#1  
Old 15-06-2012, 05:50 AM
dvj's Avatar
dvj (John)
Registered User

dvj is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 748
New 8-inch f/2.8 from ASA

http://www.astrosysteme.at/eng/h-series.html

60mm image circle as a feature for use the big arrays.

The images are starting to come in from the ASA gang taken with this instrument and Proline 16803.
New images here: and more getting posted weekly.

http://www.astrostudio.at/1_Deep%20S...da29a8eb77d034



jg
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 15-06-2012, 07:24 AM
2stroke's Avatar
2stroke (Jay)
The devil's advocate

2stroke is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 816
Dam thats one fast newt lol just when you thought a F4 was hard to collimate think of this haha. Whats the price tag?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15-06-2012, 09:11 AM
cometcatcher's Avatar
cometcatcher (Kevin)
<--- Comet Hale-Bopp

cometcatcher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloudy Mackay
Posts: 6,126
At some point, a lot of us that are into imaging go through f/ratio fever like visual observers go through aperture fever.

I have a 5.5" f3.64 Schmidt Newtonian and it's a pain.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15-06-2012, 03:13 PM
alocky's Avatar
alocky (Andrew lockwood)
PI popular people's front

alocky is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: perth australia
Posts: 1,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher View Post
At some point, a lot of us that are into imaging go through f/ratio fever like visual observers go through aperture fever.

I have a 5.5" f3.64 Schmidt Newtonian and it's a pain.
The only cure for aperture fever is more aperture :-), I suspect the only cure for Ffever is to encase oneself in a glass sphere.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16-06-2012, 07:43 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,515
On paper sounds great.

The obvious question is how much can you trust their quality control or ability to engineer a repeatable reliable scope?

How's about you get one first and let us all know!

Would they be any better than these at less than 1/4 the price?

http://www.powernewts.com/page-0#!

Greg.

Last edited by gregbradley; 16-06-2012 at 08:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16-06-2012, 11:16 AM
RobF's Avatar
RobF (Rob)
Mostly harmless...

RobF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,526
The ASA appears to have double spider vanes. Wonder what that does to difrraction spikes?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 16-06-2012, 12:15 PM
Peter.M's Avatar
Peter.M
Registered User

Peter.M is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 914
I dont know about the viability of these fast newts, the secondary is 90mm which is 20% of the area of the primary. So the aperture is only 160mm useable, this makes it a f3.75. It also has 45% central obstruction. I think personally I would prefer the FSQ106 with reducer that gives f3.6, I know the focal length would be shorter but I think it would be the cheaper more reliable option.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 16-06-2012, 12:20 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF (Rob)
Mostly harmless...

RobF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,526
I couldn't see a reference to what corrector, and if included (presumably Keller and is included)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 16-06-2012, 12:57 PM
cometcatcher's Avatar
cometcatcher (Kevin)
<--- Comet Hale-Bopp

cometcatcher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloudy Mackay
Posts: 6,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.M View Post
So the aperture is only 160mm useable, this makes it a f3.75....
Equivalent to, yes. I believe they call this a T-stop. So the F/ratio may still be F2.8 but the T-stop would be higher due to light loss.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzSlQRewS7Q

I discovered this with my f3.64 SN also being no real advantage over an unobstructed f5. It's a bit of a false economy really!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 16-06-2012, 01:04 PM
Peter.M's Avatar
Peter.M
Registered User

Peter.M is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 914
I dare say this is the corrector

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=16897
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 16-06-2012, 01:07 PM
Peter.M's Avatar
Peter.M
Registered User

Peter.M is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher View Post
Equivalent to, yes. I believe they call this a T-stop.
Ahh thanks, I was only going from logic!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 16-06-2012, 07:08 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.M View Post
I dont know about the viability of these fast newts, the secondary is 90mm which is 20% of the area of the primary. So the aperture is only 160mm useable, this makes it a f3.75. It also has 45% central obstruction. I think personally I would prefer the FSQ106 with reducer that gives f3.6, I know the focal length would be shorter but I think it would be the cheaper more reliable option.
I have seen side by side comparison shots between Tak Epsilon 180 F2.8 and FSQ 106 (not with reducer).

The Epsilon shots were always less time for similar depth of shot and perhaps slightly deeper but the star sizes were always much larger and a less fine look to the images than the FSQ ones. Bottom line was the FSQ images always looked better.

The sample images of this ASA 200 though do have very fine small stars which is very appealling. So perhaps the ASA corrector is better than the Tak Epsilon one. The 7750 Euros seems way over the top for an 8 inch scope though. That would be about AUD$13,500 by the time you got it here. Surely you can do better than that for that sort of money.
You could get a Planewave CDK12 for that or an Orion Optics AG12 with money left over. Or you could get an AP140 or TEC140 with money left over for an 8300 chipped camera.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17-06-2012, 04:21 PM
cometcatcher's Avatar
cometcatcher (Kevin)
<--- Comet Hale-Bopp

cometcatcher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloudy Mackay
Posts: 6,126
Anyone remember those 8 inch f1.5 Schmidt cameras? They were somewhat of the rage back in the 1980's when film was slow and painful. They had a curved focal plane, so a matching curved film strip holder was used to image with. Not for visual work, they were purely photographic.

If someone was to bring out a matching curved CCD array they may be resurrected lol.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 17-06-2012, 04:51 PM
Terry B's Avatar
Terry B
Country living & viewing

Terry B is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Armidale
Posts: 2,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
On paper sounds great.

The obvious question is how much can you trust their quality control or ability to engineer a repeatable reliable scope?

How's about you get one first and let us all know!

Would they be any better than these at less than 1/4 the price?

http://www.powernewts.com/page-0#!

Greg.
Greg
The AAVSO has a few of these and they are doing a great job as survey scopes. A pretty image displayed on the pdf below isn't too bad either.
see
http://www.aavso.org/apass
and
http://www.aavso.org/sites/default/files/henden_aas.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 17-06-2012, 05:25 PM
marki's Avatar
marki
Waiting for next electron

marki is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher View Post
Anyone remember those 8 inch f1.5 Schmidt cameras? They were somewhat of the rage back in the 1980's when film was slow and painful. They had a curved focal plane, so a matching curved film strip holder was used to image with. Not for visual work, they were purely photographic.

If someone was to bring out a matching curved CCD array they may be resurrected lol.
There was one for sale in the classifieds a few years back, think it was Mark (satchmo). Looked like a right challenge to use even if you found suitable film.

Mark
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 17-06-2012, 06:33 PM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
So is it f2.8, f2.9 or f3.0? I look on their website and I see 200mm aperture + 600mm focal length, which is f3.0. Then on a caption I see f2.9, then in the title it says f2.8

Re the Celestron/Epoch I bet there are a few still around. I wonder how easy it would be to get one to work with a field flattener + CCD?

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 17-06-2012, 08:31 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF (Rob)
Mostly harmless...

RobF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry B View Post
Greg
The AAVSO has a few of these and they are doing a great job as survey scopes. A pretty image displayed on the pdf below isn't too bad either.
see
http://www.aavso.org/apass
and
http://www.aavso.org/sites/default/files/henden_aas.pdf
Yumm! Paramount ME with dual astrographs. I want one!
2xAG10's perhaps, one shooting NB, the other LRGB?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 20-06-2012, 12:55 AM
dvj's Avatar
dvj (John)
Registered User

dvj is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 748
The price includes the corrector.

It's close to 9,000 euros by the time you add rings, camera adapter, shipping case, shipping. Just wait for the Euro collapse!

Fast does have penalities, like high cost. Honestly, I want an 18-inch F/2.8 with the camera at prime focus. Astroworks 18-inch Centurian was well ahead of its time.

I have yet to see any good image out of the Officina Stellari 8-inch f/3.0 which is unfortunate because that is such a cool portable scope.

My little $2500 FSQ still wins.

j
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 21-06-2012, 03:39 PM
Danack (Dan Ackroyd)
Registered User

Danack is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.M View Post
I dont know about the viability of these fast newts, the secondary is 90mm which is 20% of the area of the primary. So the aperture is only 160mm useable,
While your point stands I think your maths is a little off, and it's not quite as bad at that.

200^2 = 40000

90^2 = 8100

40000 - 8100 = 31900 = 178^2

Which is still a significant reduction it's not quite as bad as to 160mm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CometGuy
So is it f2.8, f2.9 or f3.0?
And is it 8 inches or 200mm?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 22-06-2012, 05:35 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF View Post
Yumm! Paramount ME with dual astrographs. I want one!
2xAG10's perhaps, one shooting NB, the other LRGB?
That's the N model which uses Newt mirrors (parabolic). The H model which is the one discussed here is hyperbolic mirrors which cancel out aberrations like an RC. They are much harder to make.

Greg.
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 05:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
EQ8-R
Advertisement
Astromechanics
Advertisement
Star Adventurer
Advertisement
Celestron RASA
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement