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

QHY600 - Yet another thread!

  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

#51 Denimsky

Denimsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,065
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2007
  • Loc: BC, Canada

Posted 22 July 2020 - 01:24 AM

Hi guys

 

 

I added two 1mm spacers after the QuadTCC and the curvature got down to 13% from 21%.

 

This is good enough for me.

The stars on the corners are not perfectly round but they are very good.

I'm thinking about replacing the copper tape shims with a CTU to remove the last remaining tilts.

 

I was following Roland's instruction to know if I need to add or remove spacers.

https://astro-physic...rt/tech_support

 

Fortunately I had to add spacers.

I needed to move the focuser inward by around 0.23mm from the perfect focus position for the central stars to get the stars on the corners focused.

I was wondering if I had to increase the spacing by 0.23mm so I posted a question about it on the AP user group.

https://ap-ug.groups...20,2,0,75713788

 

Roland said I need to add 2mm given my scope and the sensor size and the 0.23mm inward travel.

He was correct!

When I tried 1mm or 3mm extra spacing, the results was much worse than 2mm.

 

What I'm surprised is how much the spacing was off even though I got a custom adapter based on the published backfocus distances information.

Attached Thumbnails

  • extra_spacing_2mm.PNG

Edited by Denimsky, 22 July 2020 - 01:25 AM.

  • anismo and bugbit like this

#52 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6,052
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 22 July 2020 - 02:49 PM

Thank you Donghun!! This is very helpful. I need to test my setup now that I have the CTU and filters.. and ofcourse work spiked up (though it is clear out here).. Will test and report. I dont have CCDI. So will just do star testing.. 



#53 Denimsky

Denimsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,065
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2007
  • Loc: BC, Canada

Posted 22 July 2020 - 03:37 PM

Hi Anis

 

I followed the instruction in this blog and i found that it's very useful.

The method is very systematic.

https://aiastro.word...ilt-adjustment/


  • H-Alfa, anismo and Housemd like this

#54 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 09 August 2020 - 09:44 PM

Circling back on this as I am working on tilt with the ASI6200, Quad TCC, and the Gerd CTU tonight and am curious how others have fared?


Edited by rockstarbill, 09 August 2020 - 09:54 PM.


#55 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6,052
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 09 August 2020 - 11:35 PM

I havent yet tried my CTU with my system yet. I am hoping to test this week and will report with results. 

 

How is your system working Bill? Hopefully with the CTU, things can be brought under control?



#56 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 09 August 2020 - 11:43 PM

The weather has been horrible up until this weekend, basically. So, I have not been able to use it much until now. It just got dark here, so I will be working on tilt here in a few. I did get some time on it last night and was able to make some good progress. The CTU is well designed and works good so far. The tilt with the flattener is minor, but with the Quad TCC its a different story. :) 



#57 smccully

smccully

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2018
  • Loc: Washington

Posted 10 August 2020 - 12:03 AM

What version of the Gerd CTU are people using M68? M48? What adapters are you using to go from M68 to M52?



#58 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 10 August 2020 - 12:03 AM

I use the Gerd M68 CTU with the ASI6200. I dont go from M68 to M54 on my system.



#59 smccully

smccully

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2018
  • Loc: Washington

Posted 10 August 2020 - 12:20 AM

AH, I think the 17mm backfocus would be too much for either of my scopes. I would really like to find something that would replace the default QHYCCD tilt adapter, ....



#60 Peter in Reno

Peter in Reno

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,315
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Reno, NV

Posted 10 August 2020 - 12:28 AM

AH, I think the 17mm backfocus would be too much for either of my scopes. I would really like to find something that would replace the default QHYCCD tilt adapter, ....

What default tilt adapter? I think there's a lost in translation when QHY advertises "tilt adapter" included with QHY600M camera because it's not actually a tilt adapter. It's simply a dovetail connection between QHY600M camera and filter wheel. QHY also say it's an "auto centering" which is also not accurate. 

 

But I really like dovetail connection which makes it easier to frame an object in FOV.

 

Peter 


  • Gene3 likes this

#61 smccully

smccully

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2018
  • Loc: Washington

Posted 10 August 2020 - 12:43 AM

Yeah, I would agree its not much of a tilt adapter, doesn't plate solving make framing an object a mute point though? I usually use something like Telescopius or SkySafari just figure out the coordinates I want for any object. 


  • Gene3 likes this

#62 Gene3

Gene3

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Del Mar, CA

Posted 10 August 2020 - 11:30 AM

I have not had any issues with dovetail adapter affecting tilt (I have the shorter photo version of the 600M). With the right information entered into Telescopius I can try framing an object in different orientations. Then its simple to adjust the camera orientation via the dovetail adapter to match the orientation in Telescopius.

I should mention that to change camera orientation I actually let my WR35 do that, I do not actually use the dovetail adapter to rotate the camera... but I could.



#63 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6,052
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 16 August 2020 - 10:37 PM

Finally got the filters loaded. Loading unmounted filters on the FW is an ordeal! I hope I dont have any light leak. I have the Precise parts adapter for the Tak QE reducer and then relized that the scoep ends with M72, the CTU is M68 and the FW is M54... Sigh, to test, I couldnt use the CTU. But the field is huge that I am not sure if the CTU is even needed. The stars with the FSQ + Reducer is super tiny.

 

IMG_8841.jpg

 

What is more concerning is the vignetting with M54 opening in the FW. 

 

Screen Shot 2020-08-16 at 10.26.31 PM.jpg


  • psandelle likes this

#64 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 16 August 2020 - 10:41 PM

M54 should not be an issue if you are not using the reducer with the FSQ. Measure the aperture of your adapters though, as some have crazy small clear aperture on them. Usually an M54 adapter will have 50-51mm. 


  • anismo likes this

#65 Peter in Reno

Peter in Reno

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,315
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Reno, NV

Posted 16 August 2020 - 10:43 PM

I highly recommend filter masks from:

 

https://buckeyestarg...FilterMasks.php

 

See mine at:

 

https://www.cloudyni...but/?p=10175913

 

Peter 


Edited by Peter in Reno, 16 August 2020 - 10:47 PM.

  • rockstarbill, anismo and Gene3 like this

#66 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6,052
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 16 August 2020 - 10:49 PM

M54 should not be an issue if you are not using the reducer with the FSQ. Measure the aperture of your adapters though, as some have crazy small clear aperture on them. Usually an M54 adapter will have 50-51mm. 

Right now it is M54 to Reducer  using Precise parts adapter to meet the 72.2mm backfocus. There is space for CTU in front of the reducer. I will have to get M72 to M68 adapters. But I am trying to get somet testing this week while waiting on it.. Oh Btw, the scope is rocking the CXL moonlite I got from you :) .. Working great!

 

I highly recommend filter masks from:

 

https://buckeyestarg...FilterMasks.php

 

See mine at:

 

https://www.cloudyni...but/?p=10175913

 

Peter 

That looks like a good option! Thanks Peter!  I will be taking the flats and test. 

 

EDIT: Looking at yours and my FW, there is hardly any space between the filter slots in mine frown.gif


Edited by anismo, 16 August 2020 - 10:59 PM.


#67 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 16 August 2020 - 10:58 PM

Ah okay, yes the reducer will cause some issues with M54. No real way around it since M68 isnt an option on the QHY setup. 



#68 Peter in Reno

Peter in Reno

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,315
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Reno, NV

Posted 16 August 2020 - 11:32 PM

Right now it is M54 to Reducer  using Precise parts adapter to meet the 72.2mm backfocus. There is space for CTU in front of the reducer. I will have to get M72 to M68 adapters. But I am trying to get somet testing this week while waiting on it.. Oh Btw, the scope is rocking the CXL moonlite I got from you smile.gif .. Working great!

 

That looks like a good option! Thanks Peter!  I will be taking the flats and test. 

 

EDIT: Looking at yours and my FW, there is hardly any space between the filter slots in mine frown.gif

Take a look at the specs for CFW3 medium and large FW:

 

https://www.qhyccd.c...137&id=34&cut=1

 

It does look like a very tight fit for your large FW. Scroll down a bit.

 

Peter 



#69 Gene3

Gene3

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2016
  • Loc: Del Mar, CA

Posted 16 August 2020 - 11:55 PM

I highly recommend filter masks from:

 

https://buckeyestarg...FilterMasks.php

 

See mine at:

 

https://www.cloudyni...but/?p=10175913

 

Peter 

These work great. Just be careful to remove any stray filaments from the inside of the ring before you install. You can just run you finger around the inner edge to remove them.


  • anismo likes this

#70 FredOS

FredOS

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 263
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2017

Posted 17 August 2020 - 10:24 AM

rockstarbill,

 

were you able to dial in the AP130GTX + QUAD ?

I have started the other night before the clouds came in. I'm using the ASI6200, a FLI CFW2.7 Filter wheel and the Sidewinder after the Nightcrawler for tilt tip. In addition, I attached my FLI Atlas focuser between the Quad and FLI filter wheel to fine tune the distance after the Quad - In practice, I'm using 2 focusers !

Exercise was to move the Atlas by 0.5mm, refocus the nightcrawler, save 3 frames (20s) and measure FWHM & Eccentricity for full frame and then for an aggregate image of the 4 corners (each corner being 500 X 500 pixel).  I didn't have time to fully correct tilt tip (quite a lot). It also showed that the distance between Quad and camera needs to be precise to about 0.2mm. Indeed, 0.5mm changes on the Atlas (distance Quad to camera) showed very different results with corner eccentricity jumping by 0.2. In all likelihood, I will do further testing and just keep the Atlas in place on the imaging train.

 

Frederic



#71 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 17 August 2020 - 10:34 AM

I did manage to get things to an okay point and you are right that the spacing game makes everything even more difficult when working with this chip and the Quad TCC. I changed course and put my AGO 10" iDK on, and have been working on getting the frame well corrected on that scope -- which has not been bad at all. I am just about there. At some point I will revisit the Quad TCC but I was spending too much time fussing with tilt and not enough time imaging -- which prompted the scope swap for the stretch of good weather we have.



#72 Peter in Reno

Peter in Reno

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,315
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Reno, NV

Posted 17 August 2020 - 12:11 PM

These work great. Just be careful to remove any stray filaments from the inside of the ring before you install. You can just run you finger around the inner edge to remove them.

Gene,

 

Do you have QHY CFW3 medium or large filter wheel? If you have large FW, then sounds like the filter masks will work.

 

Peter


  • Gene3 likes this

#73 buckeyestargazer

buckeyestargazer

    Vendor - Buckeyestargazer.net

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5,280
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2008
  • Loc: IN, USA

Posted 17 August 2020 - 12:23 PM

EDIT: Looking at yours and my FW, there is hardly any space between the filter slots in mine frown.gif

 

These work great. Just be careful to remove any stray filaments from the inside of the ring before you install. You can just run you finger around the inner edge to remove them.

If I remember correctly I made a slight change to the filter masks, putting the "flat" side between the filters at a more precise angle for the large filter wheel.  I can't remember for sure but I think I did this with Gene's masks so they would fit better.  I have had a number of people buy these masks with the large QHY3 FW. 

 

I do try to remove those filaments but I guess I missed some.  grin.gif

 

EDIT:  I just found an email exchange with another customer with a CFW3L 7x50, and I did indeed make a slight change to the design to accommodate this filter wheel.  Fits perfectly now.  


Edited by buckeyestargazer, 17 August 2020 - 12:32 PM.

  • anismo likes this

#74 anismo

anismo

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6,052
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Austin, TX, USA

Posted 17 August 2020 - 06:05 PM

I could only get 5x5 minute Ha subs before clouds rolled in (after days and days of clear nights and very good seeing , I choose the night when it clouds over.. laugh.gif

 

I also got flats for all filters using Alnitak Flipflat and it looks pretty good. No light leak, weird patterns etc. The Ha subs calibrated perfectly (No over correction etc). It looks like I dont need to add anything to the filterwheel.. phew. 

 

However, this image train is with Tak FSQ106ED->Moonlite Focuser->Takahashi QE 0.73 reducer->Precise parts adapter (13.7mm)->QHY OAG-M (M54) ->QHY600 The PP adapter puts it at the right backfocus of 72.2mm . However, the stars are terrible. I couldn't attach the CTU before the reducer or without reducer because I dont have M68 adapters yet.  The stars are at the edge are not good. It is almost like spacing is off.

 

 

2020-08-17_17h52_33.jpg

 

stars.jpg


Edited by anismo, 17 August 2020 - 06:08 PM.


#75 rockstarbill

rockstarbill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,564
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 17 August 2020 - 06:07 PM

Its more likely the problem is tilt, there is no way its spacing on an FSQ. If you can upload a sub, it will be easy to confirm.




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