Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

ASI1600MMC Beta test

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
1767 replies to this topic

#276 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 08:45 PM

You can clearly see some of the common IFN structure around M81 there. I spent hours processing my attempt to capture the IFN in this region, and I recognize those shapes. You can also see Holmberg IX, which is a very faint object and often missed in images of this region. I'm quite impressed by the depth that 110 minute of exposure was able to achieve here. Certainly better than my 5D III could do. There does appear to be some field structure that may not have been corrected by the flat...but wouldn't that be a scope issue, and not a sensor issue? I don't think the sensor has been cooled enough to present RBI, and I'm not even sure RBI is possible with CMOS. Besides, any radial pattern in a sensor this size would show up as arcs around whatever the center of the wafer was, not a radial pattern centered within the image. 

 

I think it's a great test. The low read noise really shines. Tolga, I do have one more question. Was this at unity gain? Or another gain setting?

I should have mentioned that I am sorry. Yes the camera is set to Unity


 

#277 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 08:45 PM

Tolga,

Very nice.  Thanks for the work. 

Did you have a filter wheel and were shooting through L filter?  If so what kind of adapter and what was the separation between the filter and the chip?  Going to break down and get Precise Parts 1mm adapter.....any minute now....


 

#278 JMW

JMW

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,815
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2007

Posted 09 May 2016 - 09:27 PM

What is IFN structure?


 

#279 josh smith

josh smith

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,366
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013

Posted 09 May 2016 - 09:34 PM

No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.


There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.
 

#280 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 09:54 PM

 

No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.


There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.

 

Josh,

 

We have questioned just about everything associated with this camera, except maybe the fact that it runs on 12 volts DC.  That is okay.   It does look like the dust mote is not properly calibrated in the image.  I think Tolga is trying to post the information as soon as he can get it out.  It should take some time to really run it through the paces and tweak it.  I am very pleased with the results and the methodology for acquisition. I am really excited to try out shorter images, and maximizing the potential for capturing successful frames with shorter exposures.  I have always tried to get longer and longer exposures.  Go deeper and deeper with time.  The experiment in changing the way I take images is going to be great.   I think that is one of the things that is going to broaden my horizons and experience and if CMOS takes over, I will at least have some experience.  I think I understand better the thought that with the lower read noise we can take shorter frames and potentially get excellent results.  I have many people to thank on this forum for an education.  Today, I sold my Astro modified t3i to the cooler climate of Seattle, where I am sure it will make someone happy.  Living as far south as we do, the cooling is going to make a world of difference.  I might actually use the camera year round.  This is a welcome replacement to my 3ti.  I can't get it fast enough.


 

#281 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 09:59 PM

Tolga,

Very nice.  Thanks for the work. 

Did you have a filter wheel and were shooting through L filter?  If so what kind of adapter and what was the separation between the filter and the chip?  Going to break down and get Precise Parts 1mm adapter.....any minute now....

Yes Orion natulious. camera screws straight to the FW


 

#282 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:00 PM

 

No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.


There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.

 

The important thing was the amp glow. It calibrates out. I rushed and got this out. 


 

#283 josh smith

josh smith

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,366
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:01 PM


No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.

There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.
Josh,

We have questioned just about everything associated with this camera, except maybe the fact that it runs on 12 volts DC. That is okay. It does look like the dust mote is not properly calibrated in the image. I think Tolga is trying to post the information as soon as he can get it out. It should take some time to really run it through the paces and tweak it. I am very pleased with the results and the methodology for acquisition. I am really excited to try out shorter images, and maximizing the potential for capturing successful frames with shorter exposures. I have always tried to get longer and longer exposures. Go deeper and deeper with time. The experiment in changing the way I take images is going to be great. I think that is one of the things that is going to broaden my horizons and experience and if CMOS takes over, I will at least have some experience. I think I understand better the thought that with the lower read noise we can take shorter frames and potentially get excellent results. I have many people to thank on this forum for an education. Today, I sold my Astro modified t3i to the cooler climate of Seattle, where I am sure it will make someone happy. Living as far south as we do, the cooling is going to make a world of difference. I might actually use the camera year round. This is a welcome replacement to my 3ti. I can't get it fast enough.

Not sure if you are just stating you are excited or what? I am too! I've had a 178 in a shopping cart since I heard about this camera and have been holding off because I think this might be a better bang for the buck with the bigger sensor and still small pixels I want.

Doesn't change the fact that it didn't calibrate properly with Tolga's normal method and I am interested to find out why. It's not something that should be affected by a quick and dirty processing or not. It either calibrated or it doesn't pretty much. If it takes a different method for calibration, I'd love to learn more about it while waiting to decide I I'd like to get one.
 

#284 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:02 PM

What is IFN structure?

It;s realy faint dust round M81 m82 it's called integrated flux nebula


 

#285 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:05 PM

 

 

 

No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.

There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.
Josh,

We have questioned just about everything associated with this camera, except maybe the fact that it runs on 12 volts DC. That is okay. It does look like the dust mote is not properly calibrated in the image. I think Tolga is trying to post the information as soon as he can get it out. It should take some time to really run it through the paces and tweak it. I am very pleased with the results and the methodology for acquisition. I am really excited to try out shorter images, and maximizing the potential for capturing successful frames with shorter exposures. I have always tried to get longer and longer exposures. Go deeper and deeper with time. The experiment in changing the way I take images is going to be great. I think that is one of the things that is going to broaden my horizons and experience and if CMOS takes over, I will at least have some experience. I think I understand better the thought that with the lower read noise we can take shorter frames and potentially get excellent results. I have many people to thank on this forum for an education. Today, I sold my Astro modified t3i to the cooler climate of Seattle, where I am sure it will make someone happy. Living as far south as we do, the cooling is going to make a world of difference. I might actually use the camera year round. This is a welcome replacement to my 3ti. I can't get it fast enough.

Not sure if you are just stating you are excited or what? I am too! I've had a 178 in a shopping cart since I heard about this camera and have been holding off because I think this might be a better bang for the buck with the bigger sensor and still small pixels I want.

Doesn't change the fact that it didn't calibrate properly with Tolga's normal method and I am interested to find out why. It's not something that should be affected by a quick and dirty processing or not. It either calibrated or it doesn't pretty much. If it takes a different method for calibration, I'd love to learn more about it while waiting to decide I I'd like to get one.

 

It's not my method Josh It's PI. I didn't do anything to the image


 

#286 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,324
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:06 PM

Tolga, curious, when you calibrated did you add a pedestal? With my 5D III I found that even though it was a CMOS sensor/DSLR, I still needed to use a pedestal to avoid clipping when subtracting the bias. Without a pedestal, I often had calibration problems. Maybe adding a pedestal when calibrating might resolve any remnant calibration issues?

 

If you used BPP, then I guess I am not surprised there may be flat calibration issues. I think BPP has problems with flats, as I and many others have had issues calibrating our data with BPP in the past.


Edited by Jon Rista, 09 May 2016 - 10:08 PM.

 

#287 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:21 PM

 

What is IFN structure?

It;s realy faint dust round M81 m82 it's called integrated flux nebula

 

The Integrated Flux Nebulae are high galactic latitude nebulae illuminated by the milky way itself

 

A little more detail - credit Astronomy Magazine


 

#288 josh smith

josh smith

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,366
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:22 PM


No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.

There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.
Josh,

We have questioned just about everything associated with this camera, except maybe the fact that it runs on 12 volts DC. That is okay. It does look like the dust mote is not properly calibrated in the image. I think Tolga is trying to post the information as soon as he can get it out. It should take some time to really run it through the paces and tweak it. I am very pleased with the results and the methodology for acquisition. I am really excited to try out shorter images, and maximizing the potential for capturing successful frames with shorter exposures. I have always tried to get longer and longer exposures. Go deeper and deeper with time. The experiment in changing the way I take images is going to be great. I think that is one of the things that is going to broaden my horizons and experience and if CMOS takes over, I will at least have some experience. I think I understand better the thought that with the lower read noise we can take shorter frames and potentially get excellent results. I have many people to thank on this forum for an education. Today, I sold my Astro modified t3i to the cooler climate of Seattle, where I am sure it will make someone happy. Living as far south as we do, the cooling is going to make a world of difference. I might actually use the camera year round. This is a welcome replacement to my 3ti. I can't get it fast enough.
Not sure if you are just stating you are excited or what? I am too! I've had a 178 in a shopping cart since I heard about this camera and have been holding off because I think this might be a better bang for the buck with the bigger sensor and still small pixels I want.

Doesn't change the fact that it didn't calibrate properly with Tolga's normal method and I am interested to find out why. It's not something that should be affected by a quick and dirty processing or not. It either calibrated or it doesn't pretty much. If it takes a different method for calibration, I'd love to learn more about it while waiting to decide I I'd like to get one.
It's not my method Josh It's PI. I didn't do anything to the image

That's my point :)

I know you didn't do anything different. I'm hearing you. Not saying you did anything wrong at all. Just wondering why it didn't calibrate when you used the same method that normally works.
 

#289 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:28 PM

 

 

 

No Josh leave it. This image has no post processing at all. All I did is use the script in PI and stretched it. So it's OK. Maybe the flats had a gradient. I didn't spend too much time on them. I am pretty impressed with less than 2 hours of 1 minute subs.

There was never any question it can collect photons well. I'm glad it shows it can. The question has always been around calibration. I find it very unlikely anything is going on with the camera that would stop it from being able to calibrate ok. However, it didn't here and just curious what would've caused it. The two large rings are questionable if it is a flat issue, but it sure seems like it is and it is not the shape of IFN on the region so not sure what else it could be along with some of the larger dark clumps that aren't IFN. The dust mote is a dead give away that it didn't calibrate properly.

To answer Jon's question, those kind of rings definitely occur at times in images that aren't calibrated properly. The other thing is if the bias has something weird going on, it can be tough for the flats to correct.

Again, not trying to be a downer. Just want to help with you and others that are getting this along with myself if I get one. If you need to do something different than what is normally done for calibration, it would be good to find out what.
Josh,

We have questioned just about everything associated with this camera, except maybe the fact that it runs on 12 volts DC. That is okay. It does look like the dust mote is not properly calibrated in the image. I think Tolga is trying to post the information as soon as he can get it out. It should take some time to really run it through the paces and tweak it. I am very pleased with the results and the methodology for acquisition. I am really excited to try out shorter images, and maximizing the potential for capturing successful frames with shorter exposures. I have always tried to get longer and longer exposures. Go deeper and deeper with time. The experiment in changing the way I take images is going to be great. I think that is one of the things that is going to broaden my horizons and experience and if CMOS takes over, I will at least have some experience. I think I understand better the thought that with the lower read noise we can take shorter frames and potentially get excellent results. I have many people to thank on this forum for an education. Today, I sold my Astro modified t3i to the cooler climate of Seattle, where I am sure it will make someone happy. Living as far south as we do, the cooling is going to make a world of difference. I might actually use the camera year round. This is a welcome replacement to my 3ti. I can't get it fast enough.

Not sure if you are just stating you are excited or what? I am too! I've had a 178 in a shopping cart since I heard about this camera and have been holding off because I think this might be a better bang for the buck with the bigger sensor and still small pixels I want.

Doesn't change the fact that it didn't calibrate properly with Tolga's normal method and I am interested to find out why. It's not something that should be affected by a quick and dirty processing or not. It either calibrated or it doesn't pretty much. If it takes a different method for calibration, I'd love to learn more about it while waiting to decide I I'd like to get one.

 

get.jpg

 

Here is the same data preprocessed in DSS


 

#290 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:37 PM

Tolga, curious, when you calibrated did you add a pedestal? With my 5D III I found that even though it was a CMOS sensor/DSLR, I still needed to use a pedestal to avoid clipping when subtracting the bias. Without a pedestal, I often had calibration problems. Maybe adding a pedestal when calibrating might resolve any remnant calibration issues?

 

If you used BPP, then I guess I am not surprised there may be flat calibration issues. I think BPP has problems with flats, as I and many others have had issues calibrating our data with BPP in the past.

Jon I did not use bias on the lights only on the flats


 

#291 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:41 PM

Tolga,

I think the second one looks better. Is that truly Integrated Flux Nebulae on the right? If it is, that is pretty cool. Also, given what I am seeing here, I think I am going to wait on the extra $100 bucks for the Precise Parts 1mm Adapter. Any comments? Looks like the stock adapter with the XAGYL Filter Wheel and camera is going to work.
 

#292 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:45 PM

Tolga,

I think the second one looks better. Is that truly Integrated Flux Nebulae on the right? If it is, that is pretty cool. Also, given what I am seeing here, I think I am going to wait on the extra $100 bucks for the Precise Parts 1mm Adapter. Any comments? Looks like the stock adapter with the XAGYL Filter Wheel and camera is going to work.

Why do you need an adapter? Doesn't the filter wheel have T-threads?


 

#293 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:46 PM

I was just going to try to get the chip closer to the filter to minimize vignetting on the 1.25" filter but if you are using 1.25" filters then you are probably at least the third person with real world experience that is saying it is not an issue with the stock adapters.
 

#294 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:48 PM

I was just going to try to get the chip closer to the filter to minimize vignetting on the 1.25" filter but if you are using 1.25" filters then you are probably at least the third person with real world experience that is saying it is not an issue with the stock adapters.

I don't understand how you can get it any closer than putting the camera right against the FW?

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20160505_164207.jpg

Edited by tolgagumus, 09 May 2016 - 10:49 PM.

 

#295 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:57 PM

Here is some of the data 

 

https://www.dropbox....EICDuRK6Sa?dl=0


 

#296 bigeastro

bigeastro

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,340
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2015

Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:57 PM

If you use the XAGYL filter wheel, and the stock t thread adapters it comes with along with the camera, you produce 22 or so millimeters of distance between the filter and the CMOS sensor using the 6mm spec for the camera and estimating the filter wheel dimensions. If you use the 1mm adapter from Precise Parts to marry the camera to the filter wheel instead of the one that comes with the filter wheel package, you can save about 5mm of back focus and get the chip closer to the face of the filter wheel to about 17 mm. I am thinking that if you are using stock nautilus filer wheel adapters along with the camera you are going to be even futher than 22 mm from the chip to the fiter wheel, and if you are not seeing vignetting with your setup, then 22 mm should be okay. I want to avoid haveing to purchase the Precisoin Parts adapter.
 

#297 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:11 PM

If you use the XAGYL filter wheel, and the stock t thread adapters it comes with along with the camera, you produce 22 or so millimeters of distance between the filter and the CMOS sensor using the 6mm spec for the camera and estimating the filter wheel dimensions. If you use the 1mm adapter from Precise Parts to marry the camera to the filter wheel instead of the one that comes with the filter wheel package, you can save about 5mm of back focus and get the chip closer to the face of the filter wheel to about 17 mm. I am thinking that if you are using stock nautilus filer wheel adapters along with the camera you are going to be even futher than 22 mm from the chip to the fiter wheel, and if you are not seeing vignetting with your setup, then 22 mm should be okay. I want to avoid haveing to purchase the Precisoin Parts adapter.

That's what I am saying. You don't need any adapters. The threads on the FW is T Thread. Adapters are from T thread to xyz. Just add 6 mm to whatever the FW's face to filter distance


 

#298 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:14 PM

 

If you use the XAGYL filter wheel, and the stock t thread adapters it comes with along with the camera, you produce 22 or so millimeters of distance between the filter and the CMOS sensor using the 6mm spec for the camera and estimating the filter wheel dimensions. If you use the 1mm adapter from Precise Parts to marry the camera to the filter wheel instead of the one that comes with the filter wheel package, you can save about 5mm of back focus and get the chip closer to the face of the filter wheel to about 17 mm. I am thinking that if you are using stock nautilus filer wheel adapters along with the camera you are going to be even futher than 22 mm from the chip to the fiter wheel, and if you are not seeing vignetting with your setup, then 22 mm should be okay. I want to avoid haveing to purchase the Precisoin Parts adapter.

That's what I am saying. You don't need any adapters. The threads on the FW is T Thread. Adapters are from T thread to xyz. Just add 6 mm to whatever the FW's face to filter distance

 

Now I get it. The 2" adapter on the camera comes off and it has male T thread right on the face which will screw straight to the FW


 

#299 tolgagumus

tolgagumus

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 3,687
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014

Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:36 PM

One thing I did learn is that you don't want to use an OAG with a fast refractor with different brand filters LOL


 

#300 SteveGR

SteveGR

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 976
  • Joined: 04 May 2013

Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:39 PM

Thanks for this, looks really good. 


 


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics