Can't see how you can centre the secondary when it needs to be off set, especially with an F/4 scope.
It's more twist in the vanes than position, that's my problem.
Cheers,
Justin.
Twist will make them thicker by not separate. You don't need to offset your secondary that much with the 8" F/4. Your vanes are bent. All four of them.
Nice Neb capturing Justin, done very well i think, , Try using a straight edge against your spider veins, like, right accross the front of scope, stand back at arms length, might help see whats going on, or they might just need a tad more tension on them ?
Rgrds mate !
Nice image, but Marc is right. This is not temperature dependant, the spilt defractions are the result of the spider vanes not being perpendicular. I have an extact for you, see the attached [the reference to the secondary being centred is for the CDK, you need the offset].
How to fix, if you are sure your offset is correct, then you need to make new holes in your front ring, to get the vanes 90 degrees to each other.
Twist will make them thicker by not separate. You don't need to offset your secondary that much with the 8" F/4. Your vanes are bent. All four of them.
Thanks Marc!
Yep, I take your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astronobob
Nice Neb capturing Justin, done very well i think, , Try using a straight edge against your spider veins, like, right accross the front of scope, stand back at arms length, might help see whats going on, or they might just need a tad more tension on them ?
Rgrds mate !
Thanks Bob!
Good tip, Ill give it a go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex
Nice job Justin. Fantastic stringy detail in the nebula.
Thanks Rex,
A lot of stuff to process in M45.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevous67
Hi Justin,
Nice image, but Marc is right. This is not temperature dependant, the spilt defractions are the result of the spider vanes not being perpendicular. I have an extact for you, see the attached [the reference to the secondary being centred is for the CDK, you need the offset].
How to fix, if you are sure your offset is correct, then you need to make new holes in your front ring, to get the vanes 90 degrees to each other.
Looks great otherwise.
Steve
Thanks Steve!
Yep your right of course, checked my offset it's 3.2mm which is on the money.
Just need to deal with the vanes.
Nice shot with plenty of detail Justin although the registration is a little off in the top right. In an case this sort of image just shows what's possible with a DSLR these days. Amazing to someone like me brought up in the film days.
Good capture there Justin, I too recon M45 needs spikes (even double ones), refractor images of it just don't quite have the same wow factor
Mike
Thanks Mike!
Yep, don't even need to drink heavily to see doubles with this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naskies
Nice capture, Justin. Good luck getting the vanes sorted.
Thanks Dave!
Get them sorted one day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevec35
Nice shot with plenty of detail Justin although the registration is a little off in the top right. In an case this sort of image just shows what's possible with a DSLR these days. Amazing to someone like me brought up in the film days.
Cheers
Steve
Thanks Steve!
I'm pleasantly surprised how much detail that came out.
What was the scope Justin? Is it an 8" newtonian or an RC? I assume Newt because you mentioned MPCC? Just asking because I seem to get a wider FOV at the same FL.
Your spider vanes might need a little squaring.
.
