Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Veil Nebula - 2 thirds


CCD Imager

Recommended Posts

Thought it would be nice to post this image and provoke your thoughts back to those barmy warm summer nights, lol

Actually taken in early December over a couple of nights with the initial intention of a few simple shots to test my new Askar 107 PHQ refractor. I ended up with 9 hours of data over a couple of nights as it was setting early, roughly 1:1:1 for Ha, OIII and S2 filters.

ASI6200 camera on a 10 micron mount

Adrian

Veil_Pr.jpg

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@CCD Imager Pity no one responded to this because it’s a gorgeous image. Lovely and sharp. And the stars look good into the corners.

What’s your view on the Askar 107?  I’m tempted but can’t decide between the Askar 600 and the 107. The former is a faster scope at the same aperture but there have been negative comments about it’s optical performance manifest in distorted stars in the corners of the image. The 107 appears to perform better in the reviews and discussions I’ve seen. But, it is a slower scope. OK, there’s a reducer available, but reports of its performance have been mixed to say the least. I’d be interested in your thoughts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks for your kind comments!

The Askar is excellent in many ways, the optical performance is stunning and there is everso slight star elongation in the corners with a full frame camera, but you wont see them in this image coz it has been reduced in size. I am very pleased. The PHQ line of Askar refractors are their premium scopes and I can attest to that. I also have an Askar 400mm F5.6 which is good, but there are more aberrations and softer stars, than the PHQ, but I am quite happy with it, especially as it does well with full frame sensors. 

Their focal reducers are a different story, I'm afraid. The version for the 107 and 130 PHQ give poor off axis performance, stars in my images start to degrade about 1/3 the way to the corner of the sensor. I am currently liaising with Zoltan as to whether I have a bad copy or are they all like this. Then I saw Lukomatico's Youtube video of the same reducer on the 130, it gave similar results to me. Its a shame, because an F5 option would have been great.

So your choice, better more expensive scope, but slower F ratio or cheaper faster scope, but not as good optically. If you are using a FF camera, then it is likely you will reduce the image size by at least half to display on forums, social media and the relatively minor optical aberrations will hardly be visible.

Hope that helps

Adrian

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts, @CCD Imager. :)  I’ve sort of come to the same conclusions.  I’m using a APS-C size camera and am unlikely to upgrade to full frame. So I think any optical problems would be less obvious anyway with such a sensor.  On the other hand if anything that makes the 107 less attractive, especially as the reducer doesn’t look like runner. I think I will need to cogitate a little longer. 

Link to comment
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.
×
×
  • 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.