Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

rorymultistorey

Is a 1/10th wave f6 mirror better than a faster synta f5 mirror for DSO photograhy?

Recommended Posts

So I picked up a classic... a 1970's - 80's edmund optics f6 150mm newtonian...

edmund6_0.jpg.003e6bf28aef142952df30fbe2ab7b0c.jpg

... like this one but mine has a different mount. It was cheap. Very good condition. The focuser is pants. The mechanics of the secondary holder is (IMHO) brilliant and apparently the primary is 1/10th wave.

But its f6 and I trhink I'd rather swap it out for a faster synta f5 mirror. .  The thing is its a one shot job bc to make the f5 mirror work I will have to saw off a good few cm from the barrel of the scope.

So the question is: Is a high quality f6 mirror better than a faster synta f5 mirror for wide deep space astrophotograhy?

 

All comments gratefully received. 😉 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rorymultistorey said:

faster synta f5 mirror

Hi

Both mirrors would collect the same amount of light. To get faster optics I think you'd need a larger mirror,  so I don't think it would be worth it as you'd need a new tube/spider... Everything.

The main advantage of the f6 is that you -almost certainly-  wouldn't need a coma corrector, so no glass to introduce colour abberation:) The only  -not much of a- disadvantage is that you'd have a slightly narrower field of view when compared to the f5.

Just my €0.02 but HTH anyway.

 

Edited by alacant
grammar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I'd be very, very skeptical of any old mirror that claims to be 1/10 wave.  Specious specmanship is the norm here ....1/10 wave on the mirror surface or in the focal plane? RMS or peak-to-peak? What wavelength was the measurement made at? ...It's a  complete minefield for the charlatan to exploit. If you really want 1/10 wave go to someone with the published means to test it,  or a very good personal reputation.  I've got a shed full of "1/10wave" mirrors, some from very respected names, which test out on a Zygo as more like 1/4 wave in reality. It's very hard to even test convincingly to that accuracy without very expensive test kit. 

Is it even relevant? I doubt it if your aim is prime focus photography with exposures in terms of long seconds or low minutes. Guiding errors, atmospheric distortion, poor mirror mounting, collimation errors, undersampling by the camera, will all add up making the use of a 1/10 wave mirror pretty much pointless. A GSO cheapie will do just fine.

A very good mirror might be relevant for planetery photography by lucky imaging but even here I have my doubts. 

This sort of high quality mirror does have its place for visual use.....once everything else in the optical chain is perfect. 

So what are my mirrors?....all 1/10 wave from OO, and the optical quality is indeed excellent on all of them. But Synta or GSO aren't far behind and on an average night it's hard to tell the difference. Total hypocrisy in a way after my previous comments, but just occasionally the difference is worth it visually. And you know that if the system is not working properly, it's not the mirror at fault. 

The faster speed of an f/5 mirror might well be an inprovement. But the collimation is more critical, not just the general scope collimation. The camera has to be exactly square to the focal plane which is harder to achieve.  The faster mirror has a wider convergence angle which makes the in-focus depth of focus smaller.

Is it really worth hacking the tube of an otherwise nice scope for the mirror swap?

Is the secondary large enough to illuminate your sensor without vignetting? This will get worse with a f/5 unless you change both mirrors together. 

I'd try it as is first. You might be quite happy with it as it is! The focuser will probably need a lot more attention than the mirror quality.

Just my 2p....from a guy who's trashed a few scopes "improving" them....

 

Edited by rl
additional info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thx chaps... Most enlightening

BTW I used to go to a sailing club near Pershore when I was a kid.

So 1/10 wave is not necessarily going to help me for astrophotography. Squaring the camera is more important. I happen to have an orion optics OC1 (I think) 2 inch focuser which I'm going to fix onto the tube. I will be using a full frame canon 5d mark ii with a 0.9 x skywatcher coma corrector for imaging.

 

Having digested the above advice I think will use the brighter, newer, faster, synta f5 mirror AND controversially I will cut the end off the tube in order to reach focus. I mean how hard can it be 😉 (famous last words).

[Maybe I should see if someone is keen to buy it before getting the saw out. Does seem a shame to carve up such a well made scope.]

Also still curious to know whether high quality mirrors make any noticeable difference in  DSO astrophotograhy or whether the only real benefit is planetary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen 6" f/5 OTAs change hands on ABS for £50....and they come with a 2" focuser. Worth the wait until one comes up? 

If you're going down this road I'd make sure the new mirror actually fits in the cell first, before cutting anything. Then, it might be possible just to drill a few extra holes in the tube 6" up and sit the mirror higher. Thus leaving you a way out withminimal damage if it turns out not to be a good idea.....

The sailing club is still there. But sadly the micro-brewery at the Brandy Cask pup is gone...

To your other point, the standard Airy criterion for "good enough" is 1/4 wavelength in the focal plane.  Here you see a double start as two slightly overlapping central discs with figure-of-eight diffraction rings around the outside. It's an arbitrary definition of resolving power but it's stood the test of time for a century or more. A better mirror tidies things up a bit..it's a bit clearer. 

From the AP point of view there is a couple of extra considerations going on:

 If the camera can't see all the details in the diffraction pattern because the whole pattern fits on a single pixel then there is not much point in worrying about the fine details of the  diffraction pattern ..the camera is the limitation on detail. This is the normal situation for prime focus AP where you might be struggling to keep exposures times down of fitting an object to the sensor size. . It's called undersampling. 

You can get round it by using smaller pixels..but then the other point comes in. The light is spread out over several pixels which means that the signal-to-noise ratio is degraded for each pixel. So the extra detail you hoped to see gets lost in increased noise....there is an optimum point for best detail which is what you aim for when doing planetery. 

Edited by rl
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good suggestion above to avoid cutting the old scope up.

Do also consider the secondary size which may need to be increased to ensure good illumination due to the wider light cone of the faster scope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rorymultistorey said:

The mechanics of the secondary holder is (IMHO) brilliant

Hi Rorymultistorey, got any pics? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, markse68 said:

Hi Rorymultistorey, got any pics? 

 

Pics of the secondary assembly ( i hope) 

Doing this from my phone so bear with...

Please note how thin the spider vanes are. They are  made from ribbon,  maybe rubber ribbon whoose tension can be tightened. 

How the the secondary only has an up down adjustment. 

And How the secondary can be rotated around a central shaft. 

Far better than the 3 screws which easily lead to miscollimation if your only collimating with a laser. 

IMAG3873.jpg

IMAG3874.jpg

IMAG3875.jpg

IMAG3876.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stu said:

Good suggestion above to avoid cutting the old scope up.

Do also consider the secondary size which may need to be increased to ensure good illumination due to the wider light cone of the faster scope.

Secondary is suprisingly big.  And the tube is made out of some kind of reinforced cardboard...  I think.  Looks eminently cuttable.  I think this lovely scope is getting the chop😈

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, rorymultistorey said:

Pics of the secondary assembly ( i hope) 

Thanks very much Rory- what a quirky and interesting design! Looks great! I wonder what kind of ribbon it is- you'd think it'd stretch and loosen over time? Guess not- looks pretty taught. Does it hold the secondary solidly?

Agree on it being a much nicer mechanism than the simple 3 screws

Edited by markse68
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By AstroRuz
      Skywatcher 150/1200 f8 planetary Newtonian.
      Bought this originally intending to set up a planetary rig but circumstances call for sale.
      Will come with eyepieces and a collimation eyepiece. Not used by myself and has seen very little use. Mirrors in good condition
      Collection only
      £50



    • By redhat
      Hello everyone,
      Bit of a backround: I've been a keen stargazer when in my teenage years, then couldn't pursuit my passion, but recently, in my forties, it hit me again, as I moved  and life is good (South facing large garden, obstructed only from the North by our house, but then I just move the scope further and viola!). Started with 90mm refractor, but was always thinking of reflector.
      Long story short, I've got my SkyWatcher Star Discovery 150P GOTO a week ago. Bought it second hand, very good condition, and good mirror. Have got two nights stargazing, cought cold and I AM LOVING IT.
      Now I would like to get me a nice wide angle ep for DSO spotting.
      The scope is 150mm / 750mm f5. I've done some reading obviously, and Explore Scientific 82 degree series have all good reviews and fit within my budget. I can afford only one, and apparently  the best for DSOs is the one that gives 2mm exit pupil. Now, for my scope that would be 10mm piece, and that is not within ES 82 degree range, so it's down to 11mm (2.2mm exit pupil) or 8.8mm (1.76mm exit pupil).
      My question is: which one would be better for my rediscovered passion? I'm gonna be using that ep for faint mostly.
      Thanks to  everyone in advance for any kind advise.

    • By Likwid
      Hello,
      I have been doing a lot of research on this and I am reading a lot of contradictory information. I have an Orion Sirius Mount, with an ED80 and T3i for imaging, and ST80 with ASI120MM for guiding. I am trying to get prepared for the colder weather currently. Now, I have read that everything should be fine, I can keep my whole setup in my garage in freezing temperatures and I won't have much cooldown time when getting set up. I don't use the hand controller anymore, and I have read that the display stops working on it in cold weather anyways. I also have an AC adapter for my camera so I don't have to worry about short battery life. I read that the lube in the Sirius will harden in freezing temperatures and could cause damage to the gears. I was going to take apart my mount and re-lube everything before winter just to be safe, but is that necessary? Also, what lube should I use if that is recommended?
      Thank you in advance!
    • By ruskclark
      The Wizard Nebula
      An emission nebula 7,200 light years away and my first proper project of the new imaging year. 
      Really happy with it as I’ve had a steep learning curve with new kit so really pleased to see this image come together. It’s also the first time I’ve imaged it. 
      72x180s subs collected over 2 nights 24/25th August in my Bortle 7 back garden, Whitley Bay, England
      Calibrated with darks, flats and dark flats in DSS and processed in SiriL and Photoshop. 
      Lacerta 72mm f/6 APO
      ZWO ASI1600MC Pro at -15C gain 200
      iOptron CEM25p
      ZWO 60mm guide scope
      ZWO ASI120MM-S guide camera
      Altair Astro 2” Tri Band OSC Filter
      Data collected in APT and guided with PHD2

    • By LachlanR
      I’m looking for a supplier of telescope quality mirror sets at 100mm f4, preferably parabolic. Does anyone have suggestions? I would specially commission if necessary. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.