Go Back   IceInSpace > Beginners Start Here > Beginners Equipment Discussions
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 12-04-2025, 12:34 PM
kvmx's Avatar
kvmx (Nick)
TrA supremacy!

kvmx is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2025
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 33
Celestron Firstscope collimation / Nature of spherical mirrors

Hi all,

I've put my binos down and started to use my Celestron Firstscope at 15x & 50x power to have a static view of the night sky recently and while views of the moon and some bigger/brighter open clusters like IC 2602 (Southern Pleiades) at 50x are certainly impressive, I've noticed that this scope struggles to focus at 50x on smaller objects such as NGC 4755 (Jewel Box). Putting aside the fact that the focuser focuses incredibly coarsely, when I do get the stars as focused as best I can, the stars in the Jewel Box still appear slightly fuzzy or smudgy. After a couple nights I thought I'd have a crack at collimating the scope in the hopes of sharpening the view.

I ordered a SVBONY laser collimator and when it arrived I got to work. I did my best to center the laser in the primary and I noticed some quirks about this scope:
1. The primary cannot be adjusted. It seems to be glued into a base plate, and this base plate affixed via screws to the tube itself.
2. The stalk that holds the secondary cannot be adjusted in height, only rotated left or right. The stalk screws into a long nut and it seems like the manufacturer has glued the stalk into the nut, preventing adjustment.
3. The draw tube is loose and has lots of play. With the laser collimator in, focusing in and out wiggles the draw tube slightly and the laser is observed to go in and out of its collimation.

Because I can't adjust the height of the stalk the secondary sits on, the laser sits away from the geometric center of the primary. However after some reading online, apparently spherical mirrors don't have an 'optical center' and collimation is supposedly not as impactful in a spherical mirror as opposed to a parabolic one? I'm not too knowledgeable on mirror shapes and how they reflect rays of incoming light, but is what I've read true? Some diagrams showing light paths reflecting on spherical vs parabolic mirrors do seem to indicate that there isn't a 'true' optical center point on a spherical mirror. I've attached some images of the primary/secondary (with outlines to show mirror shape and laser position) and the laser collimator, this is as best as I could get it. I feel like even 50x is asking too much of this small scope!

If anyone can let me know whether it's worth my time trying to collimate further and sharpen up the view or if my efforts are utterly in vain, it would be greatly appreciated!
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Primary+Secondary.jpg)
147.7 KB14 views
Click for full-size image (Collimation.jpg)
118.0 KB12 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13-04-2025, 06:58 PM
Leo.G (Leo)
Registered User

Leo.G is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Lithgow, NSW, Australia
Posts: 1,410
The collimation I can't help you with but I have an old 130mm Celestron reflector which had a very sloppy focuser. I removed it from the tube and had some varying sizes of shim brass handy and I shimmed it, it now performs better than I could have imagined even with my DSLR hanging off the focuser (old D80 not the much heavier D810).
Getting rid of the slop helps a lot and if it's not something either worth fitting an expensive focuser to or upgrading, like my old 130mm shimming with brass or suitable gauge aluminium (think drink can), a little grease depending on the mechanisms and that's one less item to worry about.
Scissors will cut aluminium cans if you don't have the appropriate cutters, and thin brass shim.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 13-04-2025, 10:19 PM
kvmx's Avatar
kvmx (Nick)
TrA supremacy!

kvmx is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2025
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo.G View Post
... I shimmed it, it now performs better than I could have imagined...

I did see a video recently of a man modifying his Firstscope focuser to get rid of the wiggle. In the video he used smooth duct tape but I like the sound of your metal based shims better! I'll have a crack at it sometime next week.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 14-04-2025, 10:21 AM
Leo.G (Leo)
Registered User

Leo.G is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Lithgow, NSW, Australia
Posts: 1,410
Tape is a very temporary solution. If you can work out the amount of slop and shim as required while leaving enough room for it not to bind up. I good pair of verniers are handy, digital even better because many shim materials aren't precisely as stated. I'm not sure where to buy shim brass now, probably eBay.
Remember, shim brass wrapped right around is twice the thickness of the material added to the diameter.
I know that sounds silly but I've known some very smart people who have forgotten such a simple fact.
Some of these small scopes with minor tune ups end up being quite handy scopes.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14-04-2025, 07:18 PM
Pierre_C's Avatar
Pierre_C
Registered User

Pierre_C is online now
 
Join Date: Aug 2024
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 78
There are some novel approaches to this issue at https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/5...on-firstscope/
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 15-04-2025, 10:04 AM
kvmx's Avatar
kvmx (Nick)
TrA supremacy!

kvmx is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2025
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre_C View Post
There are some novel approaches to this issue...

Thanks for the link! I'll give it a sus.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 12:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement