View Single Post
  #3  
Old 10-02-2013, 06:30 PM
Astro_Bot's Avatar
Astro_Bot
Registered User

Astro_Bot is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,605
Thanks for that demo. I agree that corrector centring is vital for image quality. That's some really useful evidence of the principle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
Rotational shift of the corrector would cause the telescope to not focus at all. Even a 5 degree rotational offset will make the SCT unusable.
I'm not sure about the rotational alignment, though. Isn't the corrector (and primary and secondary for that matter) symmetric? I've read reports that say they are, and a few others that claim the corrector and secondary are hand-touched for defects in the primary, but I find it hard to believe, in a mass-produced SCTs like Celestron and Meade, that there's hand-touched anything given the prices.

I've fiddled with corrector centring in my SCT, and visually noticed a difference (soft images and, when examined closely, lop-sided astigmatism - at least that's what I've been calling it) but I couldn't see any difference with respect to rotational alignment rotating the corrector (with secondary) through 90 deg or secondary (alone) through 120 deg.
Reply With Quote