Evolux 62ed focuser

[alacant]

47 minutes ago, Elp said:

tilt adjuster plate

Yeah. I was wondering what the plate in front of the camera was for. I wonder if the camera already has one? Nothing is mentioned in the documentation.

https://www.omegon.eu/es/camaras-para-astronomia/omegon-camara-vetec-571-c-color/p,67320

Unfortunately it's not mine, otherwise I'd have a fiddle..

Thanks to everyone for your patience. I'm completely experience-less with this stuff.

CS.

Edited July 13 by alacant

[Oxize]

there not 3 grub screws. There are 6. The wobbly has been reported to Skywatcher. 

 

Evolux with focus shift: 

 

And evolux after turning each grub screw a quarter turn. Remember! There are 6 grub screws. All turn in the same direction and only for quarter. After you did 1 round of 6 screws constantly test the focus. After 3 rounds my focus was perfect and not wobbly.

 

[alacant]

Here's the latest reincarnation. This time with trim in limited edition william optics lipstick red.

Lost the rotator, refitted the compression ring collar and -the bit which I believe has done it- fitted lathe steadies, AKA guidescope rings. The rings simply bear against the train. They are not tightened. 

I put a few examples here. But why oh why can't we have longer tubes? There is 166mm between the end of the tube and the focal plane!

Notwithstanding, I intend to persue all avenues.  As soon as I can beg or borrow a tilt adaper, I shall give it a try. With just two weeks to go to new moon, when I shall have to hand back the hardware,  I've a feeling I shall be sorry to see this one go.

@Oxize Congratulations on taming the 62ed. Any news from SkyWatcher?

Cheers and CS to all.

[Elp]

166mm is comically long, even my C6 is shorter at around 105mm.

You should be able to source long extensions, even amazon have m42 ones listed.

[alacant]

Yeah, it's not the extension tubes between the focuser and the camera which is the issue. Rather the length of the tube between the objective and the focuser which needs to be longer, thus enabling the distance from the focuser to the focal plane to be shorter.

I don't think any low end focuser is capable of holding a kilogram or so of gear at a distance of over 166mm satisfactorily.

Edited July 19 by alacant

[Stuart1971]

6 hours ago, alacant said:

Here's the latest reincarnation. This time with trim in limited edition william optics lipstick red.

Lost the rotator, refitted the compression ring collar and -the bit which I believe has done it- fitted lathe steadies, AKA guidescope rings. The rings simply bear against the train. They are not tightened. 

I put a few examples here. But why oh why can't we have longer tubes? There is 166mm between the end of the tube and the focal plane!

Notwithstanding, I intend to persue all avenues.  As soon as I can beg or borrow a tilt adaper, I shall give it a try. With just two weeks to go to new moon, when I shall have to hand back the hardware,  I've a feeling I shall be sorry to see this one go.

@Oxize Congratulations on taming the 62ed. Any news from SkyWatcher?

Cheers and CS to all.

That scope was clearly not designed as an imaging scope, there are far better options out there in that size range for imaging, that really looks horrendous…and to tame any tilt or sag on there would be a nightmare…good luck indeed….😮👍🏻

[alacant]

9 hours ago, Stuart1971 said:

far better options

It certainly can't get worse than either the sw or the current noname brand!
Suggestions gratefully received.
Cheers and cs.

[Stuart1971]

3 minutes ago, alacant said:

It certainly can't get worse than either the sw or the current noname brand!
Suggestions gratefully received.
Cheers and cs.

How about this, relatively new, but from a large livery of excellent scopes and certainly a very good price for a flat field quad scope, I am considering one myself…

https://www.365astronomy.com/askar-71f-quadruplet-flatfield-apochromatic-refractor-telescope?path=111_129_463&tracking=

Edited July 20 by Stuart1971

[Elp]

The WO Redcat is usually a good goto widefield refractor. I'd have one if I didn't image with an assortment of camera lenses, and the fact I also have a Z61 which has performed excellently for everything, visual, imaging, planets (small but sharp), lunar, DSO, solar WL and HA.

Buying new now though, I'd likely go for a triplet. The above scope looks promising, as does the new Askar SQA55 lens, a Starfield Gear 60 or 80, or stump up for the WO GT line.

Edited July 20 by Elp

[alacant]

26 minutes ago, Elp said:

Starfield Gear 60

That looks good.
To save me an hour of search, any idea what that's marketed as in the EU? The rest of the stuff is gso, but I can't find that one.
TIA

[Elp]

2 hours ago, alacant said:

any idea what that's marketed as in the EU?

Looking around there's a few which are very similar if not the same exact scope, note I think the SF has FPL53 glass so some maybe FPL51 equivalent, haven't looked into the spec of the following:

Astrotech AT60EDP,

TS 60mm Quad (don't know if you want to go there again, product TSAPO60f5Q),

Tecnosky AG60.

[Stuart1971]

3 hours ago, alacant said:

That looks good.
To save me an hour of search, any idea what that's marketed as in the EU? The rest of the stuff is gso, but I can't find that one.
TIA

I had one of these gear 60 scopes for a few days, and it was a beautiful solid little scope, but I wanted to piggyback it, and it was advertised as a 2kg scope, but when it came it was actually 3.2kg, so had to return it as it was too heavy for my rings, which was a real shame, I think that have now got the correct weight on the advert, at least on FLO anyway, not sure about others…so be aware of this, but the focuser was one of the best I have used albeit only approx 25mm of travel but that’s all you need with it. 👍🏻

Edited July 20 by Stuart1971