#1  
Old 12-02-2020, 10:14 AM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,383
Which 'scope to match Full Frame camera?...

Hi eyeryone,

So the very good news was that I was lucky enough to win a full frame camera

It's a QSI 6162 with 8 Pos filter wheel & OAG port. It uses the KAF 16200 sensor, 35mm diagonal, 6 micron pixels. It requires 2" filters.

I've sold my existing QSI 683 camera to pay for the big filters, but the not so good news is that neither of my current telescopes (I have a Stellarvue SV70t refractor and a 10"CF f4 newt) are full frame compatible

I have to set up each time I shoot in my LP backyard and generally shoot NB Nebulas with the occasional trip to a star party/dark site for galaxies LRGB targets etc.

So my options are ...

A) Upgrade the newt to FF by installing a 3" Feathertouch focuser and BIG Paracoor (approx $A3100) and sell the SV70T, the 2" Paracoor and 2.5" Moonlite to help pay for the upgrades.

B) Sell both 'scopes and buy an OTA that's already FF compatible under $6k (I'm happy to consider well looked after 2nd hand gear).

C) Suggestions welcome - What have I missed?

Not going back to an RC/ SCT type 'scope again, so maybe a nice refractor could work?
The notion of one versatile scope with reducer/flattener/extender options has some appeal. ie: Tak TOA-130, Tak FSQ-106 etc. but it seems that the FL needs to be >700mm to suit the sensors 6 micron pixels.

What do you guys think?

Cheers
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-02-2020, 10:35 AM
JA
.....

JA is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy01 View Post
Not going back to an RC/ SCT type 'scope again, so maybe a nice refractor could work?
The notion of one versatile scope with reducer/flattener/extender options has some appeal. ie: Tak TOA-130, Tak FSQ-106 etc. but it seems that the FL needs to be >700mm to suit the sensors 6 micron pixels.

What do you guys think?

Cheers
Andy
Hi Andy,

Given the constraints you've mentioned then both Taks would seem excellent choices, esp. with extenders, also in the classifieds there is a SkyRover 130mm f/5 with largish image circle.

BTW: I just checked if it's the QSI 6162, you may not be that badly off in terms of image circle issues as it does not have a FullFrame (43.3mm diagonal) sensor, but rather a 34.6mm diagonal sensor. So who knows you may get by. It's certainly worth a try with your existing gear.

Best
JA

Last edited by JA; 12-02-2020 at 10:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-02-2020, 11:23 AM
Atmos's Avatar
Atmos (Colin)
Ultimate Noob

Atmos is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,422
It’s never an easy decision. I guess if you’re wanting to have a one telescope/camera setup then an idea on your image scale will give you a place to start. As you’ve got a wide field refractor and a 10” newtonian, you’ve done a bit of both.

As JA mentions, the KAF-16200 only has a 35mm diagonal so you could possibly still get away with your current 2” corrector unless you feel it has already been starting to degrade with the KAF-8300.
Alternatively I could potentially bring around a ASI094 full frame to give your current setup a test
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-02-2020, 02:27 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,613
KAF16200 as mentioned is smaller than full frame at 27 x 21.6mm. Full frame is 36 x 24mm.

KAF16200 is what is called APSh sized and may work with your current 2 inch accessories ("may").

I suggest you wait until you receive it and try it out as it may work as-is.

Matching pixel size to focal length is not exact science in my experience.
Otherwise a 16803 sensor with 9 microns would be hopeless with an FSQ and we know that is not true.

I also get great results with the 16200 on my CDK17 and that samples around .43 arc sec/pixel. That's at my dark site.

So 1260mm would work with it (I have used my 16200 on my 1260mm AP scope and it worked fine, its just a better match with the 16803 9 micron pixels).

But imaging refractors around $6K;
1. FSQ 106 EDX (not the 85mm baby Q which seems to be a rather poor scope). Usually thy sell for a bit more but there is one for sale on this site asking $7950. I had an FSQ106EDXiii and it was great. The latest iv model has a part in the focuser as a solid molding.
2. TOA130 would be superb if you can find one.
3. Don't know about the Skyrover 130 F5 but I can't see it being in the same league as an FSQ or a TOA.
The main complaint I read about the TOA series is they are front heavy, collimation if out is a trip to Japan and they may take a bit longer to reach thermal equilibrium as the 3rd lens is separated from the doublet by a fair distance.
4. TEC140 is an all rounder.

When it comes to selecting a scope I work backwards. What type of image do I want to produce and then what type of scope would produce that. Then which scopes in that category are the best.

Basically most Tak, all AP, TEC, CFF.

130mm scopes have a nice aperture for fainter stuff so the brighter galaxies would be available with extenders like the TOA has.
Your Newt though would tend to outperform a lot as aperture counts for a lot. More important than matching pixel size which is exaggerated in its importance.

Versatility is something I would consider. If you plan on taking it to a dark site portability would be important as well.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-02-2020, 11:41 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 6,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
......not the 85mm baby Q which seems to be a rather poor scope)......

Greg.
I have a FSQ106 and FSQ85.....the latter has simply excellent optics and field correction over a full 35mm frame...the 106 is simply the same design in a bigger package with even wider field correction, but overkill for a KAF16200.....hence I am puzzled why you would say that.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13-02-2020, 10:26 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
I have a FSQ106 and FSQ85.....the latter has simply excellent optics and field correction over a full 35mm frame...the 106 is simply the same design in a bigger package with even wider field correction, but overkill for a KAF16200.....hence I am puzzled why you would say that.
I have no direct experience with the 85 but read some critical posts about it on Cloudy Nights.

A quick search shows some complaints about tilt and the focuser. The earlier versions of the SQ106ED had that a lot.

By the time you add the flattener and reducers etc you would not be very far from a 106EDX which of course is the standard in widefield scopes.

Greg.

Last edited by gregbradley; 13-02-2020 at 11:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13-02-2020, 01:40 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by JA View Post
Hi Andy,

Given the constraints you've mentioned then both Taks would seem excellent choices, esp. with extenders

BTW: I just checked if it's the QSI 6162, you may not be that badly off in terms of image circle issues as it does not have a FullFrame (43.3mm diagonal) sensor, but rather a 34.6mm diagonal sensor. So who knows you may get by. It's certainly worth a try with your existing gear.

Best
JA
Thanks JA, good advice - I may well try that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos View Post
Alternatively I could potentially bring around a ASI094 full frame to give your current setup a test
Actually Colin, that's not a bad idea if you're up for it! Cheers

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
But imaging refractors around $6K;
1. FSQ 106 EDX (not the 85mm baby Q which seems to be a rather poor scope). Usually thy sell for a bit more but there is one for sale on this site asking $7950. I had an FSQ106EDXiii and it was great. The latest iv model has a part in the focuser as a solid molding.
2. TOA130 would be superb if you can find one.

130mm scopes have a nice aperture for fainter stuff so the brighter galaxies would be available with extenders like the TOA has.

Versatility is something I would consider. If you plan on taking it to a dark site portability would be important as well.

Greg.
Thanks for chiming in Greg, You're echoing what I'm thinking as the moment - and yes, portability is an issue - no messing about with collimation etc either.

Hmmmm -
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 13-02-2020, 09:25 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 6,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
I have no direct experience with the 85 but read some critical posts about it on Cloudy Nights.............

By the time you add the flattener and reducers etc ....
Greg.
Que? I would not rely on hearsay or CN web commentary as being Gospel.

I have both 'scopes.

BTW..the guys at Royal Greenwich noted that the USA eclipse was the most photographed eclipse of all time...

...yet awarded an image taken by some bloke from the antipodes using...you guessed it...an FSQ85....not bad for a "poor" telescope
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 14-02-2020, 05:18 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,470
How big is the secondary on the CF Newt you own? You might also need to upgrade the way the focuser is installed and supported on the CF Newt too. This is part of the reason why I went with the design of the OOUK scopes. The rings and internal support prevents flexure in this region.

You could upgrade your current scope to support the camera and that might be all you need to do. 2" filters should also be ok with the Paracorr you have also (I am assuming you have a Paracorr 2). In that event it would be cheaper than buying a new scope.


Edit: or you could just sell the new camera, though I think I read you have already sold your old QSI.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 14-02-2020, 06:21 PM
peter_4059's Avatar
peter_4059 (Peter)
Big Scopes are Cool

peter_4059 is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,103
Would this fit the bill?

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=179942
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 14-02-2020, 06:36 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_4059 View Post
Lol thanks!
I already pmd the seller, (twice) no response yet.
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 14-02-2020, 06:40 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
You could upgrade your current scope to support the camera and that might be all you need to do. 2" filters should also be ok with the Paracorr you have also (I am assuming you have a Paracorr 2). In that event it would be cheaper than buying a new scope.
Thanks Paul, but Im still looking at over $3k to upgrade the Newt though!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 14-02-2020, 11:29 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 6,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter_4059 View Post
Humm. Max has excellent taste

Three words. "Gift horse" and "mouth"
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 03:57 PM.

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