Daniel Carter:
@Bill Long Are you using the QHY OAG along with your Indigo? I got everything assembled last night and had issues with clearance between the QHY OAG and the LEO. I had to losen the 4 screws holding the focuser of the OAG onto the base so i could attach my image train to the LEO. The diameter of the OAG focuser is large enough that it hits the LEO. It looks like I'll have to either go to a guide scope or find a different OAG. I made do with what I had and got some first light images last night. I'll post one later...I definitely have back spacing and tilt to dial in. I didn't adjust any of that until I figure out my OAG issue.
Thanks! Neither Bill or I are guiding. The new indigo oag might solve this issue. The qhy has a very large helical focuser base which is a problem. Hopefully the Indigo is the solution. See the link that aygen posted.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
@Chris White @Aygen I have been checking weekly on the Indigo OAG impatiently waiting for its release! Chris that helical focuser is a beast. I already had to shave the shoulder down on the OAG when I attached it to my refractor. The shoulder wouldn't clear the adapter from the 3.5" Nitecrawler by about a millimeter. I didn't think that you guys were guiding but wasn't 100% certain. Realistically I probably don't need to guide. Im running on a MyT and have the MX+ on order (estimated in 2 to 4 weeks finally) so i shouldn't need guiding since I have the PEC trained in TSX along with using a TPoint model. I started off imaging with an iOptron mount and guiding was a necessity. When I moved over to my MyT, the guiding accessories came with it since that was how I was accustomed to imaging. I plan on removing the OAG tonight and see how that goes. Thanks!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Aygen:
Daniel, I can't answer for the QHY OAG since I don't have it. However, Evans from Pegasus Astro informed me two weeks ago that they shall release their "OAG INDIGO" by end of October / Early November". Have a look at it please : INDIGO OAG.
The combination of both (Filter wheel & OAG) sum a 19mm + 14mm (33mm total) of backfocus.
I am going to use the Indigo OAG along with the Indigo FW.
Unfortunately, I will have to be very, very, very patient before setting it up on my 160ed  .
PS : don't want to answer for Bill, but for sure he's not guiding with his Mach II ( ) I've been stalking the Indigo OAG website page waiting for it's release! It looks like a nice solid OAG. I don't like the QHY OAG at all. The prism is relatively small 8mmx8mm prism (I came from the ZWO OAG-L with a 12x12mm prism) and the field of view compared to the ZWO is much smaller. I am going to attempt to go unguided. I'm fairly sure my MyT can handle imaging without guiding. I have the MX+ on order (should be in within a month) and I think its in the same boat as the MyT - unguided imaging should be fine. I don't think it is as accurate as a mount with encoders (Mach2, etc.) but it should do the job unguided - especially at the Epsilon's focal length.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Same here, I've been stalking it for almost 2 months - but it's almost there.
As long as you are not going for 30 minutes subs (which doesn't make sense with the banana….) I am sure you're not going to be disappointed while going unguided.
Looking forward to seing your first lights. Good luck with your setup.
CS,
Aygen
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Yeah I image without guiding on the Mach 2 with the Epsilon. Much easier setup.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Yeah I image without guiding on the Mach 2 with the Epsilon. Much easier setup. I'm taking the QHY OAG out of the image train tonight and trying to go the unguided route. I think I should be able to go unguided with the MyT (and eventually the MX+). Not having to deal with an OAG makes things much easier (I agree, Bill!!). So anyways, I did get some test shots last night just to show I accomplished something. I've never taken an exposure this long before but the first test image was shot in H-alpha filter and was 2400s (guided). I was just curious as to the amount of detail that would come through in such a long exposure. I was able to get the QHY OAG somewhat situated in the image train last night but its not going to work long term. You can definitely see issues in all of the corners and the upper corners look worse than the lower corners. I didn't make an attempt to dial anything in last night with the Octopi since I was having issues with the OAG. I should be able to start getting things dialed in tonight (hopefully) once I get the OAG out of the way. Thanks go out to Chris and Bill (and everyone else who contributed to this thread) for their hard work in getting the ground work laid for getting the Epsilon set up for full frame!! 2400s (guided) H-alpha  This was another image I took at 120 seconds. The amount of detail coming through with just one subframe is amazing to me! Getting this scope up and running and dialed in is definitely worth the effort!! 120s (guided) H-alpha  |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Yeahhhh, you’re going to love the 160ed, no doubt about it. Let us know once you have something to share.
Also, couldn’t agree more with regards to Bill and Chris’s respective contribution. For sure you will spare quite a few nights THANKS to their knowledge (me too BTW). You guys deserve some Swiss chocolate 🍫 😂😂😂😂 - happy to send to the US a few boxes from where I live.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
When you move onto the Octopi adjustment phase just be very patient and methodical. It could take a few nights or more to get it perfected. Incremental change is what you want, and definitely stop along the way and complete a project otherwise you'll start to get mildly frustrated if you try to hit a homerun and get it perfect right away.
It's a great scope.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
When you move onto the Octopi adjustment phase just be very patient and methodical. It could take a few nights or more to get it perfected. Incremental change is what you want, and definitely stop along the way and complete a project otherwise you'll start to get mildly frustrated if you try to hit a homerun and get it perfect right away.
It's a great scope. Those sound like words of experience!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I know its not about Full frame imaging, but i got a question about filters.
i am using now Antlia 3nm Narrowband filters wich are working as well with fast scopes up to f3(in this case with epslion as well) I saw in their description that they have a transmission from 88%. I was thinking about to sell them and buy the Astronomik MaxFR Fliters what is very recommened and used here from a lot of photographer. They have a transmission of min. 95%.
My question is it is 7% difference a big quality difference as well or it doesnt make sense to give a try? I mean the Antlia filters are a bit expensive as well like Astronomik.
Thank you for advices.
Best
Attila
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Honestly speaking, keep your Antila filters. The loss is marginal, and it is not worth to spend money for that. Also, the loss may somewhat be compensated by a slight increase in term of exposure time.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Kaptas Attila:
I know its not about Full frame imaging, but i got a question about filters.
i am using now Antlia 3nm Narrowband filters wich are working as well with fast scopes up to f3(in this case with epslion as well) I saw in their description that they have a transmission from 88%. I was thinking about to sell them and buy the Astronomik MaxFR Fliters what is very recommened and used here from a lot of photographer. They have a transmission of min. 95%.
My question is it is 7% difference a big quality difference as well or it doesnt make sense to give a try? I mean the Antlia filters are a bit expensive as well like Astronomik.
Thank you for advices.
Best
Attila The transmission is not the biggest concern. It will be halos. You can certainly test this before making a decision to see if its a problem. With my system I had to change my astrodons out because of a slight halo problem. Those filters never had this with any other scope I used. Also, 3nm is pretty narrow for f3.3. You might lose some signal due to spectral shift. Always test what you have before spending money on changing stuff like this.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Apologies if this has already been covered. I’ve read most but not all 16 pages of this thread. With the Optec Leo is there anyway to conveniently rotate the image train? Or is orientation fixed?
Tom.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom Dinneen:
Apologies if this has already been covered. I’ve read most but not all 16 pages of this thread. With the Optec Leo is there anyway to conveniently rotate the image train? Or is orientation fixed?
Tom. The LEO is a universal focuser body that adapts to telescopes and image trains using an adapter. These adapters, top and bottom of the focuser are mated to the focuser itself with a dovetail connection held in place with three grub screws. If you rack the focuser all the way out, you can access the grub screws for this upper adapter. Loosen, rotate and tighten back down. It's easy to do and it does not have any impact on collimation or tilt mitigation. It's a very precise and high quality mating system.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
@ Chris, I remember one of Bill’s comments regarding the very marginal impact on collimation while rotating the focuser (can’t recall whether he was referring to the LEO though). But happy to have you around.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I can just reconfirm what @Chris White say, i am often rotated mine and its keep the collimation well. this is my last result and its was also rotated before capturing  Welcome here Tom
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Perfect. Thanks for the info. I’ve collimated my e-160ED but I loose collimation when I rotate so my orientation is effectively fixed unless I want to re-collimate. Which isn’t the end of the world once you get used to it. I also find the stock focuser doesn’t play nice with a ZWO EAF and filter offsets. It’s usually way off so I can’t use filter offsets either. Mind you the stunning quality of images more than makes up for it and sounds like there’s a focuser to match the optics albeit at an additional cost. Sounds like an Optec Leo is in my future.
Tom.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom Dinneen:
Perfect. Thanks for the info. I’ve collimated my e-160ED but I loose collimation when I rotate so my orientation is effectively fixed unless I want to re-collimate. Which isn’t the end of the world once you get used to it. I also find the stock focuser doesn’t play nice with a ZWO EAF and filter offsets. It’s usually way off so I can’t use filter offsets either. Mind you the stunning quality of images more than makes up for it and sounds like there’s a focuser to match the optics albeit at an additional cost. Sounds like an Optec Leo is in my future.
Tom. If when you rotate your image train it messes up collimation it is because your drawtube is not in perfect axial alignment, or the rotating pieces are not precisely enough constructed. I would double check your collimation, as its likely not as perfect as you think. To correct axial alignment you need to either tip the secondary up or down or rotate it a little. Another possibility is that the drawtube itself is tilted so when you collimate you compensate for this misalignment. Is this the stock focuser? The EAF does not have a fine enough steps size for epsilon. It's 4 microns per step, so even measuring offsets will be imprecise. The LEO has a step size of 0.08 microns.... that is 50 times more fine resolution! If you dont want to invest in a LEO, a nice upgrade would be to get a pegasus focus cube... I believe that focuser has 1 micron per step. I'm not sure of any challenges mounting it though, so youd need to research that. Ultimately though, offsets are not a very good way to focus the scope. Focus with the actual filter and you will get much better results, especially towards the corners of your image. Its a fast scope, so even with narrowband filters you can autofocus pretty quickly with fairly short exposures. That reminds me.... I need to ship an EAF back to Bill. He lent it to me while I waited for my LEO. Sorry I have forgotten to do this @Bill Long ! What kind of Vermont maple can I send you so that you forgive me??
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I collimated with the Tak tools and then fine tuned with SkyWave. The results below were from the first run after collimating with the Tak tools. Which reinforces just how good that process is. I adjusted up to a 9.6. Anything over 9 is considered diffraction limited for local seeing. So I’ve got spot on collimation.  I can see the central dots moving around in a circle when I rotate the CAA using the Tak collimation tools (and yes this is the stock focuser) so I suspect that’s tilt in the alignment of the focuser draw tube wrt. the secondary. From what I’ve read it’s hit and miss with Tak focusers. I must have a miss. Re. the ZWO EAF. I’m getting inconsistent results with just normal focusing. Another option is the FeatherTouch Micron Pinion upgrade and a Primaluce Lab Sesto Senso which I have. They fit quite well together and I have that setup on my TSA-120. However that won’t fix the tilt in the drawtube. So if I don’t want to recollimate every time I rotate then the only option is the Leo I think. One other thought that jumped into my head was to use the replacement Optec focuser plate with its tilt adjustment and then get a Primeluce Lab 3.5” LP. I’d need a custom adapter but that should work if I get distances correct. Might even be enough room for their rotator? Anyone know of anyone that’s tried?? Tom.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom, thank you for your feedback. First time I am hearing about SkyWave - but happy to read that you managed to get your scope properly collimated.
Let me just share with you my two cents with regards to your question (PL 3.5" focuser / Rotator). I do have both of them and honestly speaking, there are super well machined and the design is quite appalling. HOWEVER, be prepared to experience quite a lot of tilt while using their Rotator in particular. The way it is connected to the focuser is by far not excellent. Nothing is directly threaded - there is no Male / Female stuff connection, you will have to use the three little plastic screws to attach the rotator to the adapter provided.
My suggestion, especially in this hobby. Better to wait for a few additional weeks/months and invest your money in the best product available out there. In our case, with the e-160ed, and based on many reviews and feedbacks out there, the LEO is the "product to get". I am not saying that there aren't other products which can't do the trick, but the LEO is so far the only product that provides "reliability and repeatability", which are two things more than needed especially with such a fast scope (but not only).
If you want further information about the PL rotator, feel free to PM. My pleasure to share my experience.
Aygen
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom Dinneen:
I collimated with the Tak tools and then fine tuned with SkyWave. The results below were from the first run after collimating with the Tak tools. Which reinforces just how good that process is. I adjusted up to a 9.6. Anything over 9 is considered diffraction limited for local seeing. So I’ve got spot on collimation.
I can see the central dots moving around in a circle when I rotate the CAA using the Tak
collimation tools (and yes this is the stock focuser) so I suspect that’s tilt in the alignment of the focuser draw tube wrt. the secondary. From what I’ve read it’s hit and miss with Tak focusers. I must have a miss.
Re. the ZWO EAF. I’m getting inconsistent results with just normal focusing. Another option is the FeatherTouch Micron Pinion upgrade and a Primaluce Lab Sesto Senso which I have. They fit quite well together and I have that setup on my TSA-120. However that won’t fix the tilt in the drawtube. So if I don’t want to recollimate every time I rotate then the only option is the Leo I think.
One other thought that jumped into my head was to use the replacement Optec focuser plate with its tilt adjustment and then get a Primeluce Lab 3.5” LP. I’d need a custom adapter but that should work if I get distances correct. Might even be enough room for their rotator? Anyone know of anyone that’s tried??
Tom. I'd say you've ruled out collimation of the mirrors. The tak focuser is really a weak spec. I can't speak to your other focuser models but the leo is a solid piece of kit.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thanks Chris and Aygen for your input. Totally agree with you Aygen on reliability and repeatability. Have to say again that my experience so far with the Tak collimation process (once you decipher what you are supposed to do) and backed up by quantitative analysis by SkyWave is that it works and gets you good enough without having to tweak. Having said that SkyWave is a very cool technology. You can ready more about it here https://www.innovationsforesight.com/education/aitelescopecollimation/. Tom.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom Dinneen:
Thanks Chris and Aygen for your input. Totally agree with you Aygen on reliability and repeatability. Have to say again that my experience so far with the Tak collimation process (once you decipher what you are supposed to do) and backed up by quantitative analysis by SkyWave is that it works and gets you good enough without having to tweak. Having said that SkyWave is a very cool technology. You can ready more about it here https://www.innovationsforesight.com/education/aitelescopecollimation/.
Tom. I was curious about Skywave and how it could be used with the E160. I didn't know how accurate the collimation could be dialed in using this software on a fast system like the Epdilon. Since I'm a computer guy by nature (plus my vision sucks) anything that could help with collimation is attractive to me. So is the typical collimation adjustment done by first getting close collimation with the Tak tools and then using Skywave? I've been looking at their ONAG for my iDK so I've been reading about SkyWave recently.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tom Dinneen:
Thanks Chris and Aygen for your input. Totally agree with you Aygen on reliability and repeatability. Have to say again that my experience so far with the Tak collimation process (once you decipher what you are supposed to do) and backed up by quantitative analysis by SkyWave is that it works and gets you good enough without having to tweak. Having said that SkyWave is a very cool technology. You can ready more about it here https://www.innovationsforesight.com/education/aitelescopecollimation/.
Tom. Tom, Is skywave accounting for the offset secondary? I'm sure it is as Gaston is a very smart guy, I just dont see anything on your screen shot that accounts for it. I'm not even sure it matters to skywave, but I do know that you cant collimate visually with a defocused star using epsilon.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I asked Gaston the same thing. Here’s his response.
“The offset of M2 is related to field illumination at the telescope focal plane and sensor location. Translation (offset) of M2 does not impact collimation, only tilt/tip of either mirror does.”
It’s worth noting that collimating using SkYWave is independent of any tilt you have in your image train. So I was able to collimate and then address sensor tilt. I still have some sensor tilt as I’m at the point of max granularity with Aberration Inspector in NINA using the ZWO EAF and stock focuser. So I’m at around one focuser step which is around 6 microns (rough measurement) and that’s inconsistent across runs which way the tilt is.
Gaston also mentioned that there’s going to be a plus and a pro version of SkyWave. The plus version due soon will include sensor tip/tilt adjustments and the pro version is a full blown wavefront analyser.
To answer your question Daniel. Yes, get collimation close using Tak tools and then you can use SkyWave to get it closer. Once you have a model for your scope it tells you how many microns you have to defocus by. Which makes it easy at the start of a night to defocus by a known amount. Take a 20 second image with a star on axis and then run SkyWave on it. Nice way to confirm everything is still well collimated.
Tom
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
