Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

A couple of quickies (NGC6995 & M16)

Uranium235

By Uranium235
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
Posted

Last night was the first serious attempt at seeing if the modifications I've made to the 200pds have given me what I needed (four good corners).

The two mods in question are the 3d printed curve adaptor I had made to replace the not so great versa base you get with the diamond steeltrack focuser. Secondly, there was the "milk bottle washer" mod (for the secondary mirror adjuster) - which I think @Stu has mentioned a couple of times, that made precise movements of the secondary (and rotation) much easier. I think the key is to do it up so tight has to hold it into position - but not so tight as to bite into the soft plastic washer. I could tell from the collimation pattern alone that it was going to work well :)

Just a couple of targets to test, with an hour(ish) on both. Overall, I think I can be pretty certain that its now sorted :D

200pds, Atik 383L+, NEQ6 (2x2 bin)

Thanks for looking :)

 

8x450 (Ha)

34962105581_f75da6de34_h.jpg

 

10x300 (Ha)

35052692236_e17ec5ff7e_h.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cheers :) Im just relieved I've now got that telescope licked... oddly enough, it took me the same length of time to whip the 130pds into shape (11 months). At least now I can pick & choose between my gear in the knowledge that its going to work in the way I want it to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
  • Author
Posted
11 hours ago, PatrickGilliland said:

Nice work Rob - looking like all in order now

Cheers mate :) next time im out with it I'll take a pic of the modification - perhaps even upload the STL file to help anyone who wants to try the same thing.. not cheap though, it cost me £70 to get that 3d printed, so no room for error when it came to drilling and tapping the additional holes.... measure twice, cut once ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Star101

Star101

Posted
Posted

They are both great images.

I am so envious. My rig is wrapped up at the moment while I get a pier sorted ( this weekend ). Then a permanent setup with a ROR shed will be set. And your images make me so envious. Thanks for posting. Much appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 hours ago, Rodd said:

Sorted and sold!  Wow--I love M16--great detail with a moderate amount of data.  The Veil is nice too--but I think it needs more data to be able to compare with M16. 

Rodd

Thanks Rodd :) yeah, the Veil needs a bit more to clean up nicely (its better in OIII to be honest I think). But loathed that I am, ive had to take the camera off the 200pds to put it back on the f2 lens - but left everything else in place (FW, etc) so It shouldnt upset anything much.

I've got a Geoptik bayonet adaptor coming tomorrow which would give me a fair few options when it comes to a quick change facility. I can either leave it on the lens, or (with the right adaptors) use it as a method of switching the camera between any of my telescopes with a simple twist & click - with the correct spacing and rotation the way I want, every time. In the demo video it looked like a really solid bit of kit, so Im quite looking forward to giving it a test run this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Great, particularly M16. (You also have, on the left, the feature which Yves and I called 'The Running Ninja!')

Lovely stretch you've done on the Eagle. From faint to bright, it's all there.

Olly

Thanks Olly :) I processed that one using part of the Scott Rosen SMI technique, just to bring up the background Ha a bit before pushing the rest of it forward with the usual run of curves. Doing it that way meant I didnt need a layer mask to protect the pillar area.

To illustrate what I've done to the 200pds, here is a pic. Overkill yes, but it works :) I did have the idea of just using a moolite base, but the hole for the focuser was too small. So I thought it would be less of an engineering challenge to make my own, rather that try to widen the hole on a pre-existing base:

19024928_10155156451295907_6194048836603121450_o.thumb.jpg.b42248a5913aa308518b3726d7718b27.jpg

You can see the original versa base sitting on top of the curve adaptor I had made up... who in their right mind thought it would be a good idea to design a largely flat base to go on a curved tube?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toxic

toxic

Posted
Posted

lovely job Rob and lovely images :thumbright:

nice to see you got it all done.

i never changed the focuser on mine so i didn't get the problem of the flat onto curve i just shimmed my focus plate to get it plumb to the scope tube.

but great stuff mate

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barry-Wilson

Barry-Wilson

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

An accountant.

Olly

Ha, ha :icescream:.  I see this behaviour in my FD at work.

Rob - Super images Rob, especially M16 and the dynamic framing you have chosen (or is this the natural frame orientation?).  Yes very jealous that you are able to view this low lying beauty.  Well done with the Ha mono treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uranium235

Uranium235

Posted
  • Author
Posted
15 minutes ago, Barry-Wilson said:

Ha, ha :icescream:.  I see this behaviour in my FD at work.

Rob - Super images Rob, especially M16 and the dynamic framing you have chosen (or is this the natural frame orientation?).  Yes very jealous that you are able to view this low lying beauty.  Well done with the Ha mono treatment.

Thanks mate :) No real thought went into the framing of M16, its just the way it lands on the chip.

Speaking of low stuff, I was out at the dark site last night for the continuation of my horizon-hugging galactic panorama. It probably wont get processed until later on, got a fathers day dinner to munch through first :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peter shah

peter shah

Posted
Posted

Its a fine balance when it comes down to torque setting on any reflector. I've done a lot of work on this  myself. The natural instinct is to tighten everything up as tight as it will go but the reality is when you over tighten things it exaggerates any uneven torque and temperature change no matter how slight will cause things to twist. The key is even torque and only enough to hold itself in position you just don't need anymore. This poses a problem for manufactures as when things are in transit they move...swings and roundabouts I guess.

Oh and a great set of images as always

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.