11.95
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila: I use a heated dew shield. I had it custom made by Astrozap to only be 10" and it sits back 1" from the lip of the end of the tube. |
1.51
...
·
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila: Thank You. and for the back side u are using the fan or a dew tap as well? |
|
11.95
...
·
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila:Kaptas Attila: Just the fan. |
4.17
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
I ran across this today and was wondering if anyone had used one yet. I think they just came out so I doubt there are many out in the wild yet but it looks like it could be useful taking flats. It looks similar to the Pegasus FlatMaster. PrimaLuce Labs Giotto 185mm Flat Field Generator: https://primalucelabusa.com/primalucelab-giotto-185mm-smart-flat-field-generator-pri-pllgiotto185.html |
19.90
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Daniel Carter: Would probably be more appropriate to discuss in a separate thread. Lets keep this one focused on the e160ed. |
|
19.90
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
In case anyone is interested in seeing a full resolution (Which on ABIN is actually displayed at 2:1) image of the IMX455 and e160ed:  I'm stunned by the field size and the details that this combo can capture. I encourage you to take a moment and peruse this field. The only thing cropped off was the dither edge. It is 9348x6256 pixels. To anyone who is planning to setup this scope and chip combo... you are in for a real treat if you put the effort into dialing in image train tilt and spacing! @Bill Long has also posted some full resolution examples. It's mind boggling what you get with the IMX455+e160ed. |
4.88
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Indeed, very stunning field of view. I can't imagine how efficient such FOV could be while doing MOSAICs - jaw-dropping. I think I will get rid of my whole FSQ85 setup (with the 2600mm) and just get a Moravian (full frame)  .
|
|
4.17
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Daniel Carter: I'll ask on another thread. I though it may be of use for the 160 which is why I asked if anyone had used one on this thread. |
|
4.17
...
·
|
|---|
Aygen: Is anyone here using the Moravian full frame camera with their E-160? I looked at it and was considering buying it but opted for the QHY600 with the short back focal length since that was being used by several people on this thread. It seemed like it would be easier to get accessories for the QHY in the US compared to the Moravian cameras but I'm not sure. I haven't had any personal experience but I've read good reviews of the Moravian cameras. |
|
19.90
...
·
|
|---|
I haven't used the moravian but in hindsight I wish I had gone that way. I'm happy with my qhy600 standard backfocus camera, but I'm annoyed by qhy quality control with their accessories. Also with the e160ed I don't have enough space for an oag if I needed one. my primary mount has AE so i dont need one but if i wanted to grab and go with my smaller more portable mount it might not perform unguided, and I hate the idea of a guidescope. You should be fine with the short BF to add an oag if needed. |
|
4.17
...
·
|
|---|
I haven't used the moravian but in hindsight I wish I had gone that way. I'm happy with my qhy600 standard backfocus camera, but I'm annoyed by qhy quality control with their accessories. I ordered the QHY600 with the short back focal length and I am able to fit a QHY OAG in the imaging train. I don't have a mount that has encoders (maybe one day - Im using a MyT mount right now and have the MX+ on backorder) so I wanted to make sure I could get an OAG in there. I agree with you - I don't like the idea of using a guide scope. What else is in your image train that may keep you from using an OAG if you don't mind me asking? |
|
19.90
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Daniel Carter:I haven't used the moravian but in hindsight I wish I had gone that way. I'm happy with my qhy600 standard backfocus camera, but I'm annoyed by qhy quality control with their accessories. the QHY takes up 17.5mm. Octopi 5.5mm. Pegasus wheel 19.3mm. That doesn't leave enough room for a decent oag. I'm not a fan of qhy accessories, but if I needed to I could probably get that in there. |
|
4.17
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
the QHY takes up 17.5mm. Octopi 5.5mm. Pegasus wheel 19.3mm. Understandable. I'm using the QHY OAG which takes up 13mm of backspace (10mm for the OAG and another 3mm for their M54 adapter). I would prefer a larger prism than the 8x8 on the QHY but I settled on the QHY. The PP adapter (out for delivery today) has threads to screw onto the OAG M54 adapter. I've been debating ordering another PP adapter ($$$ adds up getting those custom adapters though) that will go from the corrector that bolts on to the OAG instead of using QHY's M54 threaded adapter. I'm not thrilled about using the threaded adapter on the OAG. If I had any forethought I would have just ordered the PP adapter that bolts to the OAG in the first place. I would really like to get an Optec Sagitta or Pegasus SCOPS in there but like you mentioned, there just isn't enough room even with the SBFL QHY600. I'm really interested in the Pegasus Indigo OAG (it has a 12x8 prism) but it hasn't been released yet. |
|
4.88
...
·
|
|---|
As per my last exchange with Keith, his most updated version (Octopi) takes up at least 3.5mm of backfocus. But even with that, that doesn't really leave lots of room for an OAG. What I plan to do is to get the Pegasus Indigo FW along with the Indigo OAG, which together have an optical BF of 33mm (19+14). For example, with the ASI 6200, that would result of : 12.5mm (Camera)+3.5mm (Octopi) + 33 (Indigos FW & OAG) = 49mm. Delta to the recommended BF for the e-160ed could be easily filled with the Octopi which may be adjusted up to 11mm. |
|
4.17
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Aygen: Its worth mentioning that its a good idea to keep the sensor as close to the filters as possible. Keith at Octopi recommends setting the octopi close to the zero point to keep the sensor close to the filters to reduce vignetting. He recommended setting it at 2 to 3 mm (so a total of 5 to 6mm total back space) so you still have room to adjust inwards if needed. |
|
1.51
...
·
|
|---|
Hi Guys. I was informed that from the corrector on i have a BF of 56.2 and octopi didnt use any BF. Are they wrong by Takahashi Europe? I dont think so! normaly camera need 17.5 and adapters from m48 to 54 needs 1 mm and FW need 21 in this case there is enoug space for an oag! Am i wrong that qgy600 also 17.5 mm BF have? cheers |
|
4.88
...
·
|
|---|
Correct about the BF from the corrector. Don’t forget to consider also the filters thickness in your calculations. The Octopi takes up at least 3.5mm of BF. You should have place for an OAG. |
|
4.17
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila: The Octopi takes up a minimum of 3mm (maybe a little over with powder coating) if you are using the version designed to interface with the Indigo otherwise its 3.5mm with the rim for the QHY filter wheel. Here is my designed setup: QHY600 SBFL 12.5 mm Octopi 4.5 mm Indigo EFW 19.0 mm Filter Offset -0.33 mm (Astronomik MaxFR filters are 1mm thick) QHY OAG 10.0 mm QHY M54 Adapter 3.0 mm PP Adapter 7.5 mm TOTAL: 56.17 mm Required BF 56.2 mm If you do use the regular QHY600 with 17.5 mm back focus, you can change the adapter length between the corrector and your OAG (if you are using one) to adjust for that extra 5mm of spacing. I have 1.5mm of back focus adjustment inwards on the Octopi in this design so hopefully I won't need that much going inwards. Hope this helps! |
|
19.90
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
There is confusion about spacing. Setting it straight: Qhy standard 600: 17.5mm Qhy 020002 dovetail adapter to connect to FW: 4MM Octopi (at zero point) which replaces qhy 020002: 3.5mm This is true if you use the qhy filter wheel. If not, then the octopi takes up 5.5mm (unless you have it specially machined to remove the knub that nests into the qhy filter wheel). Hope this helps. |
|
1.51
...
·
|
|---|
But why should take Octopi 3.5 mm! René by Tak Europe told me its dont takes nothing. Last i could screw on a falcon ratator and i had woth filters (0.7mm) the exact 56.2 mm BF I dont know why the focuser takes 3.5mm! They told me it s have the same size like the iriginal one, and its doesnt took any BF, right? |
|
4.88
...
·
|
|---|
Absolutely helpful- thanks for chiming in.
|
|
19.90
...
·
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila: i dont know what camera you have. See my post above. If you use the qhy600 then the octopi replaces their 4mm adapter. So in that case it doesn't take up any additional backspacing. (Actually a little less) Don't confuse this with the octopi taking up zero backspacing though. |
|
1.51
...
·
|
|---|
@Chris White if i undertand rigt, if i am not at zero point just 1 mm out i need to count this 1 mm to the BF as well, in this case the BF is just 55.2 plus filters? |
|
1.51
...
·
|
|---|
I am using the 268 mono APSC
|
|
11.95
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Kaptas Attila: With this camera you do not use the QHY Dovetail adapter 020002, so you will need to account for the Octopi, which will use 3.5mm on the QHY wheel. |
.