5 replies to this topic

[AnotherMoneyPit]

C6, hyperstar, asi533mc-pro (power + USB cable), and Starizonas supplied camera spacer / adapter (no filter drawer). 

 

The way I see it I have two 'easy' options... either run both cables together, and exit them out the base of the dew shield, close to the collector, through the provision the shield incorporates for this purpose (as well as, of course, the dew heater ring wiring), or... run them out the front of the dew shield, where creating a 90-degree angle with the wires to (hopefully) achieve attractive diffusion spikes would be possible. Neither option strikes me as ideal, particularly since it's as important to me to use the dew shield for capturing darks and flats as it is to achieve eye-pleasing diffraction patterns. I also don't know what, if any, difference there is between these wires crossing in front of the optics directly in front of the collector, vs approx 10" in front of it as would be the case if I came out the front of the shield.

 

I'm ok with modifying the shield as needed to achieve my desired goals, if necessary. But I'd rather not replace it as its already purchased and in every other way I'm really pleased with the construction and fitment.

 

Any help, advice, or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I have this question in to Starizona and will post their response here when received, but I'm curious what y'all have done and am hoping for 'first light' tonight!

Edited by AnotherMoneyPit, 25 January 2023 - 03:04 PM.

[Jim Waters]

The best option you can do is to put two small holes in the dew shield.  One for power and the other for data.

[revans]

C6, hyperstar, asi533mc-pro (power + USB cable), and Starizonas supplied camera spacer / adapter (no filter drawer). 

 

The way I see it I have two 'easy' options... either run both cables together, and exit them out the base of the dew shield, close to the collector, through the provision the shield incorporates for this purpose (as well as, of course, the dew heater ring wiring), or... run them out the front of the dew shield, where creating a 90-degree angle with the wires to (hopefully) achieve attractive diffusion spikes would be possible. Neither option strikes me as ideal, particularly since it's as important to me to use the dew shield for capturing darks and flats as it is to achieve eye-pleasing diffraction patterns. I also don't know what, if any, difference there is between these wires crossing in front of the optics directly in front of the collector, vs approx 10" in front of it as would be the case if I came out the front of the shield.

 

I'm ok with modifying the shield as needed to achieve my desired goals, if necessary. But I'd rather not replace it as its already purchased and in every other way I'm really pleased with the construction and fitment.

 

Any help, advice, or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I have this question in to Starizona and will post their response here when received, but I'm curious what y'all have done and am hoping for 'first light' tonight!

Agena astroproducts sells a cable router for under $20 that supposedly eliminates star spikes in hyperstar...  I've ordered one but haven't tried it yet.

 

Rick

[Beaverpond Astro]

The router Rick suggests is a great way to manage the cables, so you do want to get one.  You can buy them or have them 3D printed if you have that capability or know someone who does.  The designs come in a curved shape to minimize diffraction spikes or in an orthogonal shape to intentional add spikes. like a Newt does.

But I found it gets in the way of properly fitting the rigid Celestron dew shield, as it clips onto the lip of the tube.

 

I saw on another thread where someone ran their cables forward from the camera to the end of the dew shield, like you suggested. 

Good idea I think...as long as you keep them in the shadow of the central obstruction.  Then put the router guide on the end of the dew shield and bring the cables out along it.  No need to drill holes or otherwise modify that nice Celestron shield .

 

Two other advantages I can think of, at least for me...one, keeps your fingers away from the corrector plate (avoiding fingerprinting it), and if you have a filter drawer, makes changing out filters much easier, as sometimes, with  camera rotation changes, the wires can go over the filter drawer.

[revans]

The router Rick suggests is a great way to manage the cables, so you do want to get one.  You can buy them or have them 3D printed if you have that capability or know someone who does.  The designs come in a curved shape to minimize diffraction spikes or in an orthogonal shape to intentional add spikes. like a Newt does.

But I found it gets in the way of properly fitting the rigid Celestron dew shield, as it clips onto the lip of the tube.

 

I saw on another thread where someone ran their cables forward from the camera to the end of the dew shield, like you suggested. 

Good idea I think...as long as you keep them in the shadow of the central obstruction.  Then put the router guide on the end of the dew shield and bring the cables out along it.  No need to drill holes or otherwise modify that nice Celestron shield .

 

Two other advantages I can think of, at least for me...one, keeps your fingers away from the corrector plate (avoiding fingerprinting it), and if you have a filter drawer, makes changing out filters much easier, as sometimes, with  camera rotation changes, the wires can go over the filter drawer.

I wonder if the cable router would still prevent star spikes if it were moved out to the rim of the rigid dew shield? I just have a feeling that it won't work as well in that location.... but I have no experience to back up the thought....

 

Rick

[Beaverpond Astro]

No idea either...I guess there is only 1 way to find out! 

 

Should have my new router guide tomorrow, but no sign of clear skies for at least a week...

 

Steve