|
Russell, I have put sub examples from the RC and Newt. Keep in mind they are converted to jpg and downsized to fit here so they look even worse. Yes they have star shape issues but that's not the subject of the question at this time.
Lewis I do not have, nor will I be buying a TAK collimation scope. I don't see it as a necessity when so many other people seem to be getting good results without it. I am using the techniques shown in the RC collimation utube videos, Cheshire and Howie Glatter concentric ring laser, plus the advice of Wade on CN to remove the internal baffle tube during collimation to expose the whole internal structure, vanes, rings, etc for easy alignment. My collimation problem is due in part to focuser sag. Collimation looks great on an EP star test but when I put the camera on it goes to hell. Thus I am trying to collimate it via a Liveview camera screen star test, and 'seeing' impacts good results there at this time. Again this question was not about RC collimation, there is another thread on that.
Ray I realise the f ratio light gathering differences, and yes I would need to increase the exposure times significantly. I was trying to impart the focal length differences in terms of the ability to get the same perspective (magnification) on an object. If I can get near the same magnification from the 10" newt, without focuser sag, or collimation headaches, or the need to significantly lengthen sub times then I wonder about the wisdom of an RC for me. It might be a great scope in the right hands, with the right equipment and systems, but at my skill level it if frustrating my enjoyment of the hobby.
|