11.02
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Hey all, Finally getting around to setting up my E160ED with the new Extender 1.5x from Takahashi. I'll be able to do some testing of the system tonight, as it is finally clear here in the PNW. I set up last night, but clouds came in shortly after. The only things I can say about it so far, is that it is completely plug and play. Remove the stock corrector, drop this in, and reconnect your camera. Same back focus, and the focus point on my focuser remained the same. Light fall-off in the corners dropped from around 50% to around 30% based on the Lum flats I was able to get. Tonight I will be working on actual star images though so stay tuned if you are interested. I will share some data when it comes in. -Bill |
|
11.02
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I've created a base share for the sample data. Right now, there is a Lum Flat single sub and a stacked Lum Flat Master. E160ED Extender Test Data |
|
11.02
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
| First Lum frame is in the share. Really nice frame, is it PERFEFCT, not quote, but damn is that awesome for plug and play with no other changes. |
3.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Thanks for sharing this bill!! I guess I have a new item for my Xmas list? (Doubtful I can wait that long) Besides the impact on illumination in corners, any idea what this does to the spot sizes across the field? (Maybe something Tak can dig up) |
|
11.02
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Nick Grundy: Star quality seems to be the same, the field is not as well corrected as it was in the normal corrector config -- which suggests that some tweaks will be needed for a completely PERFECT field. I am not aiming for that in this test project. I just want to see the plug and play performance, which looks to be damn good. As always with the E160ED, I think this is a winner, provided one understands that some small tweaks are needed. |
2.71
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| Nice! Hopefully you get a galaxy or two before the season ends. Should also be a good tool for smaller summer targets like M16. |
20.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Excellent. Nice to see a result from this accessory. And it looks quite good as well especially considering the plug and play nature of it. I suspect that some of your corner star shapes are impacted by the distance between your chip and filters. I noticed a massive difference with the native corrector when I changed from standard QHY600 with 17.5mm spacing to QHY600sbfl with only 7mm. I have not yet published these findings as I want to test on a night with better seeing that I had before. Hopefully tomorrow... Your initial test shows this is a winner. |
|
11.02
#...
·
|
|---|
Chris White- Overcast Observatory: Yes, swapping to the SBF camera will likely be a boon for star quality overall. For simply swapping out the correctors and firing away, I am pretty pleased with the performance. I lowered the exposure time from 5 to 3 minutes for the imaging run, and I think that was a good choice. Tuning up the system would yield an even better field as well. I uploaded a ZIP with a sub from each filter during the sequence for those that want to see them: Extender LRGB Subs.zip -Bill |
|
11.02
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Swapped to the SBF camera and did an initial pass in Hocus Focus. SBF_Subs.zip The upper right of the field is where some adjustments are needed. Field is in a good state now, but of course can improve with more work. -Bill |
|
3.81
#...
·
|
|---|
| its a bit crazy when the stars are just a single pixel. How large are the pixels on that camera? (nevermind found it 3.76) |
|
11.02
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Nick Grundy: With the extender the system is at 0.97"/px which is quite nice for my usual imaging environment. There's some tilt I'll be working on this evening. Hopefully I'll be able to report back with a well tuned imaging train and some delicious frames. |
|
11.02
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I was able to work on tuning the Extender system a bit this week, and a fresh raw Lum stack of data has been uploaded here: RAW Stack.fit Fair warning though, the imaging environment here has been impacted some by smoke in the atmosphere, so some there is some haze here and there. I did my best to minimize the impact though, so we could have something to look at and discuss. Overall, the field looks to be fantastic in the RAW Image. Much more orthogonal than the first night when I just threw it outside.     Running BlurX on the data, also looks great:    |
|
20.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography: Sweet... |
|
3.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
i'm now realizing, besides everything Bill noted and how this extender is killing it...I bought a new SHO filter set to go with the epsilon. (F3 baaders) Forgetting all the concerns with Baader (i'm researching a home spectroscopy setup now). At the F ratio, with the extender, i wouldve just kept the same filters I already had. @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography you are already saving me money! |
|
11.02
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Nick Grundy: The extender is really nice, and for those that want to trade-off the faster focal ratio of the normal corrector -- they can use normal filters, but more importantly getting the field well-corrected is much, much easier. At 0.97"/px (mine plate solved to 0.966"/px) it is higher resolution yet still very friendly to imagers that have varying seeing conditions. Kind of a goldilocks zone, if you will. You still get excellent full-frame chip coverage, as the data here shows. I plan to use this for this coming narrowband season and in the winter nebula season to produce data. I spent last season with the stock corrector, which was awesome and a ton of fun. I produced one of my favorite images with that combo (Heart Nebula + HB3 SN Remnant - Redux (rockstarbill) - Full resolution | AstroBin) and I am looking forward to what I can get with the extender this season. -Bill |
1.81
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Hi @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography - last night I tried the 1.5x extender on my E130 for the first time. I just could *not* get autofocus to work (using an optic Leo) - no matter what settings I used, the focus curve seemed to be jumping all over the place. Assuming you are using Nina/hocus focus, would you be able to share a screenshot of your settings? I saw in another post you mentioned using 15s exposures (which is way longer than my usual 3) and 1000 step size (which again is larger than the 600 I was using without the extender). many thx for any suggestions. D. |
|
11.02
#...
·
|
|---|
Hi @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography - last night I tried the 1.5x extender on my E130 for the first time. I just could *not* get autofocus to work (using an optic Leo) - no matter what settings I used, the focus curve seemed to be jumping all over the place. Hi Duncan, I use Voyager for imaging. I only use HF in NINA for sensor adjustments. -Bill |
|
1.81
#...
·
|
|---|
Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography:Hi @Bill Long - Dark Matters Astrophotography - last night I tried the 1.5x extender on my E130 for the first time. I just could *not* get autofocus to work (using an optic Leo) - no matter what settings I used, the focus curve seemed to be jumping all over the place. Thx Bill. Are there equivalent values for step size etc? It was quite strange how focus would wildly jump between steps that I am almost thinking NINA was multiplying the values by some default (I had recently being playing with the optec focuser app)... On a completely different note: on your Epsilon collimation post, you mention you use the Tak collimating telescope which lets you zoom-in when collimating - is it this model? https://www.testar.com.au/products/takahashi-collimating-scope I'm finding it very hard to see the secondary "football" using the stock Tak collimating eyepiece.. Regards, Duncan. |
