Meade Series 5000 ED80 First light image M109 + Camera advice needed

[Dave Moulton]

Hi All,

A first light image with my Meade 5000 ED80. details:

Scope Meade Series 5000 ED80 no reducer flattener used

Guiding PHD Through a WO Megrez 110 Doublet

Camera SXV - H9

Expoure 2.30hrs LRGB

Hanckering after a new camera now, wider field cooled. Either the SXV H16 or one of the new 8.3mp cameras. I need some opinons on both options guys.

Currently my scopes are listed below. A Widefield DSLR replacemant is what Iam looking for

WO Megrez 110 F5.95

Meade series 5000 ED80

GSO 8" F4

Meade 10" SCT ( Currently used for planetary work)

Dave

Dave

[ollypenrice]

That's a good first light. I enjoyed my own series 5000 127 and thought it astounding value.

The 8.3 cameras will be tempting a lot of people. The 1.25 filters are 'only just' unless you get them very close. I have the Atik versions of the H16, one mono and one colour. I like them a lot. The square chip is good in that it maximises what your scope can deliver in terms of flat field. (ie no 'long axis' to reach into any coma.) This might apply to your scope. It certainly does to my TEC 140, getting me out of a 600 dollar spend on their flattener!

Olly

[Dave Moulton]

Olly,

Thanks for this. You make a good argument for the 4000 chip. I take points on board with regard to filter size and best fit for a flat field, before I take the plunge I will do some more homework

Cheers,

Dave

[Sparrow]

Really nice image Dave - nice and crisp and I love that image scale - it really puts the galaxy in perspective. Lack of flattener doesnt seem to have hindered it either.

Regards

John

[Whippy]

You don't see this one imaged very often and this one's a good one .

WRT to the camera choice, Rob Hodgkinson's images with his Atik 16hr makes me think there's a whole lot more the 285 chipped cameras (like yours Dave) can do, it's not all about FOV. I'm not looking to replace mine!

Tony..

[Euan]

Hi Dave,

If it's one of the KAF8300 CCD's you are thinking of (Starlight XPress SXVR-H18, QHY9, Atik 383L+) they are better suited to shorter focal lengths due to the small pixels, but if you were to put it on your 10" SCT you could always run it binned 2x2

[RichieJarvis]

Totally agree - the 285 is an awesome chip - I just wish it were bigger...

Which is why I am saving for an SXV-H18 at the moment - planning to double-capture with the H9 and H18....

Good shot as well btw Dave

[jnp]

Very nice indeed and those faint surrounding galaxies have come up nicely too. John

[Dave Moulton]

Really nice image Dave - nice and crisp and I love that image scale - it really puts the galaxy in perspective. Lack of flattener doesnt seem to have hindered it either.

Regards

John

Thanks John good luck with the twin refractor project

[Dave Moulton]

Very nice indeed and those faint surrounding galaxies have come up nicely too. John

Cheers John

[Dave Moulton]

Hi Dave,

If it's one of the KAF8300 CCD's you are thinking of (Starlight XPress SXVR-H18, QHY9, Atik 383L+) they are better suited to shorter focal lengths due to the small pixels, but if you were to put it on your 10" SCT you could always run it binned 2x2

I have kit that would suit the chip but more spending on filters is an issue.

thanks for this

Dave

[Dave Moulton]

Totally agree - the 285 is an awesome chip - I just wish it were bigger...

Which is why I am saving for an SXV-H18 at the moment - planning to double-capture with the H9 and H18....

Good shot as well btw Dave

Sounds interesting. I currently have three scopes on my rig so that could be an option, given another camera. Not used registar, I guess that would be what you would use to combine.

Dave

[Dave Moulton]

You don't see this one imaged very often and this one's a good one .

WRT to the camera choice, Rob Hodgkinson's images with his Atik 16hr makes me think there's a whole lot more the 285 chipped cameras (like yours Dave) can do, it's not all about FOV. I'm not looking to replace mine!

Tony..

Tony,

Not looking to replace mine either. I agree about Robs pics BTW I am looking for another option to my old DSLR. The ability to do some Narrowband of big nebs interests me as well. I do take your point though the SXV-H9 has a lot more work to do in my back garden.

Dave

[Whippy]

I think therein lies your problem Dave, to get that size of chip without spending a lot of money means that it'd be another DSLR but narrowband would be tricky, not to mention the expense of the larger filters. It'll be interesting when the 8300 chipped cameras start being used en masse to see if 1.25" filters will work or not.

FWIW, it's entirely possible to image large nebulae with the H9. I managed a 3 pane mosiac of the California Nebula in Ha with my Atik and ZS66. Had I owned the WO field flattener II at the time, it'd be two panes.

Tony..

[Euan]

It'll be interesting when the 8300 chipped cameras start being used en masse to see if 1.25" filters will work or not.

The QHY9 has been around for a while now, and here is what one of the dealers had to say...

You could use 1.25" filters, but your really swimming with the sharks if you do...

Go with 2" filters..

It really depends on the filter to CCD distance and the speed of the optics.

The Atik looks like it has the shortest CCD to front face distance but I don't have the details on it yet.

To be honest if I bought a 8300 chip CCD I would stick with 2" just because CCD's are only going to get bigger, and I'm a sucker for upgrading, so 2" filters are going to be a better buy.

[Whippy]

The QHY9 has indeed been around for a while Euan but hardly anyone's got one, hence I mentioned about the cameras being used en masse. As you mention, if the Atik is the 'shallowest' so you might get away with it but say, the H18 might not so it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

Tony..

[RichieJarvis]

I've been reading info on the Atik Yahoo group that the vignetting on the 8300 KAF chips isn't too bad - the SXV-H18 isn't released yet, so waiting with bated breath.

To be honest though, my personal feeling is that filters are so expensive that I'll stick with the 1.25" filters for a while (translates as 'until SWMBO isn't looking') and upgrade later. My hope is that the FoV will still be sufficient to make a big difference anyway with cropping - and of course, the additional detail provided by the smaller pixels will help as well.

Dave - my plan is to mount the H18 on the Genesis, and the H9 on the C8 with an F/6.3 Focal Reducer, and then collimate them precisely. - that way I can get lovely close-ins of small planetaries whilst also catching the widefield - thats the theory anyway - time shall tell!

Cheers,

Richie

[Dave Moulton]

Thanks guys for all the info. It does seem that even talking to the dealers that 1 1/4" filters with the KAF8300 are possible but they have to be close. You would think that when these cameras hit the streets then the guesswork would not have to feature

Anyway the news is I have taken the plunge this morning and impulsively ordered a new camera a QSI 583WS with the internal 1 1/4" filter wheel the proximity of the wheel to the chip I am assured makes it do able with set ups as fast as mine. ED80 F6 WO Megrez 110 F5.95 and a GSO 8" Newt at F4. If the camera works with the Newt then its a bonus

Three week delivery wait though

I will keep you posted,

Dave

[RichieJarvis]

One thing I would like someone to explain (preferably with pictures!) is why it has to be closer to the chip to avoid vignetting. My thoughts are that it should be further away?

Any thoughts/explanations gratefully received!

Cheers,

Richie

[Dave Moulton]

One thing I would like someone to explain (preferably with pictures!) is why it has to be closer to the chip to avoid vignetting. My thoughts are that it should be further away?

Any thoughts/explanations gratefully received!

Cheers,

Richie

Richie, I wish I could Mate. The vignetting effect I believe can be caused in several ways. If the filters intrude into the light cone falling onto the chip then maybe mechanical vignetting will happen I just don't know why. Everone says if you can get 1 1/4" filters up close to the 8300 chip then it should be OK Down to F4. Having put my faith in the experts I'm hoping so, otherwise its a major spend on filters

Dave

[RobH]

I had an H16 and while I agree with Olly re. chip size and shape, I was never happy with it. I found it to be a lot less sensitive than the 16HR, and had several issues with it that, although Terry sorted it out for me, caused me to lose confidence in the camera.

I am looking at different options for a replacement so I can go back to imaging with 2 scopes and cameras at the same time again, and at the moment I'm favouring one of the 8300 chipped cameras, as it will give a good FOV, be very tight on short FL images, and will be nice and sensitive while still having good resolution in 2x2 binned mode at long FL's, which will suit the 10 inch F8 RC scope I have on order, plus it should be a real beauty with the TMB.

There is a good M81 in the DSO section taken with the Atik 383 and 1 1/4 inch filters that doesn't suffer from vignetting, and still has great resolution binned 2x2.

Thanks for the kind words BTW folks .

Cheers

Rob

[MartinB]

As someone who has done more than my fair share of astro purchasing all I can say is that a few months after you have made your purchasing you will probably be hankering after something else! Sorry that's not very helpful is it?!

[RichieJarvis]

As someone who has done more than my fair share of astro purchasing all I can say is that a few months after you have made your purchasing you will probably be hankering after something else! Sorry that's not very helpful is it?!

I am glad I am not the only one suffering from that complaint!!