SBIG AO units - do they work with other cameras?

gregbradley · #1 30-10-2011, 12:24 PM

I am wondering if SBIG AO units can be used with other cameras or do they only work with SBIG cameras?

Greg.

rally · #2 30-10-2011, 12:51 PM

Only SBIG !

Poita (Peter) · #3 30-10-2011, 12:53 PM

Damn, I'd been wondering that as well...

gregbradley · #4 31-10-2011, 08:00 AM

Thanks Rally.

That's a shame. It'd be good for them as well if they did as not many other companies sell an AO unit.

Greg.

DavidTrap (David) · #5 31-10-2011, 10:12 AM

Starlight Express make one that works with the QSI cameras and others.

Link

DT

RickS (Rick) · #6 31-10-2011, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidTrap

Starlight Express make one that works with the QSI cameras and others.

In theory, the only issue with using the SX AO-LF with non SX cameras is getting the spacing for the guide camera right.

Cheers,
Rick.

bert (Brett) · #7 31-10-2011, 12:54 PM

What rally said!

But... you can drive it via an OAG with a sbig camera for instance with an other camera imaging.

So you could have an oag behind the ao unit, with an sbig camera (with an i2c port, some st402s have them, and my st8300 and st4k has) in the oag, as the AO guider and have another imaging camera.

Greg: Even if you got an Sbig AOL (shich is the larger of the sbig AO units) I don't think it would cover the 16803 sensor, I have an AOL on a stl6303 without issue, but I do remember someone telling me that they had to crop slightly with the 11002 sensor because of artifacts with the oag pick off prism. Essentially, if you went down the path of driving the AOL with an sbig camera would have to crop the 16083 heavily or just your ML8300.

Brett

cventer · #8 31-10-2011, 08:45 PM

Any views on sx ao vs Orion one?

bert (Brett) · #9 31-10-2011, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cventer

Any views on sx ao vs Orion one?

The sx works, so the does the orion... sometimes. The orions optic gets stuck sometimes.

gregbradley · #10 01-11-2011, 07:38 AM

Thanks for the replies and work around Brett.

So an SX one would work on say an 8300 chip but not a large chip either I take it.

The SX one does look interesting. I wonder if it would make my 8300 work better with the CDK17 or is it not worth pursuing?

Greg.

RickS (Rick) · #11 01-11-2011, 09:23 AM

Greg,

The SX AO-LF deviator plate is 60mm diameter, but the prism is in the optical path, so I think you'd get significant vignetting with a really big sensor.

I have an AO-LF sitting here waiting for my Atlas to arrive. I'll be putting them both on the GSO RC10. Without the Atlas I don't have enough back focus to make everything fit.

Cheers,
Rick.

Peter Ward · #12 01-11-2011, 10:20 AM

The SBIG AO can use SBIG's external guide head or the internal guide CCD (in dual chip models) for its operation, hence can not be used with third party cameras.

In the latter configuration it looks at a very tight iso-planic patch of sky that can deliver superb FWHM's as a result. (translation: the further you go off axis the less accurate adaptive corrections become)

originaltrilogy (Petr) · #13 01-11-2011, 10:20 AM

So these have lens inside that bends the light before it gets to CCD instead of moving the mount for little fixes yes?
Does image degrade with extra glass in path?

telemarker (Keith) · #14 01-11-2011, 10:25 AM

Hi Greg,
I use a SX-AO (not the LF version) with my SBIG ST-8300 with no problems, but only at 1650mm FL with a GSO-RC8 on an EQ6pro. I guess at the FL I'm using I don't really see the benefits of beating the seeing. What it does do though is allow me to do longer exposures than I could without it and still get round stars. I've gone as long as 1 hour subs with round stars - not bad eh!!
Guiding really becomes easier using AO, becomes hard when you have to go back to using just a guide cam.

cventer · #15 01-11-2011, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickS

Greg,

The SX AO-LF deviator plate is 60mm diameter, but the prism is in the optical path, so I think you'd get significant vignetting with a really big sensor.

I have an AO-LF sitting here waiting for my Atlas to arrive. I'll be putting them both on the GSO RC10. Without the Atlas I don't have enough back focus to make everything fit.

Cheers,
Rick.

Rick do mean back focus or inwards focus ? With the extension rings for the gso I am surprised back focus is an issue? I would have thou go inward focus travel may be with sx ao, plus filter wheel plus camera etc...

Terry B · #16 01-11-2011, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by originaltrilogy

So these have lens inside that bends the light before it gets to CCD instead of moving the mount for little fixes yes?
Does image degrade with extra glass in path?

I use an AO8 and find it very useful on my EQ6. I am imaging at 1800mm fl and it made guiding much better especially in dec as it compensates for the backlash very well.
I have very recently changed to a lovely tak NJP mount and I think that the benefit will be less as its trackiing is significantly better than the EQ6.
I have an AO7 for sale and it worked just as well as the AO8 but took up more back focus hence the change.
The AO7 is a mirror that moves rather than a lens. Neither seem to cause image degredation although the AO8 in theory has more potential to do so.

RickS (Rick) · #17 01-11-2011, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by originaltrilogy

So these have lens inside that bends the light before it gets to CCD instead of moving the mount for little fixes yes?
Does image degrade with extra glass in path?

It's a flat plate rather than a lens, but it does lose a small amount of light (claimed to be about 2% for the SX unit).

Quote:

Originally Posted by cventer

Rick do mean back focus or inwards focus ? With the extension rings for the gso I am surprised back focus is an issue? I would have thou go inward focus travel may be with sx ao, plus filter wheel plus camera etc...

I mean that I don't have enough back focus distance on the RC10 to fit my intended imaging train (focuser, focal reducer, AO-LF, FW, camera) so, yes, this could also be described as not having enough inward focus travel. I'm currently using a Feathertouch focuser which chews up a lot of distance.

Cheers,
Rick.

gregbradley · #18 01-11-2011, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terry B

I use an AO8 and find it very useful on my EQ6. I am imaging at 1800mm fl and it made guiding much better especially in dec as it compensates for the backlash very well.
I have very recently changed to a lovely tak NJP mount and I think that the benefit will be less as its trackiing is significantly better than the EQ6.
I have an AO7 for sale and it worked just as well as the AO8 but took up more back focus hence the change.
The AO7 is a mirror that moves rather than a lens. Neither seem to cause image degredation although the AO8 in theory has more potential to do so.

Thanks for that.

How is that lovely Tak NJP Mount? I miss it already!

Greg.

gregbradley · #19 01-11-2011, 02:53 PM

Thanks for the replies.

I am wondering how much improvement the SX AO unit would produce for my setup.

A CDK17 and FLI ML8300. 2932mm focal length.

It is very subject to seeing. Poor seeing, forget it, images will be way too soft.

I have taken a few images though with it and they were good. If the seeing is OK it works allright but I know I will get comments about the images looking a bit soft.

5.4 micron pixels and nearly 3 metres focal length is not a good mix. But its such a good camera it would be worth making it work.

Greg.

RickS (Rick) · #20 01-11-2011, 03:21 PM

I'll let you know how I go with mine, Greg, although I'll only be imaging at 1600 to 2000mm. In theory it is possible to make guide corrections several times a second, so I'm hoping it will result in significantly better images.

Cheers,
Rick.