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

Dust and speck of paper inside a new triplet

  • Please log in to reply
104 replies to this topic

#26 m9x18

m9x18

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Abilene, Texas USA

Posted 25 February 2020 - 05:28 PM

I know the flashlight test is usually considered a no-no but I'm pretty certain we all do it. Now having said that, wow, that lens does not look right to me. Especially if it's supposed to be brand new.



#27 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:23 PM

Here is a nebula shot done last weekend: https://www.astrobin.com/wokbpc/0/

I am shooting from a Bortle 5 zone. Guiding was going very good.

SubframeSelector in PixInsight shows:

- eccentricity between 0.22 and 0.58 with median at 0.37

- FWHM between 2.75" and 3.92" with median at 3.47*

 

So to be honest it performs so much better than my previous setup, but it cannot be compared and those marks just don't feel right to me. I have sought for legal advise to ensure I get the support I might be entitled to. Some of you believe, like the shop, it is normal but most of you, like me, believe it doesn't look right.

 

Currently, I am using a 4/3" ASI 1600. So I am covering only 1/4 of the circle surface. I am worried I could find surprises when I use a full frame sensor.

I plan to upgrade later to a full frame cooled astrocamera. Meanwhile I should maybe buy extension tubes and a canon EF-T2 adapter in order to check this. But it is a pain to spend more bucks for something I'll never use again.


Edited by Palmito, 25 February 2020 - 07:15 PM.


#28 Scott in NC

Scott in NC

    Refractor Fanatic

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 32,078
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2005
  • Loc: NC

Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:30 PM

Not sure what country the OP is in but if it was my scope it would be going back for a replacement or refund......  

I agree.


  • BRCoz likes this

#29 Steve Allison

Steve Allison

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2016
  • Loc: Olympia, Wash. 98502

Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:40 PM

I would be careful about accepting legal advice from posters on this site, however well-meaning...


Edited by Steve Allison, 25 February 2020 - 06:41 PM.

  • Delta608 and BFaucett like this

#30 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:45 PM

I would be careful about accepting legal advice from posters on this site, however well-meaning...

Absolutely, I have legal advise from a professional.

Here I am asking users if those defects seem normal or not.


Edited by Palmito, 25 February 2020 - 06:45 PM.


#31 Steve Allison

Steve Allison

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2016
  • Loc: Olympia, Wash. 98502

Posted 25 February 2020 - 06:46 PM

Palmito-

 

Good man!



#32 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,457
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 25 February 2020 - 07:22 PM

Absolutely, I have legal advise from a professional.

Here I am asking users if those defects seem normal or not.

The little specks on outer surfaces I could accept, the scratches not so much....., I have bought a lot of new scopes, one arrived out of collimation, one had a little black speck of dust that came off with a blower brush inside the OTA, none had scratched optics..... not normal undecided.gif


Edited by Kunama, 25 February 2020 - 07:22 PM.

  • Scott in NC, 3 i Guy, CounterWeight and 3 others like this

#33 nva

nva

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 220
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2018

Posted 26 February 2020 - 01:16 AM

The difference in the two photos is stark. The first picture was ok with what looks like dew spots and a little dust. If this was right out of the box I would wonder about the spots not the dust as much. The second looks like a black light was turned on in a motel room. I wonder if this is the dust that got rustled up when blowing into the OTA? Not sure what to make of the linear marks there.

Edited by nva, 26 February 2020 - 01:20 AM.


#34 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 26 February 2020 - 01:50 AM

Not sure what country the OP is in but if it was my scope it would be going back for a replacement or refund......

Well, that already happened once. Now he is trying to return the replacement (possibly the same scope just poorly cleaned) and the vendor is balking. Hence the legal issue. Going through the credit card company will bring a quick temporary resolution, but likely not a final one. Certainly cheaper than a lawyer and might result in a favorable final result. Seems worth a try.

Ultimately I think he is going to have to get it under the stars to resolve the issue. The picture of what might be faint scratches isn’t swaying the vendor to take it back. So a judge of some sort will need to weigh in, and part of the determination is whether it actually affects performance of the scope. I realize at this point the OP probably has a bad taste in his mouth, and wouldn’t want to keep it even if it bested a TOA150. But once it becomes a legal issue, part of the determination will be whether or not these suspected scratches actually have an impact on the view. Being stubborn and refusing to use the scope isn’t going to help. He may need to put the scope through its paces in order to demonstrate it really is defective and get an acceptable resolution.

Scott

#35 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,457
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 26 February 2020 - 02:15 AM

If those are indeed scratches then the value the scope takes a big hit regardless of whether the view is affected....
  • mtminnesota likes this

#36 Mauikj

Mauikj

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Maui, Hawaii, USA

Posted 26 February 2020 - 02:30 AM

Palmito - It should be sent back.  And the company should accept it.  The Esprit 150 is a quality scope.  If sold as new is should be pristine.  Sure,  the issues you have probably won't affect performance, but I would expect better. And It would make me crazy to see that in a band new scope.  Ive bought several new refractors and have never seen that in a new high end scope.

 

Aloha, KJ


Edited by Mauikj, 26 February 2020 - 02:33 AM.

  • m9x18 likes this

#37 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 02:48 AM

What do you think about my flats?

 

L: 

Master_Flat_L_1x1.jpg

 

Ha: 

Master_Flat_Ha.jpg

 

SII:

Master_Flat_SII_1x1.jpg

 

OIII: 

Master_Flat_OIII_1x1.jpg

 


Edited by Palmito, 26 February 2020 - 05:10 AM.


#38 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 05:12 AM

Well, that already happened once. Now he is trying to return the replacement (possibly the same scope just poorly cleaned) and the vendor is balking. Hence the legal issue. Going through the credit card company will bring a quick temporary resolution, but likely not a final one. Certainly cheaper than a lawyer and might result in a favorable final result. Seems worth a try.

Ultimately I think he is going to have to get it under the stars to resolve the issue. The picture of what might be faint scratches isn’t swaying the vendor to take it back. So a judge of some sort will need to weigh in, and part of the determination is whether it actually affects performance of the scope. I realize at this point the OP probably has a bad taste in his mouth, and wouldn’t want to keep it even if it bested a TOA150. But once it becomes a legal issue, part of the determination will be whether or not these suspected scratches actually have an impact on the view. Being stubborn and refusing to use the scope isn’t going to help. He may need to put the scope through its paces in order to demonstrate it really is defective and get an acceptable resolution.

Scott

Thanks for your valuable posts. I believe I have found proof of the defect with flat frames.


  • SeattleScott likes this

#39 Toddeo

Toddeo

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,201
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012
  • Loc: Sierra Vista, AZ

Posted 26 February 2020 - 10:09 AM

Thanks starryhtx, yes I really feel like sending it back. But at the moment the shop says they could replace it 10 times, it will always be the same, that this is normal.

I am waiting for an answer after my last emails about the cleaning marks and what I believed was scratches.

 

Thanks Alan, I really hope so.

With that kind of response- I'd say it's time to find another vendor/source for that scope. Send it back, ask for a refund and look elsewhere.


  • Mauikj likes this

#40 skyward_eyes

skyward_eyes

    Vendor - Sky-Watcher USA

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5,109
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2006

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:17 PM

Small filaments of dust get caught in the tubes during assembly. They are blown out but at times you cannot clear out every piece with the baffles installed. Shipping will move these around. They won't cause any issues. 

 

Now, that being said, the paper is something that should not be there, period. The scratches on the optics are also not acceptable in anyway. This is a $6000+ scope and should arrive as such. 


  • Erik Bakker, BillP, helpwanted and 8 others like this

#41 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:22 PM

Thanks for your valuable posts. I believe I have found proof of the defect with flat frames.

Sometimes you have to use it to lose it

#42 Heywood

Heywood

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,188
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2009

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:26 PM

Thanks for your valuable posts. I believe I have found proof of the defect with flat frames.


Time to call Sixty Minutes. Hehe.

#43 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:28 PM

Time to call Sixty Minutes. Hehe.

lol.gif


  • Mauikj likes this

#44 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:29 PM

Sometimes you have to use it to lose it

I am sure I am going to be so happy with it once fixed, hopefully soon



#45 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:37 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, that's it! I have my proof!!

 

It has been a major pain in the butt, as extension rings were stuck and I don't have a M68-M69 adapter

But at the price of most of my right hands skin, proper CAT gloves, sweat, blood, tears, shims (angle adjustment) and holding my bloody camera in place while imaging I have them!

 

Here is a master flat (total 1M ADU), without the filterwheel:

Master_Flat_NoFilter_1x1.jpg

 

And best of all, a master flat (total 500K ADU), without the filter wheel and without the field flattener:

Master_Flat_NoFilterNoFlattener_1x1.jpg


Edited by Palmito, 26 February 2020 - 12:37 PM.


#46 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 12:44 PM

Do you all agree, that those spots on my flats are too big to be caused, in any ways possible, by my sensor?

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20200226_184112_cmp.jpg

Edited by Palmito, 26 February 2020 - 12:51 PM.


#47 fmeschia

fmeschia

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 20 May 2016
  • Loc: Mountain View, CA

Posted 26 February 2020 - 01:24 PM

Do you all agree, that those spots on my flats are too big to be caused, in any ways possible, by my sensor?

I am not sure what “spots” you are referring to. If it’s the dark circle towards the center of the upper half, that can’t possibly be on the objective lens. Nothing on the objective can cause that sharp a mark... only diffraction at best. 



#48 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,763
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 26 February 2020 - 01:38 PM

Can always rotate the camera and/or filters used. If the spot rotates,...
  • fmeschia likes this

#49 Palmito

Palmito

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2018
  • Loc: Lausanne, Switzerland

Posted 26 February 2020 - 05:41 PM

Can always rotate the camera and/or filters used. If the spot rotates,...

Yes, I did, indeed protective window had dust.

Proper air blowing and 99% alcohol cleaning has been performed. Got rid of dark spots.

 

Did new flats without filters, rotated 90° and did more, found same patterns.

 

So at this point as the majority of you, I find this outrageous, but fail to show significant degradation. At least with flats, with my current 4/3" sensor.

Weather is forecast as real bad for 5 days, but hopefully I will be able to shoot at a bright star shortly...

 

My latest "NoFilter" flat:

Master_Flat_NoFilter_3_1x1.jpg


Edited by Palmito, 26 February 2020 - 05:43 PM.


#50 fmeschia

fmeschia

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 20 May 2016
  • Loc: Mountain View, CA

Posted 26 February 2020 - 05:43 PM

If the patterns appear to be the same (relative to the frame “coordinate system”) when you rotate the camera, that means they are generated by something that moves with the camera, and not by the objective lens.




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