Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Equipment Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 17-02-2019, 10:07 PM
skogpingvin's Avatar
skogpingvin (Bill)
Registered User

skogpingvin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Kew East, Melbourne
Posts: 69
saxon FCD100 127 focuser

Hi all, I'm mucking about with a saxon FCD100 127 APO for my job. I've got a question for the brains trust, because I'm not sure I understand the geometry.

To focus on infinity with my little 20mm 1.25" test eyepiece and the diagonal, I needed one of the two 37.5mm spacers supplied with the scope. The focuser was racked out to about 26mm.

To focus on infinity with my DSLR (without the diagonal) I needed both spacers and even then the focuser was racked all the way out to 44mm.

I've attached two pictures showing both of these.

Perhaps I'm wrong here, but I can't see any application that would require no spacer to be in the train. A shorter (non-parfocal) focal length eyepiece might require racking in, but not by 20mm, right? Removing the diagonal and just going for the eyepiece would require more spacers, right?


Or am I completely wrong?
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (IMG_1948 Focus at infinity with DSLR.jpg)
193.6 KB14 views
Click for full-size image (IMG_1949 Focus at infinity with eyepiece.jpg)
192.9 KB14 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 17-02-2019, 11:33 PM
casstony
Registered User

casstony is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Warragul, Vic
Posts: 3,866
With a reducer/flattener in front of the dslr you probably wouldn't need any spacers and the focuser would be racked in a fair way.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 18-02-2019, 01:32 AM
Ukastronomer's Avatar
Ukastronomer (Jeremy)
Registered User

Ukastronomer is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Llandysul, WALES, UK
Posts: 724
Surely no scope needs spacers between the diagonal and scope with eyepieces, I just place the DSLR on the diagonal
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 18-02-2019, 07:51 AM
skogpingvin's Avatar
skogpingvin (Bill)
Registered User

skogpingvin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Kew East, Melbourne
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by casstony View Post
With a reducer/flattener in front of the dslr you probably wouldn't need any spacers and the focuser would be racked in a fair way.

Aah, I hadn't thought of that - I have a reducer/flattener on my Sharpstar 107, but it still racks out a fair way (to about 68mm) for the ASI.


Having thought of that - my refractor has an OAG and a filter wheel on it between the flattener and the CMOS well - that's going to push the focus back a fair way. Perhaps I'm being overly harsh on the designers.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 18-02-2019, 07:53 AM
skogpingvin's Avatar
skogpingvin (Bill)
Registered User

skogpingvin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Kew East, Melbourne
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ukastronomer View Post
Surely no scope needs spacers between the diagonal and scope with eyepieces, I just place the DSLR on the diagonal

I wouldn't want to put the DSLR on the diagonal - you get an extra element between the sensor and the objective on which dust can settle.


But the elements I'd neglected to think about were filter wheel and OAG. I think that might explain the design.
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 12:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Nitecore
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement