View Single Post
  #13  
Old 12-10-2019, 08:01 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazjen View Post
I also saw a 10 slot FLI FW - it was really a 2 x 5 slot, with 8 filled and 2 empty. It was a "balanced" or symmetrical FW - looked interesting if somewhat expensive.

Yes that Centreline filter wheel is expensive but nicely balanced as the CFW 5/7 really sticks out to one side a lot. I have mine "upside down" with the guide camera sticking out the opposite side to help balance it better.

I saw some other 3rd party filter wheels as well. Seems like there's plenty of options.

Given all the other costs, I can see for me some compromises on the filters. I'd like to go larger, but I suspect I'll go for the best 50mm round I can afford at the time.

50mm round is correct for full frame which is a 43.26mm diagonal from memory. No real gain by going larger.


As was mentioned in another post, the focuser is going to need to be able to handle a bit of weight, so something fairly decent.

Would a Moonlite Nitecrawler be something that could work? There's 3" and 3.5" options. This would solve focuser and rotator then.

Moonlite have a good name so I assume it would be fine. Anything Starlight Express 3 inch or above would be fine. I have a 3.2 inch one on my CFF refractor and its divine. I used to have the 3.5 inch one on a TEC180FL and I also had to upgrade the 2.7 inch focuser on my Tak FS152 to the 4 inch focuser as it vignetted too heavily.


Yes. I think getting parfocal filters will avoid the need to get a(motorised) focuser on the OAG - at least for me anyway.

Yes motorised OAG is a bit of gimmick. Once focused the OAG doesn't need further attention. Guide stars being perfectly focused is not a requirement as the guiding software calculates the centroid to a small fraction of a pixel. Subtle differences between filters would make no difference to guiding.
It would to imaging. I focus the luminance of my Astrodons and its correct for the narrowband and the RGB as well. Very convenient.

Yes, I've used Josh's services as well.



For me, this is probably the one thing I can bring from my existing setup. ASI174 is working well.



There's more options here that are getting better every day, for example: Voyager (about 120 euros) or NINA (free). ekos/INDI too, of course (free).



Assuming the binning "works as advertised", it should be a versatile camera.

I read a thread on this on CNN and basically hardware binning is not possible with these CMOS sensors as they are. Its all software binning and so some of the advantage of binning is lost but not all. Its more effective on CCDs.

And, yes, the Aussie dollar is going to be a major problem for these purchases.

I'll say.

I hope both QHY and ZWO offer this - and offer good setups for it, not just the basics.



For some setups, there's a lot of weight at the back of the scope. It might not be possible to push the scope further up the saddle mount to help balance the DEC.

I have often had heavy imaging trains and its never really been a problem. You need to have large enough dovetail plate holder so you can move the scope around and on refractors you can position the rings to help with the balancing. Perhaps a Newt may be different there as the imaging train hangs off the side (always looks wrong).

I think the ZWO camera has the tilt adapter on it, but comments have indicated that it's not convenient to access, especially if you've got a large FW attached (and guess what, that's very likely). I'm going to factor on putting in a "3rd party" tilt adapter to the image train.
Teleskop Services sells a nice one. Josh can make one too.

Once you have a filter wheel and OAG etc then in the future you simply plug the new camera into that existing setup. It would just require probably one adapter to attach the camera to the filter wheel if its a different brand. So its largely a one time cost.

Greg.
Reply With Quote