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

Celestron Edge 11 + asi294MC pro + filters at f7 (adapters?) and hyperstar

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 22 August 2019 - 03:34 PM

I've yet to get my edge 11 out and test things (nib), as my observatory build is still not quite done.  However, i've ordered the asi294mc pro (not yet in hand).

I saw a few threads that confused me, so i'm seeking a bit of clarification ahead of time if possible.  Also wasnt sure if this belonged in the CCD forum or here under cats

 

Does the edge 11 require a t-adapter to connect to the asi294mc from the 0.7x reducer (IE: 93646)?  (i'm not sure why it would but maybe?)

 

Also, i'm thinking of getting the orion skyglow filter for when doing full color and not an NB HA filter at both f7 and f2, i'm pretty sure i follow that topic but, would a 1.25" that screws directly onto the asi 294 work for f7 imaging?

I was thinking 1.25 despite maybe fringe vignetting because i could also use the same filter in an electronic mini zwo wheel for the hyperstar (for eventually when i get an asi 1600mm)

 

I'm unsure though, if the 1.25 can still go directly on the 294mc and then attach to the hyperstar (without needing a 2" for one filter at a time and the filter slider, backfocus issues etc)?

 

Can anyone help clarify some of this?

 

Thanks in advance


Edited by markm75c, 22 August 2019 - 03:35 PM.


#2 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 23 August 2019 - 11:30 AM

So it appears i need the t-adapter when using the reducer, this im sure of, plus 55mm of backfocus.

Cooled-Color-Camera-solution.jpg?fbclid=

 

Not sure if throwing a 1.25" filter directly on the camera will mess with the backfocus or not (at f7).

 

I'd plan on using the same 1.25" (for now) with the hyperstar (unsure on arrangement there though).



#3 JTank70

JTank70

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2015
  • Loc: Maine

Posted 23 August 2019 - 06:53 PM

This is all new to me, but I believe you are correct about the 55mm backfocus.,  I have the Edge 8 with the 294MC Pro, and recently figured this out as well.

 

I had it set up with all of the spacers without the reducer (before I bought the reducer).

After buying the reducer I did not think I had to change anything and was actually using the camera with all of the spacers along with the reducer.

Now, I am completely new to EAA and thought my views were looking pretty good...…..  Then I discovered on another post here on CN that I was indeed supposed to shorten the Backfocus.

 

Going out for the first time tonight since making the switch, so we will see if anything looks different I guess.

 

I am not sure about the filter changing anything for you.  Hopefully someone who knows will let you know this.

 

Have fun.



#4 dragneg

dragneg

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 24 August 2019 - 05:24 AM

Hi.

 

Take a look at the photo in my thread "Severe focus issues on EdgeHD 1100" for some ideas for the setup. Something is wrong, but I'm afraid it's related to my new telescope and not the camera installation... The distances are confirmed by Celestron.

 

As far as I know, the Starizona Hyperstar is available with a filter slider for 2" mounted filters and you order it together with info about what camera you will use. It then comes with a special adapter to reach correct Back Focus for your ASI294. 

 

/anders



#5 DaveSD

DaveSD

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 21 May 2019

Posted 24 August 2019 - 10:32 AM

Hi,

 

For the 9.25"-14" Edge tubes, you need 146.05mm back focus distance.  This requires the Celestron T-Adapter plus the 55mm ZWO spacers as posted above.  If you purchase the 48mm T-adapter for EdgeHD 9.25", 11" and 14" Telescopes MFR: 93622, you won't need the ZWO thread adapter.

 

You can use 1.25" filters with the adapter included with the ASI294, which puts the filter close enough to the sensor that you wont get vignetting.  Since it fits inside the optical train, it doesn't affect the back focus distance.



#6 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 24 August 2019 - 11:20 PM

Hi,

 

For the 9.25"-14" Edge tubes, you need 146.05mm back focus distance.  This requires the Celestron T-Adapter plus the 55mm ZWO spacers as posted above.  If you purchase the 48mm T-adapter for EdgeHD 9.25", 11" and 14" Telescopes MFR: 93622, you won't need the ZWO thread adapter.

 

You can use 1.25" filters with the adapter included with the ASI294, which puts the filter close enough to the sensor that you wont get vignetting.  Since it fits inside the optical train, it doesn't affect the back focus distance.

Cool, ok, i didnt realize there was this other T adapter as an option to avoid the spacer, it says spacer length 91mm in the description on HP.

 

I finally took the 11 edge out tonight on the cem120 for the first time.  It has an adapter right on the main area that resembles the other t-adapter but with tightening screws.  It can take a 1.25" connection right off of it, though i know its not the same as for the asi294mc but, it does fit my asi224mc for planetary.



#7 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 24 August 2019 - 11:22 PM

Hi.

 

Take a look at the photo in my thread "Severe focus issues on EdgeHD 1100" for some ideas for the setup. Something is wrong, but I'm afraid it's related to my new telescope and not the camera installation... The distances are confirmed by Celestron.

 

As far as I know, the Starizona Hyperstar is available with a filter slider for 2" mounted filters and you order it together with info about what camera you will use. It then comes with a special adapter to reach correct Back Focus for your ASI294. 

 

/anders

On the hyperstar, yeah they have the filter slider you can use 2" filters with, but i know of a few using the zwo electronic filter wheel with success with 1.25", though yes with some vignetting, eliminated with darks and flats i think (avoids the need to buy two different size filters, but i may end up getting the 2" and 2" slide anyway, not sure yet).



#8 DaveSD

DaveSD

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 21 May 2019

Posted 25 August 2019 - 12:33 PM

Cool, ok, i didnt realize there was this other T adapter as an option to avoid the spacer, it says spacer length 91mm in the description on HP.

 

I finally took the 11 edge out tonight on the cem120 for the first time.  It has an adapter right on the main area that resembles the other t-adapter but with tightening screws.  It can take a 1.25" connection right off of it, though i know its not the same as for the asi294mc but, it does fit my asi224mc for planetary.

91mm (t-adapter) + 55mm (ZWO spacers) = 146mm (required backspace).  48mm is the diameter of the output end threads, they sell a smaller 42mm thread version too.



#9 DaveSD

DaveSD

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 21 May 2019

Posted 25 August 2019 - 01:13 PM

If you use the 42mm - you need the 42/48 thread adapter to fit the 16.5mm ZWO spacer and there is more of a vignetting potential.



#10 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 02 September 2019 - 12:48 AM

If you use the 42mm - you need the 42/48 thread adapter to fit the 16.5mm ZWO spacer and there is more of a vignetting potential.

Thanks, ill make sure to get the 48mm version then.

 

I also picked up the 1.25" skyglow filter for f7.  Ill get the orion 2" version for f2. 

 

What i'm trying to figure out now is what is the correct 1.25" Ha filter i could get that is both economical and decent quality, i suppose i may end up targetting a 2" verison for f2, though later with the asi 1600 + zwo electronic filter wheel, i could use the 1.25's there as others have just taking flats to get rid of vignetting.

 

Any thoughts on the ha side of things?

 

Examples:

 

https://www.highpoin...unted-hal12-125

vs

https://optcorp.com/...5-round-mounted

 

etc

 

The terminology mounted confuses me as well.

 

Doesnt the nm bandwidth thats ideal depend on f7 vs f10 or f2 (i think with f2 needing a special faster version, forgot the model off the top of my head).

 

In this case these examples are both 12nm.



#11 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 03 September 2019 - 02:10 PM

I also see WO duo band filters that seem to do light polution, ha and O3 at the same time, unsure if the added o3 will have much value on an OSC cam though?

 

Beyond those Ha filters i've found in the 1.25" range, i think it would make sense to go with a 6nm vs 12nm?  Blocks out more light pollution/moonlight?



#12 DaveSD

DaveSD

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 21 May 2019

Posted 03 September 2019 - 10:07 PM

I settled on a 'wide' Optolong UHC filter for general light pollution reduction and a 'narrow' L-eNhance for nebula imaging - do some Googling on these.  Seem to be good bang for the buck.



#13 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 04 September 2019 - 11:11 AM

I settled on a 'wide' Optolong UHC filter for general light pollution reduction and a 'narrow' L-eNhance for nebula imaging - do some Googling on these.  Seem to be good bang for the buck.

Do you use the optolong uhc in conjunction with the L-enhance or just one or the other depending on target?  If depends then which targets do you use the uhc with?  I saw there is also the L-pro as well.

 

The narrow enhance looks interesting, though the Ha spectrum is at 10nm, not 7 or 6 but better than 12 I suppose.


Edited by markm75c, 04 September 2019 - 11:54 AM.


#14 markm75c

markm75c

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 504
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 04 September 2019 - 12:46 PM

If you use the 42mm - you need the 42/48 thread adapter to fit the 16.5mm ZWO spacer and there is more of a vignetting potential.

 

Also..just came across this, for the zwo mini wheel, it says it consumes 20mm of backfocus..

 

How does that affect having the 48mm T-adapter?  How would you reduce it by 19mm?  Wouldnt that mean needing a shorter T-adapter in length if using the wheel (so two situations?)




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