube length did you get? I want to image with the scope but still use for visual.

Hi rotatux,

Am not sure about the field rotation, since these were 30 sec exposures, and I also have 300 sec exposures and they 100% the same.  Interesting thought about the wall, I would need find one far enough, but I'll give it a try.  Thanks. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, al-alami said:

Hi Adam,

I'm calculating it from the M48 thread.  I guess I will have to do some more testing with that part.  I think I need to correct the tilt first, which I am kind of dreading, since I am worried about adjusting the focuser with the camera attached.  Lack of on hand accesss to people who know these things isn't a fun thing. :)

 

Dion from astronomyshed has a youtube video showing how to align a sw focuser. Also, the standard focuser has three pairs of collimation screws on its baseplate. They (should) work the same as those for collimating the primary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, al-alami said:

 

Hi Susaron,

I wish it was easy to get the moonlite, its on my list, but I always have to worry about shipping and customs costs. :hmh: Out of curiosity, which tube length did you get? I want to image with the scope but still use for visual.

 

Hi mate,

Well regarding the shipping costs, because I was the launch customer for the 130PDS tube plate adaptor,  I bought the pack directly to Moonlite instead of FLO, that caused a cost increase due to export taxes.

You are lucky now because the adaptor for the 130PDS is available at FLO.

Regarding the drawtube length I had a discussion with the FLO colleagues, in principle I wanted the 130pds not only for photo but for visual duties as well, so I ordered the 50mm (2'') drawtube. I can assure you that this drawtube does not intercept the light cone in the photo configuration, neither with the Canon 70D nor with the QHY168C. But it is suggested by FLO that a 38mm drawtube is more suitable for astrophotography, then if you want to use the scope for visual duties you can always fit a 2'' extension tube.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Susaron said:

 

Hi mate,

Well regarding the shipping costs, because I was the launch customer for the 130PDS tube plate adaptor,  I bought the pack directly to Moonlite instead of FLO, that caused a cost increase due to export taxes.

You are lucky now because the adaptor for the 130PDS is available at FLO.

Regarding the drawtube length I had a discussion with the FLO colleagues, in principle I wanted the 130pds not only for photo but for visual duties as well, so I ordered the 50mm (2'') drawtube. I can assure you that this drawtube does not intercept the light cone in the photo configuration, neither with the Canon 70D nor with the QHY168C. But it is suggested by FLO that a 38mm drawtube is more suitable for astrophotography, then if you want to use the scope for visual duties you can always fit a 2'' extension tube.

 

Thank you for all this wonderful info. :)

My problem is that I live in Jordan so I end up paying about 70% extra on every item :(  not to mention that for some insane reason over here we need to get security clearance for any astro related item.

I guess we have move clear skies compared to you, but even with your cloudy skies you do have some nice advantages :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, al-alami said:

Thank you for all this wonderful info. :)

My problem is that I live in Jordan so I end up paying about 70% extra on every item :(  not to mention that for some insane reason over here we need to get security clearance for any astro related item.

I guess we have move clear skies compared to you, but even with your cloudy skies you do have some nice advantages :D

 

security clearance for astronomy...wow what do they think that you are going to use it for?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Adam J said:

security clearance for astronomy...wow what do they think that you are going to use it for?

 

I make the exact same comment every single time I order anything, or think of ordering anything!

Question for all,

When centering the secondary mirror, is it truly dead center? I decided to take apart everything and reassemble from scratch so I know everything is in its proper place, but for the life of me I can't remember if it is centered. When I try to have it dead center (according to my ruler) it looks like the spider vanes are not straight but curved. Am I doing something wrong?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't post to this thread for a while, although I took some shots with the 130PDS. Camera used is ASI1600MMC.

M1 is ~30min Ha and same for O3, binned 2x2, 1/4 crop, 60s exposures at 300 gain. This is just to see how large it is and if I should have a go at it after I move.

M13 I think is ~1h in 5s and maybe 30s exposures. Can't remember the other details.

M27 - ~6h of HaO3RGB, more details on astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/297809/D/

M33 - ~12h of HaLRGB, more details on astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/313011/

IC405 and IC410 - 4 panel mosaic, each panel is ~2h Ha, 180s exposures at 300 gain. I'm currently working on this, but it will be a combination with a wider lens that fills the whole area.

I should come back to this thread in the following period.

Clear skies!

Alex

M1-F585-2017-09-24-HOO_p03.jpg

M13-F585-2017-05-14-L_p03.jpg

M27-F585-2017-06-09-RGB-HOO_p04.jpg

M33-F585-2017-09-18-LRHaGB_p02.jpg

IC405-IC410-F585-2017-09-19-Ha_half_p03.jpg

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For folks who shorten their drawtubes to prevent d-shaped stars, be aware that it is possible to do this and prevent being able to focus with an eyepiece!

I suspect this is partly caused by having the mirror adjusted well up the tube as well.

Anyway my second attempt at visual use worked, but the eyepieces had to be fitted some 10mm from being home in the 2"-1.25" adaptor.

If you want to do a lot of visual work with your 130P-DS I suggest checking how far up the tube needs to be be to give you focus before using the hacksaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

For folks who shorten their drawtubes to prevent d-shaped stars, be aware that it is possible to do this and prevent being able to focus with an eyepiece!

I suspect this is partly caused by having the mirror adjusted well up the tube as well.

Anyway my second attempt at visual use worked, but the eyepieces had to be fitted some 10mm from being home in the 2"-1.25" adaptor.

If you want to do a lot of visual work with your 130P-DS I suggest checking how far up the tube needs to be be to give you focus before using the hacksaw.

It should be possible to use a 2inch extention, that's the normal work around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, moise212 said:

I didn't post to this thread for a while, although I took some shots with the 130PDS. Camera used is ASI1600MMC.

M1 is ~30min Ha and same for O3, binned 2x2, 1/4 crop, 60s exposures at 300 gain. This is just to see how large it is and if I should have a go at it after I move.

M13 I think is ~1h in 5s and maybe 30s exposures. Can't remember the other details.

M27 - ~6h of HaO3RGB, more details on astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/297809/D/

M33 - ~12h of HaLRGB, more details on astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/313011/

IC405 and IC410 - 4 panel mosaic, each panel is ~2h Ha, 180s exposures at 300 gain. I'm currently working on this, but it will be a combination with a wider lens that fills the whole area.

I should come back to this thread in the following period.

Clear skies!

Alex

M1-F585-2017-09-24-HOO_p03.jpg

M13-F585-2017-05-14-L_p03.jpg

M27-F585-2017-06-09-RGB-HOO_p04.jpg

M33-F585-2017-09-18-LRHaGB_p02.jpg

IC405-IC410-F585-2017-09-19-Ha_half_p03.jpg

Thats a smashing M27, it looks like you've got that 130pds nailed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Uranium235 said:

Thats a smashing M27, it looks like you've got that 130pds nailed!

Thanks, Rob! I've some things to improve, perhaps first I should flock it. I sometimes think to upgrade to a 8" F/4 carbon or even a 6" RC, but then I remember that I don't even reach this scope's limits due to poor seeing. I'm quite pleased with it's stock performance and also with the results. What bothers me most are the halos around the brighter stars, but I don't believe I will replace the corrector soon just for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Question, has anyone tried using a barlow with this scope? If yes, what are the suggestions? Also you would put the barlow then the coma corrector? Just curious about where to put it since now I have thins in this order: coma corrector then filter wheel then camera.

Thanks,

Fakhri

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, al-alami said:

Hi All,

Question, has anyone tried using a barlow with this scope? If yes, what are the suggestions? Also you would put the barlow then the coma corrector? Just curious about where to put it since now I have thins in this order: coma corrector then filter wheel then camera.

Thanks,

Fakhri

I would leave out the CC if using a barlow as comas isn't an issue in the central part of the field of view.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NGC6992.

Taken with my 500d, It is looking like collimation is out and so heavily cropped. 

No darks just lights, bias, flats. Flats were from my 150pds as I have not got round to sorting out ones for the 130.

20 x 300 iso800

DSS and just Startools, no gimp or photoshop.

Room for improvement and needs more lights.

eveil.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spillage said:

Taken with my 500d, It is looking like collimation is out and so heavily cropped. 

No darks just lights, bias, flats. Flats were from my 150pds as I have not got round to sorting out ones for the 130.

Great image but you really cant use flats from one scope with another, I would say you cant even use flats from one session to another especially when the colimation is out. 

Edited by Adam J
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Adam J

Thanks for the info. I have just seen your reply to my other post as I was not sure where the problem was with my images. I did not process this until last night (images gathered on Wednesday) when I realized I only had flats for the 150 and did not have time to get any 130 flats I just used what I had. 

I did think that as long as nothing is moved or changed in the image train then you can reuse flats.

If I get time this evening I will re-do my collimation and run off some flats.

 

Cheers

Spill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, spillage said:

@Adam J

Thanks for the info. I have just seen your reply to my other post as I was not sure where the problem was with my images. I did not process this until last night (images gathered on Wednesday) when I realized I only had flats for the 150 and did not have time to get any 130 flats I just used what I had. 

I did think that as long as nothing is moved or changed in the image train then you can reuse flats.

If I get time this evening I will re-do my collimation and run off some flats.

 

Cheers

Spill.

If you even rotate your camera slightly on the same scope you’ll need to retake your flats.  

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • 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.