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

The new CDK is almost ready for first light

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 sink45ny

sink45ny

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 06 December 2018 - 04:07 PM

Pw2

 When the fifth 30lbs counterweight is added tomorrow I'll be ready to drift align the mount.


  • zjc26138, DeanS, Starman27 and 14 others like this

#2 astro_1

astro_1

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2014
  • Loc: USA, Omaha, Nebraska

Posted 06 December 2018 - 04:48 PM

Really nice looking scope !!


  • sink45ny likes this

#3 RalphMeisterTigerMan

RalphMeisterTigerMan

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2016

Posted 06 December 2018 - 05:03 PM

Question: what are the benefits of a Corrected Dall-Kirkham over a Ritchey-Cretien? I know that astro-imagers use both, I'm not quite sure of the differences when it comes to imaging.

 

RalphMeisterTigerMan



#4 jhayes_tucson

jhayes_tucson

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6616
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Loc: Bend, OR

Posted 06 December 2018 - 05:04 PM

The CDK has a flat field and it's easier to make.

 

John


Edited by jhayes_tucson, 06 December 2018 - 05:05 PM.


#5 chuckscap

chuckscap

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1024
  • Joined: 18 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Colorado Springs, CO USA

Posted 06 December 2018 - 05:13 PM

Depending on design it can have a much smaller CO but then you sacrifice FOV, a good tradeoff in my opinion.



#6 sink45ny

sink45ny

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 06 December 2018 - 11:50 PM

Question: what are the benefits of a Corrected Dall-Kirkham over a Ritchey-Cretien? I know that astro-imagers use both, I'm not quite sure of the differences when it comes to imaging.

 

RalphMeisterTigerMan

Planewave sells both CDK's and RC's and here is a paragraph from the own literature.....  http://planewave.com...optical-design/

 

Having an aberration free telescope design means nothing if the optics cannot be aligned properly. Many Ritchey owners never get to take full advantage of their instrument’s performance because the Ritchey is very difficult to collimate. Aligning the hyperbolic secondary mirror’s optical axis to the optical axis of the primary mirror is critical in the Ritchey design, and the tolerances are unforgiving. The secondary mirror of the CDK design is spherical. It has no optical axis and so the centering tolerance of the CDK secondary mirror is comparatively huge. With the help of some very simple tools, the CDK user will be able to set the secondary spacing, collimate the optics and begin enjoying the full performance potential the instrument has to offer within a few minutes.

 

Note: I have never collimated a CDK or an RC.


Edited by sink45ny, 06 December 2018 - 11:50 PM.

  • psandelle and andysea like this

#7 drprovi57

drprovi57

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Virgina USA

Posted 08 December 2018 - 08:20 PM

Having owned a 14.5” RCOS (RC design) and now a 17” CDK - I can say that collimating CDK for optimal performace is a big plus - also one can find CDK’s in the F5 and F7 range - hard to find RC designs below F8 with out focal reducers.  Also most RC’s still require a field flattener for today’s large CCD chips.  

 

Jason


  • psandelle and sink45ny like this

#8 sink45ny

sink45ny

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 08 December 2018 - 08:51 PM

Having owned a 14.5” RCOS (RC design) and now a 17” CDK - I can say that collimating CDK for optimal performace is a big plus - also one can find CDK’s in the F5 and F7 range - hard to find RC designs below F8 with out focal reducers.  Also most RC’s still require a field flattener for today’s large CCD chips.  

 

Jason

Jason what mount are you using? I have an AP-1600, the CDK17 is a monster, it needs 6-30lbs counter weights. 


Edited by sink45ny, 08 December 2018 - 08:51 PM.


#9 drprovi57

drprovi57

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Virgina USA

Posted 12 December 2018 - 12:33 PM

Steve - I am now using a Paramount ME 2 - I believe it is rated around 240Lbs instrument capacity.  It has no issues pointing and tracking with CDK 17 along with cameras, guidescopes, even with added SW Esprit 100 and camera - I regularly perform unguided imagingusing ProTrack on ME2.. even with long FL - stars are round to the edge of my FLI PL11000 camera

 

jason


  • psandelle and sink45ny like this

#10 dcbaros

dcbaros

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Austin Texas

Posted 12 December 2018 - 03:23 PM

I am jealous. Great looking scope.


  • sink45ny likes this

#11 andysea

andysea

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3314
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 12 December 2018 - 08:35 PM

+1 for what Steve said about RC vs CDK collimation, I never collimated a CDK but that is also my understanding. 



#12 akulapanam

akulapanam

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2448
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012

Posted 12 December 2018 - 11:56 PM

Its only easier if the primary is fixed (the Planewave is).  If not the same skill / process is required for a CDK, Harmer Wynne, RC, Classical Cass, etc...  The disadvantage of course is that fixed primaries can develop astigmatism over a long period of time .


Edited by akulapanam, 12 December 2018 - 11:57 PM.


#13 drprovi57

drprovi57

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Virgina USA

Posted 13 December 2018 - 06:27 AM

This “collimation” topic comes up frequently regarding RCs and CDKs - Steve points out a key difference in optical design that makes the CDK’s ‘much more” forgiving in collimation compared to RCs - I have owned RCOS 14.5”, Planewave CDKs, and my present 17” OG Optical and have collimated them all using all the different techniques (Tak scopes, lasers, stars, CCD imaging, etc) and the bottomline:  one will find collimating a CDK design (with or without fixed primary) far easier than RC design - its all about the optical design...  I can share more on collimating these scope, but would take this thread off subject... enjoy the CDK they are great scopes

 

Jason

 


Edited by drprovi57, 13 December 2018 - 06:29 AM.

  • psandelle, FOUNTAIN1, sink45ny and 1 other like this

#14 sink45ny

sink45ny

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: 08 May 2014
  • Loc: Pennsyltucky

Posted 25 December 2018 - 09:18 PM

Finally got it drift aligned tonight. Now the fun begins, get the primary camera reattached and focused. Then focus the OAG.

CDK horsehead
A single 300 second image stretched but no calibration frames.
tracking

Edited by sink45ny, 26 December 2018 - 03:59 AM.

  • Alterf, drprovi57, R Botero and 1 other like this


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