So far I have taken a few test shots with the Sky-Watcher Quattro 150P and the supplied coma corrector. I use a Canon 6Da with a full-frame sensor to shoot. In the edges of the image, it looks like the coma corrector doesn't work at all. Can anyone tell me if it gets better with an APS-C format sensor or if you need a smaller sensor for the combination. I hope someone can help me.
Need reviews of the Sky-Watcher Quattro 150P with f3.45!!!
Well Written
Hi,
You can simply crop the image to the size of whatever smaller sensors you want to check, this will answer your question because it is exactly the same as what would happen if you were physically using that sensor instead of the FF one.
Cheers,
Dimitris
You can simply crop the image to the size of whatever smaller sensors you want to check, this will answer your question because it is exactly the same as what would happen if you were physically using that sensor instead of the FF one.
Cheers,
Dimitris
First of all, thank you for your tip. I am well aware that you can crop the picture. The thing is that too much light passes the sensor if it is too big. I think that if you have the right sensor, all the light hits the sensor and you have the optimal result.
The Quattro 150P coma corrector is rated to correct out to APS-C or smaller sensors, so full frame will certainly have issues at the corner. However, the scope itself is rated for full frame sensors so perhaps another corrector will work.
As for a review of mine, it has worked very well for outreach and as a secondary imager but is missing parts I think should be included in an OTA marketed for imaging:
1) Aperture mask to prevent diffraction artifacts from mirror clips. I 3D printed one and decreased the effective aperture to 142mm.
2) Cover for the scope’s rear. Light from one of my power sources once made it around the primary mirror and ruined many exposures at the zenith. Also 3D printed a cover with a port for a small fan.
3) Focuser needs third thumbscrew to avoid tilting the imaging train. I had a friend drill an M4 threaded hole so I could have 3 evenly spaced points of contact 120 degrees apart. I think the threads in the draw-tube are M54 so a replacement male M54 to 2 inch eyepiece adapter with three thumbscrews should work.
As for a review of mine, it has worked very well for outreach and as a secondary imager but is missing parts I think should be included in an OTA marketed for imaging:
1) Aperture mask to prevent diffraction artifacts from mirror clips. I 3D printed one and decreased the effective aperture to 142mm.
2) Cover for the scope’s rear. Light from one of my power sources once made it around the primary mirror and ruined many exposures at the zenith. Also 3D printed a cover with a port for a small fan.
3) Focuser needs third thumbscrew to avoid tilting the imaging train. I had a friend drill an M4 threaded hole so I could have 3 evenly spaced points of contact 120 degrees apart. I think the threads in the draw-tube are M54 so a replacement male M54 to 2 inch eyepiece adapter with three thumbscrews should work.
Helpful Insightful Engaging
First of all, thank you for your suggestions for improvement. Good that I now also have a certainty that you can work well on the telescope with an APS-C sensor. I'm saving up for an astro camera with IMX 571 sensor and was now unsure if it was the right choice at all.
On point 1.
I also installed an aperture.
On point 2.
I always cover the mirror from behind.
On point 3.
I installed one with a clamping ring.
I also installed a more stable secondary mirror spider.
Then I can hope for my first pictures with the Quattro with my DSLR and f4 in the next good weather.
Thanks again for the clarification.
CS
Thorsten
On point 1.
I also installed an aperture.
On point 2.
I always cover the mirror from behind.
On point 3.
I installed one with a clamping ring.
I also installed a more stable secondary mirror spider.
Then I can hope for my first pictures with the Quattro with my DSLR and f4 in the next good weather.
Thanks again for the clarification.
CS
Thorsten