I finally got a "proper" first light last night rather than daytime images.
I took 7 x 5 min exposures of the trifid and of eta carina.
They were taken using an unmodded 40D quided with my QHY guider and guidemaster. Flats, darks etc and processed in Iris. No deconvolution filters have been used just stacking and a asinh stretch.
So the outcome.
Visually the scope is wonderful. I can't see any false colour with a 10mm eyepiece. Through the camera it isn't quite the same. There is certainly a small voilet halo around the bluer stars.
I will try to deconvolve the blue channel to see if it is removeable.
The field is not quite flat.There is a small amount of smearing on the ouside of the frame but it isn't visible at the magnification of these images.
There is very little vignetting. I have posted a flat frame to demonstrate this.
How does it compare to my VC200L.
The psf of the stars is about the same but the VC200L has no halo. It does however have difraction spikes. Is this good or bad? I quite like them.
A similar eta taken with the VC200L is
here.
The field of the 127mmAPO is much wider and the contrast visually is higher. I'm not sure if this extra contrast makes up for the lesser aperture. However there is no way I could ever afford a 200mm refractor so probably the comparison is unfair.
The only other scope I have to compare it to is my 120mm achromat guidescope. It has lots of false colour and is not a patch on the new scope.
I am very happy with the scope but it isn't perfect. It seems to be worth the money.