Julien Dufour:
Thanks a lot for your feeback and all the tips, it is really helpfull.
@Bill Long@Chris White you did good job 
I own a 160ED since early June. My camera is the 2600MMP.
My first picture was the seahorse : https://www.astrobin.com/nv9u8k/
I've done it real pain dealing on tilt issues EVERY night. // I'm using the GERD Neumann CTU.
For the second picture (Cave Nebula : https://www.astrobin.com/full/51rfxn/0/) I bought the Moonlite focuser.
The tilt didn't moove for all my shooting week.
The stars were not perfect but friends of mine reminded me "le mieux est l'ennemi du bien" (the best is the enemy of the good).
For my third image I want perfectly round stars 
I started test with a DSLR (Cannon 500D) - the sensor is supposed to have no tilt.
But one of the corner is ko.
=> I think I will start by remooving and reinstalling the saddle of the focuser
I may need your help in the next weeks to analyse the images.
Thanks a lot !
Nice result! Looks more like you need to tweak your backspacing than anything. Tilt looks minimal. Corners are symmetrical. I recommend Blue Fireball machined shims for adjusting spacing. They come in a set that is 0.1mm to 1.0mm. Octopi also can adjust spacing.
|
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.
Daniel Carter:
I have my order placed for the Optec Leo and it is estimated to be delivered around the end of September. I bought the Gerd Neumann CTU and it was delivered last week. I noticed that it was mentioned the Octopi CTU was easier to use for full frame cameras. I'm planning on using my ASI2600MM with my 160. Do you think it is worthwhile to upgrade to the Octopi with an APS-C sensor (there may be an upgrade in the next year to full frame so i think i answered my own question)?
I think i can still use the Gerd Neumann CTU with my iDK (much more back space available) so at least i can still use it.
I also saw that you were using Hocus Focus in NINA for adjusting tilt. Is that better/easier than using ASTAP or CCDInspector? I use NINA but I haven't installed that plug-in yet.
Thanks!
You definitely want to use NINA. In the tilt thread I wrote about how to use ASTAP, etc... but I wont be able to offer assistance on how to capture all the data and analyze using other tools. It's way too time consuming for me, and NINA Hocus Focus automates the process. Give NINA a try and if you have questions about that, I am happy to assist.
Tilt thread here: https://www.astrobin.com/forum/c/astrophotography/equipment/fixing-the-dreaded-tilt-and-backspacing-error-in-optical-systems-with-objective-analysis/?page=1#post-59989 |
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.
Daniel Carter:
I have my order placed for the Optec Leo and it is estimated to be delivered around the end of September. I bought the Gerd Neumann CTU and it was delivered last week. I noticed that it was mentioned the Octopi CTU was easier to use for full frame cameras. I'm planning on using my ASI2600MM with my 160. Do you think it is worthwhile to upgrade to the Octopi with an APS-C sensor (there may be an upgrade in the next year to full frame so i think i answered my own question)?
I think i can still use the Gerd Neumann CTU with my iDK (much more back space available) so at least i can still use it.
I also saw that you were using Hocus Focus in NINA for adjusting tilt. Is that better/easier than using ASTAP or CCDInspector? I use NINA but I haven't installed that plug-in yet.
Thanks!
I use both Hocus Focus and ASTAP. You can easily bring the saved Hocus Focus images into ASTAP and from there copy the results into Excel where you can do more fiddling with the data. Hocus Focus is easier to do analysis with as it does it for you automatically but I think ASTAP is better for isolating backspacing from tilt.
|
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.
Are you going to reiterate a 65h of integration time  ?
Joke aside, marvelous scope Bill. I can't wait for it even though I must admit that my TOA is giving me full "satisfaction"
By the way, I have made up my mind > I will get the Octopi too even though I wont be able to fit my OAG (I am missing a few millimeters). The most recent version of the ASI interface takes up a minimum of 3.5 mm. The installation doesn't seem complicated (from what I have seen via videos). However, what about the fine tuning, anything to cautious about ?
Not going that deep this time, in fact I have had enough cloud interference tonight I will probably just salvage some of this HA, snap a bit more tomorrow and move on to SII and OII.
I have a TOA150 here as well, and it is a very good scope, just not as fast as the banana is.
How to tune and use the Octopi, I think Chris "Heisenberg" White can answer far better than me.
Ha... I doubt that.
The main challenge with the Octopi when used with the e160ed is that because it is on top of the OTA you are fighting gravity when locking the "brake" screws. This creates a cantilever effect, or tilting of the entire unit which can cause inconsistent locking positions. The way to counter this (as Bill figured out) is to only loosen two of the four locking screws at a time. That way you always have some brakes engaged. So if you want to make an adjustment on the lower left corner, you would loosen the brake for the lower left and upper right. Make your adjustment and then snug both brakes back down. You want the brakes snug but not so tight that you cant get the plate to pivot inside. You'll get a feel for it after spend some time with it.
The fine thread screws are very delicate. make sure you dont torque these. If you cant turn them, you need to loosen more brakes. You dont want to damage the screws.
Definitely use NINA Hocus Focus. A little trial and error to see what happens will teach you more than you can learn by reading. Once you have started, if you run into trouble... post here and we can help!
Two words : thank you !!!!
I very much like the Octopi. In addition to tackle tilt, having the possibility to adjust the back spacing is really a cool add-on.
|
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.
I use both Hocus Focus and ASTAP. You can easily bring the saved Hocus Focus images into ASTAP and from there copy the results into Excel where you can do more fiddling with the data. Hocus Focus is easier to do analysis with as it does it for you automatically but I think ASTAP is better for isolating backspacing from tilt.
In my most recent testing I've found CCDI to be most helpful of the three for measuring field curvature.
|
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.
I use both Hocus Focus and ASTAP. You can easily bring the saved Hocus Focus images into ASTAP and from there copy the results into Excel where you can do more fiddling with the data. Hocus Focus is easier to do analysis with as it does it for you automatically but I think ASTAP is better for isolating backspacing from tilt.
In my most recent testing I've found CCDI to be most helpful of the three for measuring field curvature.
Cool, I'll check it out. Thanks Chris
|
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.
Since I will ultimately be purchasing a full frame camera in the next year or so (which means new EFW and such) is there a difference between going with QHY or ZWO (QHY600 vs ASI6200)? I am currently on the ZWO train and I've been happy with my results. So far I havent seen any compelling arguments to switch to QHY over ZWO.
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.
Daniel Carter:
Since I will ultimately be purchasing a full frame camera in the next year or so (which means new EFW and such) is there a difference between going with QHY or ZWO (QHY600 vs ASI6200)? I am currently on the ZWO train and I've been happy with my results. So far I havent seen any compelling arguments to switch to QHY over ZWO.
Thanks!
The QHY600PH-M uses the industrial version of the sensor and has multiple read out modes. The ASI6200 uses the commercial version of the sensor and operates in high gain mode only.
The QHY600 uses 17.5mm backspacing in the normal version, and they sell a version that only uses 12.5mm as well. The ASI6200 uses 17.5mm or 12.5mm with the stock tilt plate removed.
Personally, I had the 6200 and nothing but major tilt problems with the camera. My QHY was much flatter and more orthogonal but on the fast scope you'll still need to make small adjustments.
What I can say is, the Pegasus Astro wheel is better than both QHY and ZWO. Oddly enough, changing out the QHY wheel for the Pegasus resulted in my system starting off very close to squared in Hocus Focus and I only made minor tweaks to get it fully dialed in.
So my recommendation is QHY 600 plus the Pegasus Astro wheel and Octopi.
|
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.
|
Would that be the Pegasus Astro Indigo (EFW)? I currently have the PowerBox Advanced and I also have the Falcon rotator. I have been impressed with their products.
|
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.
Daniel Carter:
Would that be the Pegasus Astro Indigo (EFW)? I currently have the PowerBox Advanced and I also have the Falcon rotator. I have been impressed with their products.
Thats the one. |
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.
Daniel Carter:
Since I will ultimately be purchasing a full frame camera in the next year or so (which means new EFW and such) is there a difference between going with QHY or ZWO (QHY600 vs ASI6200)? I am currently on the ZWO train and I've been happy with my results. So far I havent seen any compelling arguments to switch to QHY over ZWO.
Thanks!
The QHY600PH-M uses the industrial version of the sensor and has multiple read out modes. The ASI6200 uses the commercial version of the sensor and operates in high gain mode only.
The QHY600 uses 17.5mm backspacing in the normal version, and they sell a version that only uses 12.5mm as well. The ASI6200 uses 17.5mm or 12.5mm with the stock tilt plate removed.
Personally, I had the 6200 and nothing but major tilt problems with the camera. My QHY was much flatter and more orthogonal but on the fast scope you'll still need to make small adjustments.
What I can say is, the Pegasus Astro wheel is better than both QHY and ZWO. Oddly enough, changing out the QHY wheel for the Pegasus resulted in my system starting off very close to squared in Hocus Focus and I only made minor tweaks to get it fully dialed in.
So my recommendation is QHY 600 plus the Pegasus Astro wheel and Octopi.
I can echo Bill. I have two ZWO cameras (2600 and 6200) - and I would lie telling you that I am not content with them. NEVERTHELESS, and as Bill pointed out, they do have serious quality control criteria since my 2600 has suffered quite severe tilt issue ;(
In addition to the QHY camera, I would also so suggest to read a bit more about Moravian camera which have also excellent reviews here in Europe.
Las but not the least > the indigo filter wheel looks like very appealing > what a pity they are not selling another version than the 2".
|
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.
I can echo Bill. I have two ZWO cameras (2600 and 6200) - and I would lie telling you that I am not content with them. NEVERTHELESS, and as Bill pointed out, they do have serious quality control criteria since my 2600 has suffered quite severe tilt issue ;(
In addition to the QHY camera, I would also so suggest to read a bit more about Moravian camera which have also excellent reviews here in Europe.
Las but not the least > the indigo filter wheel looks like very appealing > what a pity they are not selling another version than the 2".
The Moravian cameras get excellent reviews. Leo (the author of Voyager) uses many of their cameras and totally adores them.
|
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.
I like the Moravian cameras but I think for ease of acquisition that the QHY600 Short Bock Focus model is going to be the winner along with the Pegasus Astro Indigo filter wheel. I've talked with Keith at Octopi and I went ahead and ordered the Octopi. It looks like I should have enough room for an OAG in this setup using the QHY OAG (I think it is a minimum BF of 10mm and an additional 3mm on each side if you use the included M54 adapters for a total of 16mm. I really like my ZWO OAG-L due to the larger prism size but it takes up more of that precious back spacing. I am open to options however. If anything, I can just use a guide scope since I'm not imaging at a long focal length.
For those using the QHY camera - what are you using (if using one) for an OAG?
It doesn't appear that I can bolt the OAG to the Indigo EFW so I would have to use either the included M54 adapter and a male to male M54 connector or order a custom adapter from Precise Parts (which seems the best way to avoid introducing tilt from a cobbled together assortment of adapters). The other option is to use the QHY EFW which I would rather avoid if possible.
Thanks for everyone's input! The wait on the Optec is going to drive me crazy in the meantime...
|
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.
Daniel Carter:
I like the Moravian cameras but I think for ease of acquisition that the QHY600 Short Bock Focus model is going to be the winner along with the Pegasus Astro Indigo filter wheel. I've talked with Keith at Octopi and I went ahead and ordered the Octopi. It looks like I should have enough room for an OAG in this setup using the QHY OAG (I think it is a minimum BF of 10mm and an additional 3mm on each side if you use the included M54 adapters for a total of 16mm. I really like my ZWO OAG-L due to the larger prism size but it takes up more of that precious back spacing. I am open to options however. If anything, I can just use a guide scope since I'm not imaging at a long focal length.
For those using the QHY camera - what are you using (if using one) for an OAG?
It doesn't appear that I can bolt the OAG to the Indigo EFW so I would have to use either the included M54 adapter and a male to male M54 connector or order a custom adapter from Precise Parts (which seems the best way to avoid introducing tilt from a cobbled together assortment of adapters). The other option is to use the QHY EFW which I would rather avoid if possible.
Thanks for everyone's input! The wait on the Optec is going to drive me crazy in the meantime...
Actually Daniel, the QHY OAG does bolt directly to the indigo wheel. It is tapped for m3 with the 62mm diameter and correct spacing for the QHY connections. Both sides actually, so you can bolt it directly to an Octopi as well.
You do need some dust masks for the indigo though. These are made to cover the slotted holes in the event you dont use the indigo m54 adapters. Pegasus just barely got the machined masks on hand, so email them to ask about it. They should be included with the wheel. You can also 3D print the masks as well.
The OAG-L does NOT bolt to the indigo.
Also, make sure you get the right Octopi for your camera. If you get the short BF version, I believe it does not have the dovetail connection. Double check the spec and confirm with Keith that you are getting the right one.
IMO the QHY filter wheel is garbage. Go with the Indigo. I'm waiting for Pegasus to release a 36mm wheel so I can ditch my other QHY wheel.
|
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.
Daniel Carter:
I like the Moravian cameras but I think for ease of acquisition that the QHY600 Short Bock Focus model is going to be the winner along with the Pegasus Astro Indigo filter wheel. I've talked with Keith at Octopi and I went ahead and ordered the Octopi. It looks like I should have enough room for an OAG in this setup using the QHY OAG (I think it is a minimum BF of 10mm and an additional 3mm on each side if you use the included M54 adapters for a total of 16mm. I really like my ZWO OAG-L due to the larger prism size but it takes up more of that precious back spacing. I am open to options however. If anything, I can just use a guide scope since I'm not imaging at a long focal length.
For those using the QHY camera - what are you using (if using one) for an OAG?
It doesn't appear that I can bolt the OAG to the Indigo EFW so I would have to use either the included M54 adapter and a male to male M54 connector or order a custom adapter from Precise Parts (which seems the best way to avoid introducing tilt from a cobbled together assortment of adapters). The other option is to use the QHY EFW which I would rather avoid if possible.
Thanks for everyone's input! The wait on the Optec is going to drive me crazy in the meantime...
Daniel,
I would love to hear more about how you intend to fit an OAG. With my ZWO stuffs I will need to remove it and use most probably a guide scope 👎 since I am planning to get the Octopi too.
|
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.
|
Pegasus sells a bolt on OAG for the Indigo wheel that has a larger prism than the QHY. Only problem is I don't see it in stock anywhere. Maybe reach out to them?
|
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.
Just dropped them an email.
If only they would produce a 36mm version of their filter wheel… that would do the trick for me with their OAG 🥹 (indigo).
|
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.
|
Im curious as to how you adjust focus on the Indigo OAG. The QHY and ZWO have a helical focuser to help focus the guide camera. The Indigo OAG looks like it accepts a C-thread mount only. Do they make a helical focuser that would fit on that? Also, Im not sure the OAG has been released yet. It does look like a nice piece of equipment though!
|
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.
Chris - I have a quick question about the Octopi for you regarding the QHY600 SBFL and the Indigo EFW. I just received this email from Keith at Octopi and I was hoping you could shed some light on my options:
"I was just looking for the bolt pattern for the Indigo when I received this email. So the interface for the QHY has 6 m3 holes on a 62mm circle but it has a 1.5mm bump out to fit in the QHY FW. If you would like, I can remove that 1.5mm bump off the interface as the Indigo appears to have a flat surface if you would like. You may want to ask Chris if it is actually flat first though. The Indigo is new on the market and I didn't even know it existed a few weeks ago and their published mechanical drawings are wanting so this is all new to me also."
If the Indigo is indeed flat and will not accept that 1.5mm bump then Keith said he could make the Octopi flat instead of including the lip for the QHY EFW.
Thanks for your input!
|
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.
Daniel Carter:
Chris - I have a quick question about the Octopi for you regarding the QHY600 SBFL and the Indigo EFW. I just received this email from Keith at Octopi and I was hoping you could shed some light on my options:
"I was just looking for the bolt pattern for the Indigo when I received this email. So the interface for the QHY has 6 m3 holes on a 62mm circle but it has a 1.5mm bump out to fit in the QHY FW. If you would like, I can remove that 1.5mm bump off the interface as the Indigo appears to have a flat surface if you would like. You may want to ask Chris if it is actually flat first though. The Indigo is new on the market and I didn't even know it existed a few weeks ago and their published mechanical drawings are wanting so this is all new to me also."
If the Indigo is indeed flat and will not accept that 1.5mm bump then Keith said he could make the Octopi flat instead of including the lip for the QHY EFW.
Thanks for your input!
Oh yeah, totally get that bump removed. Its made to nest into the QHY wheel, which of course the indigo doesnt have the same depression. This will save you 2mm of backspacing.
|
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.
Oh yeah, totally get that bump removed. Its made to nest into the QHY wheel, which of course the indigo doesnt have the same depression. This will save you 2mm of backspacing.
I just sent off my email to Keith letting him know that the lip was not needed!
Thanks for verifying that!
|
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.
Advice, please, is this collimation good enough for full frame?
This is a very useful thread. Thank you, Bill, for starting it.
I’m setting up my Epsilon 160ED for full frame. Current imaging train (on-hand stuff) ZWO OAG L, ZWO 2”/7 position EFW, ZWO ASI6200MM, 5.2 mm of 54 mm spacer. Stock focuser for now. Octopi on order, thinking about the Optec focuser.
I tried to check factory collimation with the collimation tools. I used a strand of my wife’s hair for cross hairs (thinner than the Tak nylon furnished).
Scope pointed up on workbench, flat LED panel on top, iPhone positioned with adjustable tripod mount at the collimation tools ‘eyepiece’. I was careful to put the view through the eyepiece exactly centered on the iPhone’s field of view and to make the illumination as even as possible. I used the Halide app for manual control of focus and exposure and the 2X lens.
I positioned the Camera Angle Adjuster to 4 positions separated by 90 degrees (and CAA knob tightened each time) and made a picture at each. These are attached as Positions 1, 2, 3, and 4. If you look at each image carefully the cross hairs are not centered on anything (except the secondary marker at position 1), the elliptical ‘football’ on the secondary is not in the center of the pattern, and the cross hairs nutate about the image, off-center. Does this mean the stock focuser’s CAA is tilted (not sure wrt to what since it is not really centered on the primary circle mark.
So, I am looking for advice. Do I need to fix these errors or is this close enough? What is the first adjustment I should make - primary or secondary? Or should I start from the beginning based on the instructions - but I’m having difficulty following exactly the instructions in the manual.
I have had only one night on the sky since we are having a good monsoon season here in New Mexico (9th on the list of all time records). However, in the few images I have, there are elongated stars in the lower right corner and generally the right side of the image. These aberrations appear in the same part of the image as the CAA is rotated - implying tilt in the camera - but just wondering if anyone has an opinion on whether or not the collimation errors shown in these images could cause those lower right corner aberrations? I can supply star images if anyone is interested.
Thank you all for any help or advice.
Bob Fugate
attached images
 |
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.
Bob,
Bill is better than I am at collimation, but that is definitely not good enough for imaging.
Your margin of error is non existent. All circles need to be concentric and the crosshairs need to be perfectly centered.
That said, dont point your scope straight up. Your focuser is probably sagging in that position. Set your scope flat so that the focuser is pointing straight up. Then check it again. Make sure the drawtube lock is engaged a little bit too.
|
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.
|
Thank you, Chris. I did have the draw tube snugged up but I will try this again. And is it best practice to have the scope horizontal for any collimation adjustments as well? Just want to understand what's best from the experts. Eager to get Bill's input.
|
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.
Thank you, Chris. I did have the draw tube snugged up but I will try this again. And is it best practice to have the scope horizontal for any collimation adjustments as well? Just want to understand what's best from the experts. Eager to get Bill's input.
You never want to fight gravity. So yes, always collimate with the scope horizontal with the focuser on top when using the stock focuser. If you had a LEO on there it wouldn't matter but the stock focuser is not your friend when it comes to precision.
|
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.
20.43
0.90
4.88
3.58
11.02
1.51
