Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
Ray,
Hi Ray,
thanks for your reply.
I also have an RCC1
see pic:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/247194...in/photostream
I think I need to spend more time on the spacing using the Varilock
after viewing your pic.
It's amazing that the RCC1 works so well for a $250 corrector.
cheers
Allan |
Hi Allan - yep, they are really good value - as far as I can see, the RCC1 does nothing to the image but remove the coma.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
And there in lies the myth, in the end seeing is absolute king, doesn't matter how big or how much your scope is worth or how catchy its name is, if it doesn't get under really steady skies most people would be hard pressed to see any advantage  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevec35
A great image Ray - love it!
Steve
|
Hi Steve - thanks for the comment
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjastro
Wonderful resolution Ray.
Steven
|
thanks very much Steven
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpal
Well it must have been a fluke night at Ardrossan south Australia
which is at sea level.
Imagine how good our results would be if we all had robotic scopes at Siding Springs
at altitude & many more clear nights?
|
It wasn't a fluke Allan, it was nearly a dozen flukes - I switched over to M16 whenever the Ha seeing was exceptional (which is better than 2.5 arcsec FWHM around here) and the moon was up (and I was not doing anything else). The shortest bracket of images was taken in a 15 minute burst of good seeing and the ensemble was gathered over months. It would be great to have a better site, but part of the fun is that whoooa feeling when the seeing comes good
.
regards Ray