Focal reducer/ field flattened for Skywatcher 150 Mak

[Xcris9y]

Hi everyone 

can anyone recommend a focal reducer or field flattener and how to set this up for my Skywatcher 150 Mak. I’m using a Canon 450d with a 2 inch adapter. 

 

Thanks in advance 

Chris

 

 

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi Xcris9y and welcome to SGL. 

You are going to need one of these ---> http://scopestuff.com/ss_smsa.htm and one of these ---> http://www.scopestuff.com/ss_frs2.htm ...I think it is on par with the Celestron branded one after reading a review somewhere. Not sure about the Meade ones though!

I am not sure whether there is a reseller for 'Scopestuff' in the UK/GB as I order any 3rd party accessories that cannot be found elsewhere direct from them.  

[alan potts]

I tried my Meade F6.3 on the back of my 180mm Mak about 2 years back thinking it would work, now I don't know if I did something wrong but it was awful, I was meaning to try is again sometime. I am wondering reading the two links if it is only OK with 1.25 inch eyepieces, I used a 35mm Panoptic.

Alan

[Xcris9y]

Thanks guys - any tips for imaging with this type of reducer? Eg spacing between the reducer and the sensor? Just want to make sure I don’t get egg shaped stars 

[Luna-tic]

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 09:40, Philip R said:

Hi Xcris9y and welcome to SGL. 

You are going to need one of these ---> http://scopestuff.com/ss_smsa.htm and one of these ---> http://www.scopestuff.com/ss_frs2.htm ...I think it is on par with the Celestron branded one after reading a review somewhere. Not sure about the Meade ones though!

I am not sure whether there is a reseller for 'Scopestuff' in the UK/GB as I order any 3rd party accessories that cannot be found elsewhere direct from them.  

The description of that reducer says it's designed for f/10 SCT's. The  150 Mak the OP has is f/12, so I wouldn't bet it would work. The $100  might be better spent by adding a few hundred more for a wide-field frac.  I have the .63 for my C6, and it does work well with the SCT. I also have the 0.7 for my Edge HD800, which is not compatible with a standard SCT.  I posed a question to High Point Scientific about a reducer for Mak's, I'll post what they tell me when they answer.

[RT65CB-SWL]

On ‎17‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 15:31, alan potts said:

I tried my Meade F6.3 on the back of my 180mm Mak about 2 years back thinking it would work, now I don't know if I did something wrong but it was awful, I was meaning to try is again sometime. I am wondering reading the two links if it is only OK with 1.25 inch eyepieces, I used a 35mm Panoptic.

Alan

 

1 hour ago, Luna-tic said:

The description of that reducer says it's designed for f/10 SCT's. The  150 Mak the OP has is f/12, so I wouldn't bet it would work. The $100  might be better spent by adding a few hundred more for a wide-field frac.  I have the .63 for my C6, and it does work well with the SCT. I also have the 0.7 for my Edge HD800, which is not compatible with a standard SCT.  I posed a question to High Point Scientific about a reducer for Mak's, I'll post what they tell me when they answer.

 

I use the Celestron branded one with my 're-modded' ETX105. (see photos below)...

<--- photo 1... F6.3 focal reducer and 1.25" visual back.

<--- photo 2... F6.3 focal reducer and Crayford focuser.

<---photo 3... F6.3 focal reducer and 2" star diagonal.

 

@alan potts ...Can you enlighten as to what the end was result looked like? - Was the combination of the TeleVue Panoptic at 68deg and your Meade focal reducer was bending the light path to excessive? - I have been using mine visually with TeleVue Plossl's at 50deg and the view that I see appear ok to my dominant observing

eye.

@Luna-tic ...The Meade ETX105 in its 'original' spec, (i.e. plastic rear-end) says it is F14. - I look forward to reading what High Point Scientific have to say too.

 

Maybe with I have found the sweet-spot or I'm with stupid after all.

[alan potts]

1 hour ago, Philip R said:

 

 

I use the Celestron branded one with my 're-modded' ETX105. (see photos below)...

<--- photo 1... F6.3 focal reducer and 1.25" visual back.

<--- photo 2... F6.3 focal reducer and Crayford focuser.

<---photo 3... F6.3 focal reducer and 2" star diagonal.

 

@alan potts ...Can you enlighten as to what the end was result looked like? - Was the combination of the TeleVue Panoptic at 68deg and your Meade focal reducer was bending the light path to excessive? - I have been using mine visually with TeleVue Plossl's at 50deg and the view that I see appear ok to my dominant observing

eye.

@Luna-tic ...The Meade ETX105 in its 'original' spec, (i.e. plastic rear-end) says it is F14. - I look forward to reading what High Point Scientific have to say too.

 

Maybe with I have found the sweet-spot or I'm with stupid after all.

I will need to check again but cannot at the moment due to weather for astronomy that is. It was that long ago I cannot recall what I saw other than something I was not happy with, I have half an idea it may have been bad vignetting, which if the case will explain why your Plossl works. I had a simila issue with the Sc 12 inch, the 28mm 2 inch Meade 28mm SWA worked OK ( this is about the max you can go, but the 24mm 82 degree UWA vignetted, it could well be a case of too bigger eyepiece. I will check when I get out.

Alan

[RT65CB-SWL]

8 hours ago, alan potts said:

I will need to check again but cannot at the moment due to weather for astronomy that is. It was that long ago I cannot recall what I saw other than something I was not happy with, I have half an idea it may have been bad vignetting, which if the case will explain why your Plossl works. I had a simila issue with the Sc 12 inch, the 28mm 2 inch Meade 28mm SWA worked OK ( this is about the max you can go, but the 24mm 82 degree UWA vignetted, it could well be a case of too bigger eyepiece. I will check when I get out.

Alan

Same here! I have been meaning to check the same 'combo' with my TeleVue 6mm Radian.