Jump to content

stargazine_ep44_banner.thumb.jpg.6153c4d39ed5a64b7d8af2d3d6061f61.jpg

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

Help please. Last night I purchased an old celestron c8 sct, 2000mm fl, f10 on a fork mount. The mount has no power cable so is pretty useless, but i brought it to defork the ota for planetary imaging and hopefully some small faint dso's. It was a reasonable price. Ive got a heq5 pro mount that i will be mounting it onto. The guy said it needs collimation. I know i need to mount it on a vixen dovetail but the bolt holes dont line up anywhere. Its as if someone has rotated the corrector plate housing around 120 degrees. Would it make a huge difference if i removed the housing screws and put it back so that the bolts line up, keeping the mirror and plate in the same spot on the housing bracket,  or would i have to try put everything back separately in different positions and collimate everything from scratch. The picture at the minute doesn't quite get crisp so whatever has been done needs rectifying. Can this even be done by us regular folk? Any thoughts or ideas, instructions? I feel the plate could do with a clean and the primary mirror itself. I just want it as optimum as possible. And can a hyperstar be fitted to these older versions? Im literally starting from scratch with an sct setup. Also what type of camera would suit a scope with this focal length for faint dso's, i have a gp290c for the planetary side of imaging. Sorry for the bombardment of questions. 

20201019_200517.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a look at my more modern C8 SE.  The dovetail bar screw holes may not line up in the way you think - mine has two screws at one end of the bar, (spaced around the cast rim) and one at the other.   Looking from the back, the focus knob is at the bottom and the dovetail bar on the left.

At the other end, it does look as though the front casting could be unscrewed and put back at 120 deg rotation.

Opinions differ on the effect of rotating the secondary mirror or correcting plate, suggesting also that it may or may not matter depending on how old the SCT is.  The collimation though is something you can check with a star test.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mark 2020

I also own a very old (early seventies) C8 SCT and am using it on a HEQ5 Pro mount. As soon as everybody wakes up here I will go up in the observatory and  have a look at the screws (my C8 is already mounted on a vixen bar) and I will try and take a pic for you to check, if this can help

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC a few weeks ago another member was trying to fit a dovetail bar to an old de-forked C8 SCT.

If you can use the wider Losmandy bar, that might make it easier to find a set of 2+1 holes that line up with the bar.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/10/2020 at 21:44, Cosmic Geoff said:

I have had a look at my more modern C8 SE.  The dovetail bar screw holes may not line up in the way you think - mine has two screws at one end of the bar, (spaced around the cast rim) and one at the other.   Looking from the back, the focus knob is at the bottom and the dovetail bar on the left.

At the other end, it does look as though the front casting could be unscrewed and put back at 120 deg rotation.

Opinions differ on the effect of rotating the secondary mirror or correcting plate, suggesting also that it may or may not matter depending on how old the SCT is.  The collimation though is something you can check with a star test.

Hi Geoff 

I just realised aswell the secondary mirror housing turns freely on the plate, the numbers on the corrector plate are nowhere near the 3 oclock position like ive read, also this seems to be glued together not screwed together so as to trap the glass. And.... i did a star test last night and collimation is out alot but the collimation screws are tight down and im not able to pull in the concentric circles anymore. How or where can i start to get this all sorted. I found mars last night but was just a fireball on the one side. And pleides all stars were badly hazed and stretched the one side. Physically cannot get the seconday mirror to move any more the right way. 🤦‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites

The secondary mirror housing should not be rotating in the plate, and the three collimation screws should slacken off.  I hope that somebody who has worked on one of these will come along and advise.  Seems that you will need to dismantle the front end, sort it and reassemble it. Not that I'd want to try it myself except as a last resort.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I have often read advice that you should only ever tighten the collimation screws, I’m not convinced by it myself. The mirror sits on a central pivot. If you keep tightening all of the screws it will eventually deform the pivot or backplate. There are a few examples of this happening. Obviously, if you keep slackening all three screws, the mirror will eventually detach from the holder and drop into the tube, and I think that’s where the only tighten rule comes from.

I’ve not had to collimate an SCT many times, as despite being carried out every time I use them, mine have kept their collimation after I’ve done an initial collimation. I start by tightening all the screws up. When I then need to make a collimation adjustment, if the screw I need to tighten is already tight, I slightly loosen one or both of the opposite screws and then tighten the desired screw. Afterwards I nip the other two back tight. I only turn the screws a fraction of a turn at a time and at no point do I loosen all three screws. After each minor adjustment, all three screws are tight before I recheck the collimation. Because of this, I think the risk of completely loosening the mirror is minimal.

In terms of the rotating secondary, and I’m not familiar with your generation of C8, so double check before you remove anything, but i think you need to tighten that up from the back of the corrector plate i.e. from the inside of the scope. I think the secondary shroud on the inside of the scope screws onto the secondary holder, sandwiching the corrector plate between them.

Modern C8’s have a nut on the inside of the bolts that hold the front corrector plate housing on (which will fall into the tube if you loosen them), so you would need to remove the corrector from the housing to get to the inside. However, it’s worth checking as I know some of the Celestron SCT’s don’t have nuts on the inside so in theory you can remove the entire housing, tighten up the secondary holder, and refit without having to remove the collector itself. You would just need to make sure you mark the orientation of the housing with the tube so that you don’t rotate it when refitting.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently had the corrector plate out of my 8SE, while it may not be exactly the same as the older C8 it shouldn't be that different a procedure to put it back and collimate.

I discovered small triangular markings on the edge of the corrector plate glass, possibly made during assembly to find the best position / rotation in the tube, you could note / photograph these (if present) and where they lined up when you remove the corrector plate.  Before you remove anything though, get some fresh masking tape (I discovered that old stuff leaves sticky residue - test it somewhere else beforehand) and stick a piece all the way from the outer metal casing right onto the glass of the corrector plate, then, using a sharp knife, very carefully cut the tape so that you can separate the corrector plate from the holder, and the holder from the metal casing.  This way you will know exactly how the glass should be aligned when you put it back.  It'll probably be worth cleaning both sides of the corrector plate (there are youtube videos on this, basically treat it like a Faberge egg), I wouldn't touch the mirrors unless they were actually dirty, use an air blower bulb to blast away any loose dust or particles.  If the primary needs cleaning then do it with the OTA mounted horizontally, and use just enough water to wet the mirror surface (use soft cotton wool).

As AstroTim said, it's the same process as aligning a finder scope - slacken one collimation screw very slightly before tightening another.  I found the collimation of my 8SE pretty easy on the whole, I just needed to point the telescope at a bright star (I don't have enough distance for an artificial star in the house).  Bob's Knobs / knurled screws really help.

I wonder if you might be able to fit tube rings to that thing though, maybe just behind the front cell and in front of the rear band that the finder fits to.

Edited by jonathan
Link to post
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By SamK
      After many hours of fiddling round with Registax wavelet settings to process my own solar system images, I've always been curious as to how it actually works. In doing so I've put together my own image sharpening program which does something similar to Registax wavelets. For comparison, I've also added some general purpose deconvolution techniques which you'll probably be familiar with from other image processing software (like Wiener inverse filtering, Richardson-Lucy, etc). In choosing a point spread function to deconvolve with, one suprising result was that the typical stack outputs from Autostakkert work best with a Lorentz point spread function (with a minor modification). Deconvolving with a Gaussian point spread function doesn't really work. Deep-sky images seem to deconvolve best with a Moffat point spread function (which is to be expected - it's already well established that star profiles in long exposures are best approximated with a Moffat function).
      On the whole, it's unlikely that you can sharpen solar system images much more in this program than you already can in Registax. You can see results from Registax wavelet (sharpening layers), inverse filtering (e.g. Wiener), and iterative deconvolution (e.g. Landweber) below. They all give very similar results. In all the techniques there's a similar trade-off between less noise but less detail vs more noise but more detail.
      There are some quick start notes on the first page of the Readme here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/blob/main/Readme.pdf
      There are some examples of deconvolved images here (move mouse over image to see before/after):
      https://50000quaoar.github.io/Deconvolvulator/
      Image credits are on the hyperlinks
      The Windows download is here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/raw/main/Deconvolvulator32.zip
      Example solar system tifs to experiment with are here:
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator/tree/main/image%20examples
      And the project page is here (with Source code in the src folder)
      https://github.com/50000Quaoar/Deconvolvulator
      If anyone finds it useful, do post here how it compares to other tools you use for solar system image sharpening.
      The download and the source code are free, you can use it unrestricted for any purpose. The OpenCV and OpenCVCSharp components which my program use have licence information at the end of the Readme.pdf.
      Sam
       

    • By Desmond
      Hi,
      I recently spent my Xmas money on an L-Enhance filter as I have seen amazing results with this filter.
      I took it for a test run on the Y Cas Nebula last night (not the best night, but when is?)
      I managed to get around 43 mins of time.
      I normally shoot 1 min exposures with my 1000D modified camera but I thought I'd go for 90 seconds as the filter would reduce brightness? (any thoughts on exposure times here would be great)
      The results were not as great as I was hoping for - see below.
      O over stretched it just to see if I had captured the 'ghost'. He's there, but it turns out really grainy and not the nice subtle wispy nebula that I see from other folks.
      So my questions are:
      - is this a tricky nebula target?
      - What exposure times should I run? 
      - Is 43 mins way too little for this (or any) target?
      - any other advice???
      Setup is:
      Canon 1000D - modified
      L-Enhance filter
      Skywatcher 72ED Telescope
      Skywatcher AzGTI mount (AZ mode at the moment until I can get polar alignment working with SharpCap)
      Any thoughts, hints, tips greatly appreciated!
      Thanks in advance!
       
       

    • By Rchurt
      Hello,
       
      I recently purchased my first telescope and camera, and now I want to make sure I have the correct Barlow or reducer to couple them together to achieve Nyquist sampling on the camera (or slight over-sampling). In case it’s important, I’m interested in planetary imaging—in theory that shouldn’t matter for this sampling question, but maybe there are other considerations to take into account.
       
      I used this calculator (https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability) and plugged in my info:
      Telescope: Celestron 8 SE
      Camera: ZWO ASI462MC
      Seeing: experimented with this one, but would like to get optics that allow for poor or very poor
      Binning: prefer 1x1 to preserve spatial resolution, but could consider higher if SNR is a problem
       
      I’ve seen on several forum posts that people often use a 2x Barlow to couple the two. However, according to this calculator, that will always lead to over-sampling. If anything, it says I should use no intermediate optics or even a reducer.
       
      So my questions are:
       
      Binning: Will I be able to see anything with 1x1 binning, or should I expect to need to bin to collect enough light?
       
      Is there some other consideration that’s more important here than achieving correct sampling? It seems like most others are over-sampling, and perhaps there’s a good reason for this. If so, is there another formula that would let me determine the appropriate optics to buy?
       
      Thanks in advance for any help!
    • By gstallichet
      In market for a good quality, reasonably priced long focal length 1.25 eyepiece to increase fov and help locate and view large objects. Celestron makes a 32mm for @$45.00. Is it any good? Price seems too good to be true. What are good quality/price options?
    • By AstroRookie
      Hello,
      despite the full moon and the humid weather I could not resist to take some exposures yesterday, merely to test a couple of things, not with the intention to get something decent. I had all sorts of problems, like my ZWO ASI 120MM (mini) not being able to display any stars in PHD2, so I decided to go without guiding, and honestly, as my polar alignment was very good, I was happy with the results of my 1 minute shots.
      But having taken a closer look at the subs, I noticed strange diffraction spikes of the bright stars (see attached example).; I'm using a Orion 8 Astrograph and a Canon 500D.
      One of the things I modified, I attached a cooling system to the DSLR, bringing it's weight from 480g to 1080g, could that be the problem; I don't remember where, but I seem to have read somewhere that the Orion8 focuser could take up to 1300g. I know I'm close, but still.
      Or is it my collimation that is not ok; I admit, I did not check it, as I collimated last week during the day and the whole setup has not been moved. It stays outside under a car cover.
      Anybody any idea what's going on here?
      Thanks in advance,
      AstroRookie

×
×
  • 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.