ICEINSPACE
Most Read Articles
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON Waxing Crescent
30.3%
The Sun Now
Time Zones
Sydney
1:23 am
Perth
11:23 pm
Auckland
3:23 am
New York*
11:23 am
Paris*
5:23 pm
GMT
3:23 pm




Go Back   IceInSpace > Images > Deep Space

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 23-02-2018, 12:34 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Question Test shot, NGC2835. What's wrong with my stars?

I'm testing a new RC8 and when it comes to scopes with vanes, I'm used to seeing prominent diffraction spikes with small stars. It feels like I'm getting the opposite here.

Is it the focal length (1625mm), or due to the secondary central obstruction? Bad seeing?

The scope was collimated with a howie glatter laser, and a defocused star looks good.

Any suggestions? (not that I can do much about it with the current weather).

Higher quality image here
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (NGC2835_2018_IIS.jpg)
188.8 KB139 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23-02-2018, 12:51 PM
Atmos's Avatar
Atmos (Colin)
Ultimate Noob

Atmos is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,232
I suppose the first question is what the stars look like when using very short exposures.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 23-02-2018, 01:17 PM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 5,179
Nothing much is wrong here...
Faint(er) stars are round (which is good), the brighter ones have some strange diffraction spikes, maybe the aperture is not clean .. perhaps the edges of the mirror are damaged ?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 23-02-2018, 01:44 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos View Post
I suppose the first question is what the stars look like when using very short exposures.
Unsure of this. Will try some short exposures if these clouds ever end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bojan View Post
Nothing much is wrong here...
Faint(er) stars are round (which is good), the brighter ones have some strange diffraction spikes, maybe the aperture is not clean .. perhaps the edges of the mirror are damaged ?
Perhaps. The secondary looks ok to me, apart from a spider web which was removed. (attached)
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (IMG_7576.JPG)
59.4 KB61 views
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 23-02-2018, 01:54 PM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 5,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by furgle View Post
Unsure of this. Will try some short exposures if these clouds ever end
No need for that, bright stars and short exposure is the same as faint ones with longer exposure.. if tracking was OK (and it was)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 23-02-2018, 01:55 PM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 5,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by furgle View Post
Perhaps. The secondary looks ok to me, apart from a spider web which was removed. (attached)
Spider web was a very possible culprit.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 23-02-2018, 02:07 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Registered User

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 5,868
Looks like spherical error to me. What do the intra and extra focal patterns look like?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 23-02-2018, 02:10 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
Looks like spherical error to me. What do the intra and extra focal patterns look like?
Unsure as I was mainly interested in collimation at that point. As soon as it clears, I'll add that to the list of things to check.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 23-02-2018, 03:04 PM
beren's Avatar
beren
Registered User

beren is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: WA
Posts: 2,662
Are you using a reducer.......over sampling maybe ?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 23-02-2018, 05:13 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by beren View Post
Are you using a reducer.......over sampling maybe ?
No reducer (yet), but I never got my head around over and under sampling. It's a 8300 chip binned 2x2, so using 10.8um pixels it should be around 1.4 arcsec/pixel
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 23-02-2018, 07:49 PM
beren's Avatar
beren
Registered User

beren is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: WA
Posts: 2,662
This a handy ccd calculator http://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability

I recently got the same OTA and have used both the HG laser and Tak collimation scope. Both have given different results (the stock focuser doesn't help), close though, but have gone with the Tak scope adjustments after some research here on the forum ( yet to do a star test for confirmation ).

Have you got an unprocessed image or one without the PI star shrink process done ? Btw very nice image though
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 23-02-2018, 08:54 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by beren View Post
This a handy ccd calculator http://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability

I recently got the same OTA and have used both the HG laser and Tak collimation scope. Both have given different results (the stock focuser doesn't help), close though, but have gone with the Tak scope adjustments after some research here on the forum ( yet to do a star test for confirmation ).

Have you got an unprocessed image or one without the PI star shrink process done ? Btw very nice image though
I'll post a raw fits the next chance I get. Currently dealing with the trials and tribulations of my 4 year old not doing a damn thing I say. Kind of like my gear on a bad day...
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 24-02-2018, 09:24 AM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Link to single unprocessed fits: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rxK...ew?usp=sharing

Link to calibrated, registered, std rejected stack (CCD Stack) fits: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wD...Tg2Jt-mKuT7n33

Link to all RAW data + calibration files (some of these files were not used in the stack, based on their aspect ratio, etc) 102MB: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wH...wIqgfkepLQVB9C

Stretched JPG also attatched below
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Mean NGC2835 P 31x360s bin2x2.jpg)
116.8 KB64 views
Click for full-size image (NGC2835 20180210231726 N5ME P0004.jpg)
154.1 KB43 views
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 14-03-2018, 11:24 AM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Stars are starting to look a bit better now. I cleaned the secondary, adjusted the dew heater wiring, and used an iterative stretching method in PI.

Thanks for all the tips.

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=165380
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 14-03-2018, 12:49 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,672
Hi Adam,
it doesn't look too bad.
Is the GSO RC8 design causing any weight from the camera to
be taken by the mirror?

cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 14-03-2018, 01:50 PM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal View Post
Hi Adam,
it doesn't look too bad.
Is the GSO RC8 design causing any weight from the camera to
be taken by the mirror?

cheers
Allan
It has a tilting plate to align the camera to the secondary. I don't think any weight from the camera is pulling on the mirror. Either way, since this photo, I recollimated using a shopping bag full of beans to simulate the weight of my imaging train (AO, ONAG, QSI683, SX Lodestar), approx 1kg (1.5kg - 0.5kg for the howie glatter laser).

If the tilting plate was not strong enough, or the mirror was loaded, I would expect the collimation to change as the altitude of the scope changed. It measured the same throughout the latest imaging session.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 14-03-2018, 03:31 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by furgle View Post
It has a tilting plate to align the camera to the secondary. I don't think any weight from the camera is pulling on the mirror. Either way, since this photo, I recollimated using a shopping bag full of beans to simulate the weight of my imaging train (AO, ONAG, QSI683, SX Lodestar), approx 1kg (1.5kg - 0.5kg for the howie glatter laser).

If the tilting plate was not strong enough, or the mirror was loaded, I would expect the collimation to change as the altitude of the scope changed. It measured the same throughout the latest imaging session.

Hi Adam,
It was just a thought as I remembered a thread on the stargazers lounge
about people modifying the GSO RCs.
I thought it was an RC8 but I can only find an RC10 here:
https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/1...-rc-dissambly/


I am away from my home computer so I may be able to drag up the article
I thought I read - on the weekend.

cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 14-03-2018, 08:17 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,672
What a shame - all the images on that link from photobucket
are blocked -I thought it was the work computer but
it's photobucket itself.

There must be millions of articles on forums wrecked by photobucket.
Apparently they are demanding a ranson of $400 to unlock peoples photos.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 15-03-2018, 11:23 AM
furgle (Adam)
Registered User

furgle is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal View Post
What a shame - all the images on that link from photobucket
are blocked -I thought it was the work computer but
it's photobucket itself.

There must be millions of articles on forums wrecked by photobucket.
Apparently they are demanding a ranson of $400 to unlock peoples photos.
Doh. I was hoping it was just my phone that didn't want to show the photos.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 15-03-2018, 12:44 PM
beren's Avatar
beren
Registered User

beren is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: WA
Posts: 2,662
Latest image looks good Adam

Did some star testing on my RC8 after just receiving a tilt plate from Bintel.
Noted the new tilt plate didn't have any locking grub screws next to the three adjusting bolts. I used a simple collimation/chesire cap to align the focuser to the secondary marker using the tilt plate, then the Tak scope to align the secondary. Used the Tak scope to tweak the primary to get the baffle tube and secondary lined up { the primary lock down grub screw where not locked down on my scope}. Did five iterations of this and a visual star test {through an eyepiece, no diagonal} which looked spot on.

Encouraging to see the weight of your imaging train doesn't appear to interfere with collimation, been worried about that with the GSO RC design. Think Moonlite has a flange/collar that separates the focuser from the primary mirror housing, although I thinks it's only available for the 10' and up
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 01:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
SkyWatcher 2018 Catalogue
Advertisement
Interest Free Finance
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
SkyWatcher WiFi Adaptor
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Atik Horizon
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
FLI Cameras and Imaging Accessories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement