#1  
Old 26-02-2013, 03:29 PM
alistairsam's Avatar
alistairsam
Registered User

alistairsam is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Box Hill North, Vic
Posts: 1,817
Baader MPCC Mark 3

Hi,

Has anyone used the MPCC mark 3 version for imaging?

I have a 10inch F4 reflector and use the MPCC and it works well, but reading the description on improvements made on the M3, I'm tempted to try it out.

http://www.baader-planetarium.de/sek...cc-mIII-en.pdf

Any test reports would help

Cheers
Alistair
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 26-02-2013, 03:57 PM
MrB's Avatar
MrB (Simon)
Old Man Yells at Cloud

MrB is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rockingham WA
Posts: 3,408
I have had two(one for a mate) for a while now but sadly have had no chance to use one. I'm hoping to do a side-by-side with the mkII when time permits. The mkII still had a very small amount of coma at the corners of an APS-c frame at f3.9
The mkIII is supposed to produce tighter stars too.
We will see, eventually.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 26-02-2013, 09:17 PM
alistairsam's Avatar
alistairsam
Registered User

alistairsam is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Box Hill North, Vic
Posts: 1,817
Hi,
It will be good to see the difference.
I was a bit surprised to see that my MKII works really well even at 58m as opposed to 55mm.
one plus on the MKIII would be the 44mm clear aperture as opposed to the 38mm of the MKII. not sure if that would reduce vignetting on an F4 and if so, by how much.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 27-02-2013, 11:14 AM
MrB's Avatar
MrB (Simon)
Old Man Yells at Cloud

MrB is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rockingham WA
Posts: 3,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by alistairsam View Post
...
one plus on the MKIII would be the 44mm clear aperture as opposed to the 38mm of the MKII. not sure if that would reduce vignetting on an F4 and if so, by how much.
Yes it has 44mm clear aperture at the front, however it still has 38mm at the back to suit the M42 T2 thread, tho I'm not sure whether this will be an issue.
Infact, I measure the new mkIII as slightly narrower than the old at 37.75mm vs 38.05mm
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 27-02-2013, 11:54 AM
alistairsam's Avatar
alistairsam
Registered User

alistairsam is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Box Hill North, Vic
Posts: 1,817
Hi Simon,

isn't the T2 nosepiece / thread removable as in this pic?
this is the side that would face the camera.
http://www.alpineastro.com/optical_a..._ExplodeLg.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27-02-2013, 12:25 PM
MrB's Avatar
MrB (Simon)
Old Man Yells at Cloud

MrB is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rockingham WA
Posts: 3,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by alistairsam View Post
isn't the T2 nosepiece / thread removable as in this pic?
Oh! duh! hahaha
Upon further investigation, yes, yes it is!
I knew the stopper ring was removable, but not the T-ring.... cheers!

Note that it was VERY tight and at one point when it wouldn't budge, I had my doubts.

Last edited by MrB; 27-02-2013 at 12:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-03-2013, 01:26 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hinchinbrook
Posts: 18,224
Got one from the TS-Shop last week so should be receiving soon and will post some shots with my small 5" Newt when done. I'm interested in seeing if they've improved their elements coating. I used to get some internal reflections with the older model and the field was corrected probably close to 98% but not 100%. I see the spacing is the same so it should fit my old adapters. Just swap and go. It's also a little cheaper than the previous model when it first came out.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 16-03-2013, 10:55 PM
astronobob's Avatar
astronobob (Bob)
Casual Cosmos Capturer

astronobob is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Gold Coast SE QLD
Posts: 3,719
Interesting read, all; as I've yet to try my new MKIII yet ? used to borrow an older one (not sure if a I or II, Prob a I) with the 8" F/4, which still left very minor coma at the extreme edge of frame !

I just now also removed the Stopper and 'T' rings, as a matter of curiosity, but then the other thread left on the MPCC MKIII does not match the Dlsr T adapter thread, this also are interchangable as there are three grub screws which hold it in place, therefore, can remove it and change to another with matching thread size ? (I assume) why else would they come out, one thought was, that its holding the lens in place, not much else there holding the lens ?

BTW, Not sure if you guys are using Dslr's or ccd's, the latter may also have interchangable thread options ?

Anyway, I also attempted to mount the MPCC with out the thread in the Dslr T, and secure it with the three grub screws, but they only bite on the very edge of the MPCC, there is a small lip there, but the grubs dont get behind it, Lol ,, besides, prob not good practice, clamping down on an alluminium lens assembly in three places, undue concentrated pressure might stress or worse still, crack the lens : )
Also, Taking the mpcc T-ring off, will alter the distance of the corrector lens to the chip, only a few to 5mm, in this case, not sure if this is critical tho ? ?
Just some thoughts ,,

Last edited by astronobob; 16-03-2013 at 11:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17-03-2013, 03:01 AM
MrB's Avatar
MrB (Simon)
Old Man Yells at Cloud

MrB is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rockingham WA
Posts: 3,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by astronobob View Post
I just now also removed the Stopper and 'T' rings, as a matter of curiosity, but then the other thread left on the MPCC MKIII does not match the Dlsr T adapter thread
It is an M48 thread. I believe it is the 2" filter thread, originally intended to allow you to screw 2" eyepieces directly to the mkIII... in which case one of these EOS adaptors should work.
However, a 2" filter thread is M48 x 0.75mm pitch, I have a set of thread pitch gauges here and the M48 thread on the mkIII has a best fit on the 0.6mm pitch gauge. I am not sure what to make of this. I have also read elsewhere of M48 x 0.6mm used for 2" filter thread.
I do not have anything else at hand this size to try it with, so if you do, be very careful... if you feel any resistance, don't force it.

Quote:
Also, Taking the mpcc T-ring off, will alter the distance of the corrector lens to the chip, only a few to 5mm, in this case, not sure if this is critical tho ? ?
Yes it is critical. The lens to sensor distance is 55mm +/-1mm, which doesn't sound too critical with a 2mm range, but I have read of people "fine-tuning" this distance with spacers to get optimum correction, suggesting there is a sweet-spot.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 19-03-2013, 11:27 PM
astronobob's Avatar
astronobob (Bob)
Casual Cosmos Capturer

astronobob is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Gold Coast SE QLD
Posts: 3,719
Thats great info thanx Simon
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
mpcc

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 10:38 AM.

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