William Optics RedCat 51 APO

[R3tr0]

11 hours ago, Jkulin said:

I just had a look and whilst the centres were reasonable this is from the Top left, horrendous star shapes: -

Bottom Left: -

Bottom Right

Top Right

Middle

Sorry Scott, but I really think you have got a real problem with that OTA and I woudln't waste any more time with it.

I will most definitely not be buying one until I see some consistency with the quality

Hay no need for a sorry John< i'll see if they will take it back maybe exchange for something else, I appreciate the info from all on SL.

[R3tr0]

11 hours ago, Davey-T said:

I think mine takes the prize for worst sample so far.

Coma across entire image these are centre of images.

Dave

Hi Dave, I agree you are the prize winner. did you exchange or return or intend to get it fixed?

[FLO]

We have just received another delivery of RedCat telescopes (WhiteCats too) so if someone has a problem with theirs please contact us, assuming of course it was purchased from FLO 🙂 

Currently we have experienced only three that required attention (the majority are performing well and customers are pleased) but if over time we conclude RedCats require additional quality control we will arrange that (sell them with Es' Reid checks). 

HTH, 

Steve 

[R3tr0]

3 minutes ago, FLO said:

We have just received another delivery of RedCat telescopes (WhiteCats too) so if someone has a problem with theirs please contact us, assuming of course it was purchased from FLO 🙂 

Currently we have experienced only three that required attention (the majority are performing well and customers are pleased) but if over time we conclude RedCats require additional quality control we will arrange that (sell them with Es' Reid checks). 

HTH, 

Steve 

Thanks for the heads up FLO, got mine from RVO I have informed them and awaiting a call back.

Edited May 28, 2019 by R3tr0

[Davey-T]

1 hour ago, JimothyC said:

What was your spacing to the sensor on these shots? I had some pretty dodgy stars in mine, but I've now seen this diagram (this wasn't included in the quick start guide supplied with the scope)

Just using a DSLR with supplied adapter so there should be no spacing issue.

Dave

[R3tr0]

Heads up, the lads at Rother Valley are having the Redcat picked up and tested for me!

I'll let you know what happens from there!

[Nikolas74]

I still couldn't try mine.....is there a time limit on that ?

Thanks.

Nikolas

 

[symmetal]

3 hours ago, JimothyC said:

What was your spacing to the sensor on these shots? I had some pretty dodgy stars in mine, but I've now seen this diagram (this wasn't included in the quick start guide supplied with the scope)

It looks like spacing should be 59.7mm rather than the normal 55mm. My test shots were taken at 56mm using the zwo recommended setup for a filter wheel and asi1600. I'm not sure how to achieve 59.7mm using any commercially available adaptors. 

The spacing isn't critical like it would be with using a field flattener. The quoted sensor distances just allow the scope to achieve it's maximum focus range, which would be useful if used for terrestrial imaging. When the scope focuser is almost fully back (normal infinity focus position) the sensor spacing is 59.7mm. If your distance is less than that then the focuser will need to be further forward to achieve infinity focus, but should still give the same star shapes. Your minimum focus distance will be increased however.

Alan

[FLO]

1 hour ago, Nikolas74 said:

I still couldn't try mine.....is there a time limit on that ? 

We are flexible so take your time 🙂 

Steve 

[Adam J]

4 hours ago, JimothyC said:

What was your spacing to the sensor on these shots? I had some pretty dodgy stars in mine, but I've now seen this diagram (this wasn't included in the quick start guide supplied with the scope)

 

 

It looks like spacing should be 59.7mm rather than the normal 55mm. My test shots were taken at 56mm using the zwo recommended setup for a filter wheel and asi1600. I'm not sure how to achieve 59.7mm using any commercially available adaptors. 

Incorrect spacing would not normally result in coma in the centre of the image. Only the rear optical element being tilted in so far as I know. 

[JimothyC]

2 hours ago, symmetal said:

The spacing isn't critical like it would be with using a field flattener. The quoted sensor distances just allow the scope to achieve it's maximum focus range, which would be useful if used for terrestrial imaging. When the scope focuser is almost fully back (normal infinity focus position) the sensor spacing is 59.7mm. If your distance is less than that then the focuser will need to be further forward to achieve infinity focus, but should still give the same star shapes. Your minimum focus distance will be increased however.

Alan

Great thanks for confirming. I was hoping that was the case but I wanted to be certain before I take it up with the retailer. Rather wishing I'd purchased from FLO now......

[melsky]

Managed to get a test shot out of my Redcat this week, here is straight out of the camera jpeg from a full frame DSLR, the bright star at the centre is Deneb, I'm pretty well pleased with the result but just wonder how it compares to others?

Thanks Mel

[symmetal]

Hi Mel,

Your RedCat image is the best I've seen at the moment regarding star shapes particularly as it's full frame.  There looks to be a hint of coma down the extreme left but it's very small and you wouldn't notice it unless you were examining pixels. It's hard to tell exactly as the jpg artefacts distort the star edges to some degree. If I had that one I'd be happy. For an APS-C or smaller sensor it would be look to be excellent.

Alan

[Davey-T]

1 hour ago, melsky said:

Managed to get a test shot out of my Redcat this week, here is straight out of the camera jpeg from a full frame DSLR, the bright star at the centre is Deneb, I'm pretty well pleased with the result but just wonder how it compares to others?

One of the best as Alan said, downloaded and enlarged to 200 times.

Mine's disappeared into Es black hole but it's raining anyway 

Dave

[Astroscot2]

Mel, I would be content with that, encouraging for those with full frame cameras.

[Jkulin]

Sorry but at 100% the stars are truly awful

Bottom Left

Bottom Right

Top Left

Top Right

[geordie85]

26 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

Sorry but at 100% the stars are truly awful

Bottom Left

Bottom Right

Top Left

Top Right

For a full frame camera I'd say them stars aren't too bad at all. 

How many optics actually do give round stars on a full frame camera? And in this price range? 

[tooth_dr]

I've been following this thread a lot myself.  I dont think that looks too bad for a FF camera.

[Davey-T]

34 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

Sorry but at 100% the stars are truly awful

You have to allow for it being a JPEG. 

It looks fine as a single full frame, if it had the usual problem all those stars would be little shuttlecocks 

Dave

[Jkulin]

Problem is that I would have bought the Redcat to use full frame with my Sony, but with stars like that I won't go near it.

[Davey-T]

2 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

Problem is that I would have bought the Redcat to use full frame with my Sony, but with stars like that I won't go near it.

A Tiff of 20 or so stacked frames would look a whole lot better, I have Canon L lenses that don't produce as good a single full frame image, IMHO what is a bigger annoyance with the RC is the focuser getting progressively harder to turn as it approaches infinity making small adjustments hard.

Dave

[Jkulin]

This is the centre which should be perfect but isn't, I agree better, but I still think that WO needs to revisit the quality: -

Sorry @melsky absolutely no reflection on you, just the scope.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Jkulin

[Davey-T]

5 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

This is the centre which should be perfect but isn't, I agree better, but I still think that WO needs to revisit the quality: -

Don't think you can expect much more for the price point, pity that WO hyped it up so much.

Did you see the centre of mine a few posts up ?

I also have a WOZ61 plus flattener that works out cheaper than the RC and produces nice images.

Dave

 

[symmetal]

1 hour ago, geordie85 said:

Sorry but at 100% the stars are truly awful

That's just the jpeg artifacts causing the stars to have unrealistic hard edges in the image. Having random odd shaped stars with no overall trend is not an optical fault. Only the extreme left shows all the stars as being slightly similarly odd shaped which led me to imply slight coma there but it's not definite due to the jpeg compression. If Mel can post a tiff or png we can give a more accurate assessment. 

Alan

[Jkulin]

1 hour ago, Davey-T said:

Did you see the centre of mine a few posts up ?

Haven't seen it Dave as having major broadband problems, so when it picks up then I can browse properly

 

42 minutes ago, symmetal said:

That's just the jpeg artifacts causing the stars to have unrealistic hard edges in the image.

Its not just the edges, the stars are horribly shaped. I have never experienced that with any of my stuff, guiding errors yes but not shapes like that,