Jump to content


Photo

Edge HD Focal Reducer

  • Please log in to reply
462 replies to this topic

#451 wolfman_4_ever

wolfman_4_ever

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1245
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2011
  • Loc: El Segundo, Ca, So. Cal

Posted 26 June 2013 - 02:26 AM

Maybe you have a bad reducer?

Someone on a yahoo group received an HD11 reducer with severe vignetting and had it replaced.

#452 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4118
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:14 AM

Dave this is a very important information. I would really like to see other Edge1100 reducer owners share their experiences with us.

#453 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4118
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:46 AM

Hi Frank,

I agree with the points you put forth in your latest post.

Here is the components I am using in my image train with this reducer

1 - Lacerta OAG or Wide T-mount
2 - Baader Hyperion fine tuning ring - 28mm
3 - A-P CCDT67 reducer

The OAG has a wide opening too

Posted Image

Below you can see the reducer coupled to the 28mm fine tuning ring then to EOS-to-48mm adaptor

Posted Image

and this shows the ADASCTLC large visual back that I use for attaching the image train to the scope

Posted Image

#454 Thomas27

Thomas27

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2010

Posted 12 September 2013 - 04:57 PM

Hey Guys,

Looking for some input here. I want to get a reducer for my 9.25.

My options are the optec or the AP CCDT67.

The optec looks easy as there are only 2 pieces i need to get but i don't like the fact that there are no threads on it and am a little confused on how it fits together.

I like how the CCDT67 fits together but am unsure of the parts i need for it to work properly with my scope.

ADASCTL + CCDT67 + 20mm spacer maybe?

any help would be appreciated.

thanks.

#455 frobi6852

frobi6852

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2011

Posted 13 September 2013 - 05:00 AM

Hey Guys,

Looking for some input here. I want to get a reducer for my 9.25.

My options are the optec or the AP CCDT67.

The optec looks easy as there are only 2 pieces i need to get but i don't like the fact that there are no threads on it and am a little confused on how it fits together.

I like how the CCDT67 fits together but am unsure of the parts i need for it to work properly with my scope.

ADASCTL + CCDT67 + 20mm spacer maybe?

any help would be appreciated.

thanks.


I have the Optec reducer for my 8" EdgeHD it comes with the reducer and a dovetail for my camera. The reducer screws into the rear cell and the dovetail mounts to the reducer via 3 hex screws

#456 end

end

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 23 September 2013 - 12:13 PM

I'd just like to add a data point here. To preface, I only received the X0.7 reducer for EdgeHD 1100 a little while ago and every night thereafter has been poor due to clouds. Therefore the results I have are not yet complete.

To add another caveat, I'm using the new Celestron OAG with this setup. First the good news:

I plate solved two images. One taken with the reducer and one without. Everything else about the setup was identical (both used the Celestron OAG and a Canon 60Da).

With reducer:
Pixel scale: 0.45 arcsec/pixel
Field width: 38.92 arcminutes
Field height: 25.93 arcminutes

Without reducer:
Pixel scale: 0.32 arcsec/pixel
Field width: 27.42 arcminutes
Field height: 18.28 arcminutes

This gives an actual focal reduction of:

based on width: X0.7045
based on height: X0.7050

Which is probably within the expected error for the system, but I will continue to test this as the weather permits.

My concern, as others here have expressed is with vignetting. The design of the OAG is such that it attaches to the standard SCT thread and not to the large aperture provided by the C9.25, 11 and 14. This results in an immediate constriction of the light cone after the reducer. I haven't had a chance yet to properly quantify the vignetting caused by this, but I will compare this to the vignetting caused by the standard t-adapter as soon as the clouds permit.
Considering the large number of adapters provided in the OAG setup, this seems like a poor choice to me. I may end up fabricating a more appropriately sized adapter because otherwise I really like the new OAG.

#457 Wmacky

Wmacky

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Florida

Posted 28 September 2013 - 11:00 PM

Hey Sedat, how are those C8 Edge reducer tests coming along?

#458 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4118
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 01 October 2013 - 02:41 PM

Still in the queue for the final tests.

I couldn't convince myself to sacrifice the very little time I had for testing the reducer instead of imaging. I have imaged with my FSQ all this summer and the results are more than perfect.

Meanwhile, have you seen any images taken with the Celestron reducer ? If it is delivering tight and round stars without too much vignetting, I'd rather buy it instead of spending my precious nights with trials and errors.

Clear skies

#459 end

end

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Houston, Texas, USA

Posted 01 October 2013 - 05:22 PM

My findings for the C11 reducer is that it too provides good star shape and only minor vignetting. In contrast, unfortunately, the use of the new Celestron OAG with the reducer results in substantial vignetting. There is a discussion on the "Team Celestron" web page now about this. My guess is that the fix will be a modified version of the adapter that goes between the 3.3" back of the C11 and the OAG. For some reason the one that ships with the OAG was designed only with small OTAs with the traditional SCT threads in mind and thus the light cone is substantially constricted. Really a mind boggling oversight in my opinion.

Nevertheless, I think this will be a fixable problem and expect at this point that my primary setup is likely to soon be my EdgeHD1100 running at 1960mm, f/7. Crossing my fingers that this will be a good stable platform for the foreseeable future!!

#460 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4118
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 02 October 2013 - 07:10 AM

end, thank you for the update on the C11 reducer and OAG.

Any C8 users ? I 'd love to have some first hand information.

Clear skies

#461 SJTill

SJTill

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:39 AM

Following with great interest--I was so close to pulling the trigger on a 9.25 EdgeHD, but still don't see a reducer for it.
May go with the 8 inch just to get started.

#462 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4118
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 27 November 2013 - 06:07 AM

Welcome to CN.

There, actually, is a reducer for C9.25 Edge. It gives great results. Please read this thread and then contact Poochba (Mike) via PM for the details.

Hope this helps

#463 Lynn van Rooijen

Lynn van Rooijen

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 29 Dec 2010
  • Loc: Netherlands

Posted 25 April 2014 - 02:58 PM

I've been trying to read through this long but informative thread - however, what I'm looking for is someone who has used the CCDT67 reducer with an 11" Edge and a Starlight AO/filterwheel and didn't find this.

To get to ( = not go over) the recommended distance for the reducer, this means placing it behind the AO. This means it is about 70mm from the back of the scope to the surface of the lens of the reducer and then about 103mm to the CCD, so near 175mm from back of scope to CCD (instead of the 146mm recommended by Celestron??). This seems to introduce some coma, although when I imaged with the reducer accidentally inserted backwards, I got some pinpoint stars to the edge. So I was wondering if it is possible to use the reducer behind the AO and if someone has done this successfully, what the distances were.

Thanks!
Lynn






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics