My first six months with the Sharpstar 15028HNT-AL - A trial by fire! - Forums

Topic starter

Mar 4, 2026

So I bought my Sharpstar 15028HNT-AL back in September last year, based off a few users brilliant images, and the spec-sheet alone… Lets face it, it’s hard to argue with F/2.8 when you’re primarily a narrowband deep sky imager.

Having owned a few newtonians in the past, albeit, F/4, F/5 and F/6 newtonians, I knew that collimation would be required regularly, I knew the process and I knew that an F/2.8 newt was going to be significantly more sensitive to error than even the F/4… What I didn’t know, however, was the meaning of the word ‘significantly’ in this instance…

On first receiving the scope, and after the obligitory rain that ensued for a couple of weeks, I was able to make my first test image. For this, I used simply the collimation cap and a defocused star to get it looking ‘OK’… and overall, it wasn’t bad - however I did notice that the flats showed that the ‘center spot’ of the light cone was a LONG way from the center of my camera sensor…

📷 Sharpstar 15028HNT First Light test.https://app.astrobin.com/i/wjaafu/

After this experience, I learned that the scope was incredibly sensitive to off-axis light, dew and that the collimation that looked ‘ok’ was nowhere near good enough… I looked at the OCAL, but at its extreme price, I had to try a laser first. I bought one, had another go at the collimation (which was actually looking relatively close even with the laser) and then made this test…

📷 Second test of the Sharpstar 15028HNThttps://app.astrobin.com/i/rarr6l/

You’ll notice this is cropped quite heavily - why? because outside of this field of view, the stars were MUD! despite the laser telling me everything was dead on - there was MASSIVE tilt in the optical train (ASTAP reporting 39% tilt in fact…)

The thought crept into my mind at this point… “Have I made a mistake selling my beautiful refractor to purchase something as sensitive as an f/2.8 newtonian?”. But as I said those words in my head, I heard “f/2.8”, and remembered that IF I could tame this monster, I would have an EXTREME imaging tool!

A third, fourth and fifth attempt was made at collimation… The Sharpstar documentation in hand, the collimation cap and the Baader Laser Colli MkIII at my disposal.. Again, I had things looking close. What I could notice is, that despite having the secondary mirror holder spaced at 5mm from the back of the spider as per Sharpstar’s documentation, the secondary did not look how I would have expected… It didn’t look like a circle, rather, quite oblong, and while I was able to get the primary mirror completely in the secondary, and get the laser return beam to go exactly back into the laser emitter, it just felt like something was still wrong… but the tools said it was right, so I did another test image…

📷 SMC Nebulaehttps://app.astrobin.com/i/wvua6p/

Again - this doesn’t look too bad after processing, but ASTAP was still reporting between 35 and 40% tilt in the optics, the flats were still very uneven, with the center of the light cone significantly off-center, almost 50% of the distance between the center of the image and the left hand edge… My mind kept focusing on that detail… The flats are off-center, and the secondary looks wrong based on what I know about newtonian collimation… But also, I’d read that a laser collimator was also grossly inadequate for an f/2.8 optical system, and I’d need something more accurate, that could factor in more than just ‘does the laser hit the center of the primary and come back into the laser diode’.

But was this collimation? or did I actually have tilt in my optical train. I ran ASTAP over a number of images from my Askar 120APO, and they were dead flat, next to 0% tilt. So I felt that the camera was not introducing tilt..

So what? Was the focuser of my 15028HNT mis-aligned. Did I have sag in the focuser? was my primary mirror loose and flopping about?? Enough was enough, something had to be done.

I took the plunge and bought an OCAL 4 Pro… It confirmed to me what I had been thinking I could see…

1. The secondary mirror was not in the center of the focuser tube, in fact, it was a long way off.
2. The secondary mirror was not even remotely circular.

I got it as close as I could, while adhereing to the documentation still, and made my fourth test image.

Now, to say that I was mad about this would be a lie… There was still 35% (Extreme) tilt, stars in the bottom corner appeared as small donuts, BUT, I’ve wanted to shoot this target for nearly 20 years, but I’ve never had equipment that made it possible from my bortle 5 sky… I was blown away when the first 600s sub rolled in, so despite the flaws, I let it run anyway, and collected ~8hrs of data…

📷 LDN 1622 - The Boogeyman Nebula (Ha false-colour)https://app.astrobin.com/i/3qfxqz/

I was so happy to have got this image, but still very dissatisfied with the stars in the bottom left corner, and the unusal looking flares from the bright stars.. Collimation was clearly wrong, and at this felt I’d done everything except one…

So discarding the Sharpstar manuals information regarding the 5mm spacing between the secondary holder and the back of the spider, I got to work on the scope, manually moving the secondary until it was central in the OCAL’s field of view. I then manually (by hand) adjusted the tilt and rotation of the mirror until it was perfectly circular and concentric with the focuser tube.. This step took me almost 1h of fiddling, but once done, I screwed in the adjustment bolts so it would hold, then measured the gap between the secondary and the spider, 8.5mm… 3.5mm further from the spider than Sharpstar’s documentation, BUT! it looked how I expected a secondary mirror should look. I removed the primary from the tube, and leveled it in the mirror cell so it was ‘neutral’ with no tilt applied, and ensured that the retaining ring was tight enough that the mirror couldn’t flop, but not so tight that it could possibly pinch the optics..

After refitting the mirror, I tweaked the secondary adjustments to point it directly at the primary - and then the primary to center everything up in the OCAL’s field of view… This took a few iterations, as every adjustment of the primary necessitated a slight tweak on the secondary, but finally… the adjustments converged.

It finally looked GOOD! not ‘ok’… but GOOD.

Weather here has been a nightmare, but I got a 15min window of clear sky, so I took the opportunity and I put it outside with the intention of taking a single test frame just to see the field… No polar alignment, no guiding… didnt even turn on the cameras cooler… I just wanted a test sub to confirm the collimation…

I ended up taking 3× 30s subs in Ha… This was the result.
📷 EtaCar_Ha_90s_Half-Size.jpgNot bad for 90s of total integration with a 3.5nm Ha filter… and ASTAP reports 5% tilt - which it deems as negligable… This made me VERY happy. I packed up, before the cloud and ran began…

A week later, I got an hour of clear sky to test properly…

This is 25×180s subs.
📷 Vela_Ha_75_half-size.jpgThis one was obviously with an accurate polar alignment and guiding in play, camera at -10c… And this is the first time that I’ve started to feel like this scope was the right choice!

There is still a long way to go - but I’m seeing the promise this scope has!

Clearly, collimation has been the focus thus far… I do however have some other thoughts on the scope…

1 - Reflections in the OTA.
The carbon fiber model was flocked from the factory, however the AL version is not - and there were a number of reflections going on inside the tube.

Resolution: I have flocked the OTA internals, and the edge of the secondary mirror.

2 - Stray light in the OTA.
The neighbors porch light, street lights 300m away.. Street lights 500m away that were reflected off the red-brick wall of my house, even the IR light from my back yard security cameras… if it emitted, or reflected light, it ended up in the OTA, and washed out contrast dramatically, sometimes to the point of making the target invisible in the frame entirely.

Resolution: I designed and printed a 24cm long light shield for the scope. Once printed, this was then flocked to match the OTA internals.

3 - Dew on the primary and secondary mirrors on humid nights.
The usual weather here of a night time is very humid, but especially October through to May…. > 80% humidity is average here… Coupled with the 35°C days, promptly dropping to 19~21°C after dark, dew is common… and the primary mirror in this scope LOVED to catch it all! not only that, but the secondary would condensate, then drip water droplets onto the primary… Good times!! Something had to be done!

Resolution: The aforementioned light shield is also a dew shield. This has made some pretty dramatic improvements. Further to this, I have added a dew heater around the rear of the OTA where the primary mirror is held. This has now resolved the issue, such that the scope lasted 6h under the stars in 80~95% humidity, and rapidly dropping temperatures without suffering any interference from dew.

4 - OAG pick off prism causing shadow in the light path.
The light cone on an F/2.8 optical system is pretty steep! I was unable to retract the pick off prism far enough to remove it from the light cone, while still being able to see stars…

Resolution: As I couldn’t retract it any further, my only option was to move from the OAG to a William Optics Uniguide 32mm f/4 guide scope..

5 - Rotating the camera via moving the whole focuser is annoying.
Rotating the camera is inevitable between nights due to having to remove the camera to perform collimation checks, and the only way to adjust this rotation is to rotate the entire focuser assemly, which can be difficult due to the position of the EAF…

Resolution: Due to the change from the OAG to the external guide scope, I have enough available backfocus now to add a rotator into my imaging train, which I will do as soon as I can… This will remove the issue as I will lock down the focuser in the orientation that is most sensible to me, then rotate the camera or collimation tools electronically.

Issue conclusion:
So, while the scope is complicated, results are this in a nutshell.

1 - It suffers from internal reflections - flock EVERYTHING you can.
2 - It suffers from dew and stray light - get/make a dew shield, run a heater band around the primary.
3 - Rotating the whole focuser is annoying - if you have room in your backfocus calc, get a rotator for this scope.
4 - Collimation is EXTREMELY sensitive - Get the correct tools and take your time. Ignore what the manual says about mirror spacing and just collimate it so it looks perfect via the tools you are using.

What a mission this scope is turning out to be - I LOVE how fast it builds SNR on even very dim targets, but getting it properly adjusted and running perfectly is incredibly difficult.

Is it worth it? Well that’s a purely personal decision I think.

I know I need to tweak the collimation a little more still, and I know that I need to buy high-speed narrowband filters to get the most out of these optics… But given the extremely limited time I get to astro-image, having a scope that is building signal as quickly as this one does, that is as small and portable as this one is… well, the value to me is immeasurable. I’m also a sucker for big diffraction spikes, and this scope will certainly produce them when pointed at a bright star!

It’s been a MASSIVE P.I.T.A!

But I love it, and would buy it again in a heartbeat!

Well Written Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging Supportive

SonnyE

Frequent contributor

Mar 4, 2026

Well, I like the images even if you don’t. 👍️

I’d call it a win. You’ll get things dialed in to your liking, just keep on swimming.

Respectful Supportive

Brent

IOTD Staff

Mar 4, 2026

Did I see you are using a 3.5 nm FWHM filter? you will end up throwing away a lot of signal due to off band shift, unless that is one of the fast optics shifted filters. This will have the effect of stopping down your scope to around f/4 ish. I have a lot of videos about this on my youtube channel.

John Tucker

Frequent contributor

Perfect post

Mar 4, 2026

I bought a TS Optics “PowerNewt” (an F/4 Newt bundled with a 0.75x reducer-corrector) about 6 years ago with similar ambitions. I’d never owned a Newt before and struggled tremendously, eventually selling the 0.75 reducer/corrector and buying a 1.0x corrector. After several years of this I got the courage to try again recently and bought a Nexus 0.75 reducer-corrector.

My process for collimation and tilt correction is much the same as at F/4, but as you say, a lot more sensitive.

I moved the secondary mirror up and down until the vignetting was centered in the field of view. This was purely a trial and error process
I roughly align the secondary mirror with a laser in the focuser tube. I adjust the secondary until I hit the center spot of the primary, and then I roughly align the primary by adjusting it until I can see the laser beam going right back to the source in the laser (you can see this in the reflection in the primary mirror).
At this point the collimation of the primary is usually good enough that I can’t improve it further with the Farpoint collimation cap. So I move on to the autocollimator.
My mirror has one of those little reflective triangles that is VERY carefully centered over the center spot put on the primary by the manufacturer. I adjust the primary until the brightest triangle is perfectly (>98%) overlapping the reflected triangle that points in the same direction. Hopefully at this point the other two triangle reflections are right on top of the first two, and hopefully even fade to invisibility. If not, some further tweaking of the primary and secondary is needed. I think this is discussed in good detail on the Catseye site.
In hopes of doing this better, I invested in a Catseye dual pupil autocollimator, that has both a center and an off-center pupil, with the latter claimed to provide a more precise collimation for the final tweak. I haven’t decided whether this actually works better than my single pupil autocollimator.
I used the Gerd Neuman tilt corrector, given the sensitivity of this system, I can’t image removing the camera assembly from the OTA every time I needed to adjust a screw.

Overall I think I have mine working. There is a tremendous sense of “Weeeeeeee” when you get a decently exposed picture in an hour or two to be sure. I attached below a 6 second exposure of the Orion Nebula. It has some slight star elongation across the field but that is due to a mount issue that I subsequently resolved and not an optical problem.

I’m not sure I saw a reference to an autocollimator in your post. If you aren’t using one I highly recommend one.

Also, an extremely helpful piece of advice I received along the way was to use enough spacer tubes so that your autocollimator, collimation cap, and/or laser sits with its business part (the laser emitter hole, the bottom of the collimation cap, or the mirror of the autocollimator) sits the same distance from the OTA axis as the camera sensor does when the telescope is focused. It actually seems to make a difference.

A lot of people screw their corrector into the focuser rather than relying on compression rings. I was surprised to find that I could get away with the compression rings provided that I always put the corrector in the focuser tube and tightened the compression screws while the OTA was in the “home” position, with the focuser tube pointing straight up. That way gravity tends to ensure you’re putting it in reproducibly.

📷 image.png

Well Written Helpful Engaging Supportive

Tony Gondola

Frequent contributor

Exemplary contributor

Mar 4, 2026

Alex Nicholas · Mar 4, 2026, 12:18 AM
So I bought my Sharpstar 15028HNT-AL back in September last year, based off a few users brilliant images, and the spec-sheet alone… Lets face it, it’s hard to argue with F/2.8 when you’re primarily a narrowband deep sky imager.

Having owned a few newtonians in the past, albeit, F/4, F/5 and F/6 newtonians, I knew that collimation would be required regularly, I knew the process and I knew that an F/2.8 newt was going to be significantly more sensitive to error than even the F/4… What I didn’t know, however, was the meaning of the word ‘significantly’ in this instance…

On first receiving the scope, and after the obligitory rain that ensued for a couple of weeks, I was able to make my first test image. For this, I used simply the collimation cap and a defocused star to get it looking ‘OK’… and overall, it wasn’t bad - however I did notice that the flats showed that the ‘center spot’ of the light cone was a LONG way from the center of my camera sensor…

📷 Sharpstar 15028HNT First Light test.https://app.astrobin.com/i/wjaafu/

After this experience, I learned that the scope was incredibly sensitive to off-axis light, dew and that the collimation that looked ‘ok’ was nowhere near good enough… I looked at the OCAL, but at its extreme price, I had to try a laser first. I bought one, had another go at the collimation (which was actually looking relatively close even with the laser) and then made this test…

📷 Second test of the Sharpstar 15028HNThttps://app.astrobin.com/i/rarr6l/

You’ll notice this is cropped quite heavily - why? because outside of this field of view, the stars were MUD! despite the laser telling me everything was dead on - there was MASSIVE tilt in the optical train (ASTAP reporting 39% tilt in fact…)

The thought crept into my mind at this point… “Have I made a mistake selling my beautiful refractor to purchase something as sensitive as an f/2.8 newtonian?”. But as I said those words in my head, I heard “f/2.8”, and remembered that IF I could tame this monster, I would have an EXTREME imaging tool!

A third, fourth and fifth attempt was made at collimation… The Sharpstar documentation in hand, the collimation cap and the Baader Laser Colli MkIII at my disposal.. Again, I had things looking close. What I could notice is, that despite having the secondary mirror holder spaced at 5mm from the back of the spider as per Sharpstar’s documentation, the secondary did not look how I would have expected… It didn’t look like a circle, rather, quite oblong, and while I was able to get the primary mirror completely in the secondary, and get the laser return beam to go exactly back into the laser emitter, it just felt like something was still wrong… but the tools said it was right, so I did another test image…

📷 SMC Nebulaehttps://app.astrobin.com/i/wvua6p/
Again - this doesn’t look too bad after processing, but ASTAP was still reporting between 35 and 40% tilt in the optics, the flats were still very uneven, with the center of the light cone significantly off-center, almost 50% of the distance between the center of the image and the left hand edge… My mind kept focusing on that detail… The flats are off-center, and the secondary looks wrong based on what I know about newtonian collimation… But also, I’d read that a laser collimator was also grossly inadequate for an f/2.8 optical system, and I’d need something more accurate, that could factor in more than just ‘does the laser hit the center of the primary and come back into the laser diode’.

But was this collimation? or did I actually have tilt in my optical train. I ran ASTAP over a number of images from my Askar 120APO, and they were dead flat, next to 0% tilt. So I felt that the camera was not introducing tilt..

So what? Was the focuser of my 15028HNT mis-aligned. Did I have sag in the focuser? was my primary mirror loose and flopping about?? Enough was enough, something had to be done.

I took the plunge and bought an OCAL 4 Pro… It confirmed to me what I had been thinking I could see…

1. The secondary mirror was not in the center of the focuser tube, in fact, it was a long way off.
2. The secondary mirror was not even remotely circular.

I got it as close as I could, while adhereing to the documentation still, and made my fourth test image.

Now, to say that I was mad about this would be a lie… There was still 35% (Extreme) tilt, stars in the bottom corner appeared as small donuts, BUT, I’ve wanted to shoot this target for nearly 20 years, but I’ve never had equipment that made it possible from my bortle 5 sky… I was blown away when the first 600s sub rolled in, so despite the flaws, I let it run anyway, and collected ~8hrs of data…

📷 LDN 1622 - The Boogeyman Nebula (Ha false-colour)https://app.astrobin.com/i/3qfxqz/

I was so happy to have got this image, but still very dissatisfied with the stars in the bottom left corner, and the unusal looking flares from the bright stars.. Collimation was clearly wrong, and at this felt I’d done everything except one…

So discarding the Sharpstar manuals information regarding the 5mm spacing between the secondary holder and the back of the spider, I got to work on the scope, manually moving the secondary until it was central in the OCAL’s field of view. I then manually (by hand) adjusted the tilt and rotation of the mirror until it was perfectly circular and concentric with the focuser tube.. This step took me almost 1h of fiddling, but once done, I screwed in the adjustment bolts so it would hold, then measured the gap between the secondary and the spider, 8.5mm… 3.5mm further from the spider than Sharpstar’s documentation, BUT! it looked how I expected a secondary mirror should look. I removed the primary from the tube, and leveled it in the mirror cell so it was ‘neutral’ with no tilt applied, and ensured that the retaining ring was tight enough that the mirror couldn’t flop, but not so tight that it could possibly pinch the optics..

After refitting the mirror, I tweaked the secondary adjustments to point it directly at the primary - and then the primary to center everything up in the OCAL’s field of view… This took a few iterations, as every adjustment of the primary necessitated a slight tweak on the secondary, but finally… the adjustments converged.

It finally looked GOOD! not ‘ok’… but GOOD.

Weather here has been a nightmare, but I got a 15min window of clear sky, so I took the opportunity and I put it outside with the intention of taking a single test frame just to see the field… No polar alignment, no guiding… didnt even turn on the cameras cooler… I just wanted a test sub to confirm the collimation…

I ended up taking 3× 30s subs in Ha… This was the result.
📷 EtaCar_Ha_90s_Half-Size.jpgNot bad for 90s of total integration with a 3.5nm Ha filter… and ASTAP reports 5% tilt - which it deems as negligable… This made me VERY happy. I packed up, before the cloud and ran began…

A week later, I got an hour of clear sky to test properly…

This is 25×180s subs.
📷 Vela_Ha_75_half-size.jpgThis one was obviously with an accurate polar alignment and guiding in play, camera at -10c… And this is the first time that I’ve started to feel like this scope was the right choice!

There is still a long way to go - but I’m seeing the promise this scope has!

Clearly, collimation has been the focus thus far… I do however have some other thoughts on the scope…

1 - Reflections in the OTA.
The carbon fiber model was flocked from the factory, however the AL version is not - and there were a number of reflections going on inside the tube.

Resolution: I have flocked the OTA internals, and the edge of the secondary mirror.
2 - Stray light in the OTA.
The neighbors porch light, street lights 300m away.. Street lights 500m away that were reflected off the red-brick wall of my house, even the IR light from my back yard security cameras… if it emitted, or reflected light, it ended up in the OTA, and washed out contrast dramatically, sometimes to the point of making the target invisible in the frame entirely.

Resolution: I designed and printed a 24cm long light shield for the scope. Once printed, this was then flocked to match the OTA internals.
3 - Dew on the primary and secondary mirrors on humid nights.
The usual weather here of a night time is very humid, but especially October through to May…. > 80% humidity is average here… Coupled with the 35°C days, promptly dropping to 19~21°C after dark, dew is common… and the primary mirror in this scope LOVED to catch it all! not only that, but the secondary would condensate, then drip water droplets onto the primary… Good times!! Something had to be done!

Resolution: The aforementioned light shield is also a dew shield. This has made some pretty dramatic improvements. Further to this, I have added a dew heater around the rear of the OTA where the primary mirror is held. This has now resolved the issue, such that the scope lasted 6h under the stars in 80~95% humidity, and rapidly dropping temperatures without suffering any interference from dew.
4 - OAG pick off prism causing shadow in the light path.
The light cone on an F/2.8 optical system is pretty steep! I was unable to retract the pick off prism far enough to remove it from the light cone, while still being able to see stars…

Resolution: As I couldn’t retract it any further, my only option was to move from the OAG to a William Optics Uniguide 32mm f/4 guide scope..
5 - Rotating the camera via moving the whole focuser is annoying.
Rotating the camera is inevitable between nights due to having to remove the camera to perform collimation checks, and the only way to adjust this rotation is to rotate the entire focuser assemly, which can be difficult due to the position of the EAF…

Resolution: Due to the change from the OAG to the external guide scope, I have enough available backfocus now to add a rotator into my imaging train, which I will do as soon as I can… This will remove the issue as I will lock down the focuser in the orientation that is most sensible to me, then rotate the camera or collimation tools electronically.
Issue conclusion:
So, while the scope is complicated, results are this in a nutshell.
1 - It suffers from internal reflections - flock EVERYTHING you can.
2 - It suffers from dew and stray light - get/make a dew shield, run a heater band around the primary.
3 - Rotating the whole focuser is annoying - if you have room in your backfocus calc, get a rotator for this scope.
4 - Collimation is EXTREMELY sensitive - Get the correct tools and take your time. Ignore what the manual says about mirror spacing and just collimate it so it looks perfect via the tools you are using.
What a mission this scope is turning out to be - I LOVE how fast it builds SNR on even very dim targets, but getting it properly adjusted and running perfectly is incredibly difficult.

Is it worth it? Well that’s a purely personal decision I think.

I know I need to tweak the collimation a little more still, and I know that I need to buy high-speed narrowband filters to get the most out of these optics… But given the extremely limited time I get to astro-image, having a scope that is building signal as quickly as this one does, that is as small and portable as this one is… well, the value to me is immeasurable. I’m also a sucker for big diffraction spikes, and this scope will certainly produce them when pointed at a bright star!

It’s been a MASSIVE P.I.T.A!

But I love it, and would buy it again in a heartbeat!

You just can’t buy this kind of fun. Oh wait, you did! :-)

Actually, I envy you, but then, I love projects…

Alex Nicholas

Topic starter

Mar 4, 2026

Tony Gondola · Mar 4, 2026, 04:14 AM
Actually, I envy you, but then, I love projects…

Honestly, It’s been an extremely testing time, and there has been many evenings of doubt, confusion and even regret after selling what was potentially the nicest telescope I’ve ever owned (The Askar 120APO with the 1x flattener and 0.8x reducer), and added a decent amount to purchase this newtonian, only to have 6 months of poor quality images, dew issues, stray light issues, etc etc…

Finally seeing the light at the end of the tube (pun intended), I am very pleased to say that the doubt and regret are gone… This thing is INCREDIBLE… and once I have it completely nailed down, I really hope to put in a solid 12~15h integration into a target and see what F/2.8 is really all about!

Where I am (central East coast of Australia), we’re just about to come into the ‘clear nights’ half of the year, so I have maybe 1 more month before I can have this thing set up for 2 or 3 weeks at a time and really suck down some photons!

Well Written Respectful Engaging

Alex Nicholas

Topic starter

Mar 4, 2026

John Tucker · Mar 4, 2026, 04:00 AM
Gerd Neuman tilt corrector,

This is something I’ve heard about, but not actually seen or done any research into myself yet - but I’ll take a look at these, and an autocollimator too.

I am definitely thankful for the Astrobin community - as you’ve given me a lot of different things to look out for and consider, which was the original intention of my post here! Hopefully things that I’ve found can help someone else out who finds themselves bitten by the ‘speed’ of a fast newt, then finds themselves invenomated by the very same… The level of ‘What have I done’ that I experienced over the last few months with this scope was so intense, I was ready to sell it SUPER cheap and buy an Askar SQA70 and walk away, pretending that none of this had ever happened.

I’m glad I told myself I would give myself one more month to sort this scope out!

Well Written Respectful Engaging

Brent

IOTD Staff

Mar 5, 2026

I have the Gerd Neuman tilt corrector - it is nice kit, but it eats a lot of back focus (20ish mm). There are a few tilt plate adapters now made that fit on the front of the camera that use ~5 mm of back focus. Note that this one is M54 thread
https://www.highpointscientific.com/zwo-m54-sensor-tilt-plate-for-asi6200-2600-2400-pro-cooled-cameras-and-m68-oag-m54-plate

The Gerd Neuman is nicer and high precision, but 55 mm of backfocus is gone with a filter wheel and OAG.

Helpful Concise

Alex Nicholas

Topic starter

Mar 5, 2026

Brent · Mar 5, 2026, 12:49 AM
but 55 mm of backfocus is gone with a filter wheel and OAG

Yeah, I need 55~56mm of space between my sensor and the corrector flange, with the 2600M, Filter Wheel and Rotator, I’m left with a grand total of 0~1mm of free space.

The focuser has a tilt correction, but that is incredibly difficult to get to when the camera is fitted, and the camera has a tilt plate too, but you can only adjust it by removing the bolt-on filter wheel… I’m quite satisfied with the 8% tilt measurement I got from ASTAP after this last attempt at collimation, and knowing that there is most likely a bit of room left over in there to make it more precise, I don’t see tilt being my biggest concern. Also, my 2nd camera is a IMX585, and that detects next to no tilt because the sensor is tiny by comparison to the IMX571.

Well Written Respectful Concise Engaging

John Tucker

Frequent contributor

Perfect post

Mar 5, 2026

Brent · Mar 5, 2026, 12:49 AM
I have the Gerd Neuman tilt corrector - it is nice kit, but it eats a lot of back focus (20ish mm). There are a few tilt plate adapters now made that fit on the front of the camera that use ~5 mm of back focus. Note that this one is M54 thread
https://www.highpointscientific.com/zwo-m54-sensor-tilt-plate-for-asi6200-2600-2400-pro-cooled-cameras-and-m68-oag-m54-plate
The Gerd Neuman is nicer and high precision, but 55 mm of backfocus is gone with a filter wheel and OAG.

It’s funny how the world of astrophotography revolves around standards that were created when most people used DSLRs (or maybe just SLRs?).

Fortunately I’m quite comfortable working with an OSC camera, and at 400mm focal length and typically 15-30 sec exposure durations, can not only dispense with the OAG, I can very nearly dispense with guiding altogether.

I’ve also been very surprised to learn that I can get away with using a compression ring at F/3, and so don’t need the camera rotator i purchased either. I’m one of the precious few with 20 or so mm of extension tubes between my coma corrector and camera! It just requires a rigorously reproducible method for putting the coma corrector in the focus tube. The rim on the Nexus really seems to help with that.

Wonder why the 55mm standard is still so common?

Well Written Helpful Engaging

Alex Nicholas

Topic starter

1 day ago

Another quick update - I’m getting such infrequent clear skies that I almost forget the process of getting this thing dialed in when I get a chance to actually use it.

Here is 180×60s subs on IC2944… Given only 3h of integration from B5 sky, and the use of a 3.5nm Ha filter which is not optimal for an f/2.8 imaging system, I am really happy with this result… I’m hoping to see some clear skies again once this moon buggers off, so I can add 3h of OIII to this… 📷 running chicken - Hahttps://app.astrobin.com/i/z1hwt3/

I did however, add some colour to it from an image I made last year… The beauty here is that, the IMX571 with the 15028HNT, drizzled 2x gives me the exact same pixel scale as the IMX571 in the 120APO that I was using last year… Obviously, the 120APO restricted the field of view fairly significantly, however I did give a pretty splash of colour….

📷 chicken_HA_185_OSC_240.jpg
The saga continues…

However, I think I’m going to sell the scope despite the incredible results it gets when its set up right..

Between having a full time job, a wife, 5 kids and other hobbies, and sporadic clear skies, I just can’t afford to lose nights to fiddling with the optics… When I actually get the opportunity to do some imaging, I need my rig to be as simple as possible…. Put it outside - start imaging… This scope unfortunately needs someone who has either a permanent pier to mount it on, or it needs someone who has more time to fiddle with it…

Or maybe just more patience.

Well Written Respectful Engaging

Related discussions

RC collimation

I am going through the process of collimating a GSO/Skywatcher style RC. When I first got it, it was slightly out so I decided to line everything up on the bench using a Cheshire and laser. At that point everything looked perfect through the Cheshire...

Collimation sensitivity relevant to fast F/2.8 Newtonian telescope maintenance.

Oct 4, 2025

My littte bad weather project: Sharpstar 13028HNT modification

Due to bad weather in Germany, I wanted to do some modifications to my Sharpstar 13028HNT. I’d like to share my first experiences with these modifications, though there is still more to do. A few things I wanted to try:Create a new mirror mask (notch...

Direct experience with similar Sharpstar model modifications and troubleshooting.

Dec 12, 2025

Secondary mirror coating issue or possible light leak problem?

I was considering sending my secondary for my ago idk 14.5" over to terry at ostahowski optics for a recoat because if I look closely enough, I have what looks like an oil spot or something that slightly dulled a small part of my secondary coating th...

Secondary mirror issues applicable to Newtonian collimation and optical problems.

Nov 3, 2025