Jump to content


Photo

Officina Stellare Veloce RH 200 First Light

  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

#1 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 24 December 2012 - 11:41 AM

Aligned with my love to short focal length, this is actually a Riccardi-Honders, F/3 system, which prides itself on a very wide (42 mm) fully illuminated and corrected field, small spot size (8 microns @26 mm from axis) and solid mechanics. My colleague Tal Faibish and I grew fond of its very small dimensions (235 mm length, 285 mm physical diameter; 8.4 kg) which makes it rather portable.

The system requires strict orthogonality between the chip surface and imaging train, and for that the whole focuser system is fit on a plate which can be adjusted through 4 screws, on the 4 corners corresponding to the 4 corners of the image (and chip).

I copied some more info to my site:
http://www.pbase.com...s_veloce_rh_200

On the first night out, however, we didn't figures out correctly how the SBIG ST 8300 chip is located in the camera (mistakenly assuming it is 90 degrees to how it actually is built). This caused us to spend some 6 hours desperately trying to get the thing to work. Well... Once we figured it out, at about 2 AM, it took us less than 10 min. to get the system to generate images which were of decent quality. We left the better fine tuning of the system to next time.

Our target for the night, the Rosette, was already quite low on the horizon, so all we could do was squeeze in 1 hour of Ha, which is hereby presented to you...

http://www.pbase.com/image/147972462

Hope you like it!

Cheers and Happy Holidays!
Harel

#2 Jim Thommes

Jim Thommes

    Soyuz

  • ****-
  • Posts: 3819
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2004
  • Loc: San DiegoCA USA

Posted 24 December 2012 - 12:27 PM

Harel,
Congrats on the first light and on overcoming your initial difficulties.

Yes I image an f/3 system would require good orthogonality - particularly so to take advantage of the quality optics.

The image came out superb.

#3 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3164
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 24 December 2012 - 12:31 PM

this is really funny - i was just looking at this OTA on OS's website, then on a reseller website, and then i pop over here to find this post at the top!

i happen to have the same CCD camera... why is the orientation of the CCD important? is it just because you were trying to make it all orthogonal expecting the camera to be in the other orientation?

otherwise it sounds like you can not rotate the CCD.

#4 David Rosenthal

David Rosenthal

    Imager Extraordinaire

  • *****
  • Posts: 3114
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2006
  • Loc: NJ

Posted 24 December 2012 - 03:09 PM

Congratulations on your first light image. It is really good despite the lost imaging hours. Can't wait to see what you are going to do with it !

#5 David Pavlich

David Pavlich

    Transmographied

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 27503
  • Joined: 18 May 2005
  • Loc: Mandeville, LA USA

Posted 24 December 2012 - 04:53 PM

That's very nice work, Harel!

David

#6 rigel123

rigel123

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10891
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2009
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 24 December 2012 - 05:08 PM

Very nice Harel, congrats on getting everything working!

#7 alpal

alpal

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3663
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Melbourne Australia.

Posted 24 December 2012 - 05:24 PM

The system requires strict orthogonality between the chip surface and imaging train,
and for that the whole focuser system is fit on a plate which can be adjusted through 4 screws,
on the 4 corners corresponding to the 4 corners of the image (and chip).


Nice image Harel.
Do you have any photos of your above setup?
Was this an add on which was not supplied with the telescope?
You'll do well with this new high tech RH200.

#8 vpcirc

vpcirc

    Skylab

  • *----
  • Posts: 4005
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2009
  • Loc: Merced CA

Posted 24 December 2012 - 10:14 PM

Beautiful detail! Nice Scope

#9 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 25 December 2012 - 03:56 AM

The system requires strict orthogonality between the chip surface and imaging train,
and for that the whole focuser system is fit on a plate which can be adjusted through 4 screws,
on the 4 corners corresponding to the 4 corners of the image (and chip).


Nice image Harel.
Do you have any photos of your above setup?
Was this an add on which was not supplied with the telescope?
You'll do well with this new high tech RH200.


Thanks alpal :-)

Here's a capture directly from the user manual, which explains the subject, along with an image which shows where the bolts are, etc.

Cheers,
Harel

Attached Files



#10 alpal

alpal

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3663
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Melbourne Australia.

Posted 25 December 2012 - 07:01 AM

Thanks Harel.
That's good - a fully adjustable system as is.
cheers
Allan

#11 mdek

mdek

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Netherlands

Posted 25 December 2012 - 06:23 PM

Amazing shot, and a beautiful scope indeed! I can imagine orthogonality is crucial in a f3 system! I had trouble enough getting my gso 8" rc focusser/primary ortho enough for f6!

#12 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 26 December 2012 - 01:12 PM

Thanks Jim!
Happy you liked the image.
It actually took quite shorter time than we expected, once we understood the grave misperception we had regarding the position of the chip in the camera :roflmao:
Cheers,
Harel

#13 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 26 December 2012 - 01:17 PM

this is really funny - i was just looking at this OTA on OS's website, then on a reseller website, and then i pop over here to find this post at the top!

i happen to have the same CCD camera... why is the orientation of the CCD important? is it just because you were trying to make it all orthogonal expecting the camera to be in the other orientation?

otherwise it sounds like you can not rotate the CCD.


Hi - its not the orientation of the chip is in itself important. You can position it however you like. However, you must know how its physical orientation in the camera, relates to the image that comes out on your PC. I.e. - if the stars aren't perfect on the right hand top side of the image on the PC, you ought to know how that particular corner relates to the actual physical side of the camera, so that you can change it.

Now, if you have this relationship wrong (as we have: thinking that top right relates to top top right, whereas it actually related to bottom right) then your adjustments RUIN the orthogonality, rather than refine it.

Once we got it right, the issue was resolves in less than 10 min. There's still some refinement to do, but as you can see in the image - most of the work is behind us.

Cheers,
Harel

#14 bilgebay

bilgebay

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4192
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Turkiye - Istanbul and Marmaris

Posted 26 December 2012 - 01:47 PM

Hi Harel,

Very nice image and very nice setup as I have already said in the Cats forum.

I can understand your frustration until you figured out the correct way to square the camera to the optical plane. I have taken note of this issue. Thank you for sharing your joys and frustrations as well :)

Sedat

#15 Bert

Bert

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 731
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 26 December 2012 - 06:21 PM

Hi Harel

Here is a 8min exposure in NII with a Bahtinov Mask. 1.3MB

http://d1355990.i49...._12/RH200-B.jpg

As you can see all the stars with visible diffraction patterns show perfect focus. This can only mean one thing. The PL16803 sensor is almost perfectly orthogonal to the optic axis of the RH200.

I can pick up a 100 step difference of the FLI Atlas focuser in the diffraction patterns. This corresponds to 8.5 micron along the optic axis. This means that my camera sensor is aligned better than 10 micron from corner to corner.

I have a custom made frame to firmly hold the camera. With this I can make very small adjustments to align the sensor.

All imaging systems invert the image. It fools the best of us.

Bert

Astrograph is an Officina Stellare RH200 which has a focal length of 600mm and is F3, yes F3! Clear aperture is 200mm.
FLI Atlas Focuser.
FLI ten position filter wheel CFW-3-10 with 50mm square filters.
Astrodon E series LRGB and HA, NII, SII and OIII 3nm NB filters. Also a continuum filter 5nm.
Camera is a FLI PL16803 which has a sensor size 36.8 X 36.8 mm.
The FoV of this system is 3.5 X 3.5 degrees.
Mount is a Software Bisque PMX.

Attached Files



#16 orion69

orion69

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 995
  • Joined: 09 May 2010
  • Loc: Croatia

Posted 26 December 2012 - 07:09 PM

Harel, can you compare resolution and contrast of RH200 vs let's say fast 130/780 mm refractor with 0.75x FF/FR which make it F/4.5 ?
Actually, I have not seen any high quality, long subs, preferably NB, finished picture with RH200. In fact, best images with RH200 I've seen so far are somewhat "soft" compared to top quality images with fast 5-5.5" refractor...
I'm buying astrograf next year and deciding between mentioned refractor and RH200.

#17 Bert

Bert

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 731
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 26 December 2012 - 07:33 PM

Hi Knez

The RH200 is fast at F3. This is 5X16 minutes in 3nm NII. This would take you with an F4.5 system 5x36 minutes. Or longer if you wanted to get the signal to noise ratio down to the same level as the shorter exposures the RH200 give you.

Large image here 5MB

http://d1355990.i49....2_RH200_NII.jpg

By the way 3nm NB filters DO work very well even at F3. Especially the Astrodons.


Bert

Attached Files



#18 Bert

Bert

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 731
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 26 December 2012 - 09:15 PM

Here you go again Knez a mosaic before I got the sensor alignment almost perfect. about 12Mb.

http://d1355990.i49....MC_2P_RGB_F.jpg

Enough stars?

Bert

#19 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3164
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 26 December 2012 - 11:58 PM

Hi - its not the orientation of the chip is in itself important. You can position it however you like. However, you must know how its physical orientation in the camera, relates to the image that comes out on your PC. I.e. - if the stars aren't perfect on the right hand top side of the image on the PC, you ought to know how that particular corner relates to the actual physical side of the camera, so that you can change it.

Now, if you have this relationship wrong (as we have: thinking that top right relates to top top right, whereas it actually related to bottom right) then your adjustments RUIN the orthogonality, rather than refine it.

Once we got it right, the issue was resolves in less than 10 min. There's still some refinement to do, but as you can see in the image - most of the work is behind us.

Cheers,
Harel


ah yes, okay, now i understand. at least on my telescope the image comes out upside-down. but i thought that was normal - the image is formed upside-down at the focal plane. the RH200 could be different though.

i did encounter this while collimating my RC10 - if you are using the defocused star method it's important to re-orient the image so that up is up!

#20 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 27 December 2012 - 06:21 PM

[quote name="Bert"]Here you go again Knez a mosaic before I got the sensor alignment almost perfect. about 12Mb.

http://d1355990.i49....MC_2P_RGB_F.jpg

Enough stars?

Bert [/quote

Hi Bert,

Thanks for sharing - I wasn't aware of this image of yours!
It's a lovely gem - I like it very much!

Cheers,
Harel

#21 microstar

microstar

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1227
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 28 December 2012 - 12:43 AM

Took a while to download but a pretty amazing image Bert.
...Keith

#22 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 28 December 2012 - 02:17 PM

Hi Knez

The RH200 is fast at F3. This is 5X16 minutes in 3nm NII. This would take you with an F4.5 system 5x36 minutes. Or longer if you wanted to get the signal to noise ratio down to the same level as the shorter exposures the RH200 give you.

Large image here 5MB

http://d1355990.i49....2_RH200_NII.jpg

By the way 3nm NB filters DO work very well even at F3. Especially the Astrodons.


Bert


I can't agree more. I used to have a baader 7 nm on the same camera and there's literally no comparison to the crisp, full and noiseless results the Astrodon 5 nm is giving me. all on f2.8 or f3 systems.

Cheers
Harel

#23 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 28 December 2012 - 08:23 PM

Hi Harel

Here is a 8min exposure in NII with a Bahtinov Mask. 1.3MB

http://d1355990.i49...._12/RH200-B.jpg

As you can see all the stars with visible diffraction patterns show perfect focus. This can only mean one thing. The PL16803 sensor is almost perfectly orthogonal to the optic axis of the RH200.

I can pick up a 100 step difference of the FLI Atlas focuser in the diffraction patterns. This corresponds to 8.5 micron along the optic axis. This means that my camera sensor is aligned better than 10 micron from corner to corner.

I have a custom made frame to firmly hold the camera. With this I can make very small adjustments to align the sensor.

All imaging systems invert the image. It fools the best of us.

Bert

Astrograph is an Officina Stellare RH200 which has a focal length of 600mm and is F3, yes F3! Clear aperture is 200mm.
FLI Atlas Focuser.
FLI ten position filter wheel CFW-3-10 with 50mm square filters.
Astrodon E series LRGB and HA, NII, SII and OIII 3nm NB filters. Also a continuum filter 5nm.
Camera is a FLI PL16803 which has a sensor size 36.8 X 36.8 mm.
The FoV of this system is 3.5 X 3.5 degrees.
Mount is a Software Bisque PMX.


Hi Bert, is what we are seeing in the image the back of the os RH 200 rig?

Cheers,
Harel

#24 orion69

orion69

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 995
  • Joined: 09 May 2010
  • Loc: Croatia

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:12 AM

Bert, thanks for very nice image, but I have (as usual) few questions...
While center image (http://d1355990.i49....2_RH200_NII.jpg) is very nice, stars look good etc., border image starts to brake down, stars have unusual halos and much more noise is present. Is that because of vignetting, type of processing or some other reason?
The specs say "200mm clear aperture", what does it mean?
Since obstruction is 55% what is actual diameter of the tube?
How do you like the focuser for imaging? My accessories are around 4 kg...
Does it have to be collimated often, is the collimation complicated, how long does it take?
How fast does it cool down?
And finally, how does it cope with temperature change, does it have to be refocused often?

Hope you don't mind lots of questions, but 5800 Euros is not cheap, I have to be sure what I'm buying...

Thanks

#25 Harel_Boren

Harel_Boren

    Vendor-The Boren-Simon PowerNewt Astrograph

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1192
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Israel

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:30 PM

Hi Kemz,
The obstructin is 55% linear, I.e. .55 of the diameter.
This means that its about 30% area obstruction which is quite reasonable considering that you don't we'd flats (ie much more light all over the frame) and that reflectivity of the mirror is 99%.

Cheers,
Harel






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics