Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [William Optics] Flattener/reducer for 110 FLT Light

Expand Messages
  • kcgolden@gmail.com
    Sorry, didn t realize the retail price came down. It used to be 795, now 495. I ll sell mine for 300. Again, I ve never used it. I just took it out of the box
    Message 1 of 5 , May 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Sorry, didn't realize the retail price came down. It used to be 795, now 495. I'll sell mine for 300. Again, I've never used it. I just took it out of the box once to see if out would work with my image train. It won't work with a off axis guider so I put it away ( back focus was too long in my setup)

      ~Kelsey
      Sent from my phone.


      kcgolden@... wrote:

      Hi,

      I have a flattener specifically for the flt 110 that I've never used. If you our anyone else wants it, it is yours for $400. Contact me off list.

      ~Kelsey
      Sent from my phone.


      Craig <cgsathome@...> wrote:

       

      Hi -
      I'm a new member and recently purchased a very lightly used 110FLT Light. I have been able to start acquiring images using the AT2FF (which I already owned) with a reasonably flat field. The scope also came with a WO III flattener/reducer. This doesn't seem to work well at all with the 110 FLT.
      There are many threads about flatteners and reducers in this group, not all leading to concrete conclusions. If someone has experience with these, could you provide me input on the following?

      1) it is true the flattener 3 isn't a good match for the 110 FLT (at least at the stated spacing of 55mm from sensor face)?
      2) if #1 is true, is there an application/focal length where the Flattener III is useful?
      3) does it turn out that for someone interested in a reducer/flattener combo that the current version of the flattener IV (which can adjust to match different FL scopes) performs acceptably (that is, reduces field and produces reasonably flat stars across field)?

      By the way, the scope itself seems to optically perform very well... Mechanically, I don't think the Rack and Pinion power focuser is going to work. I can't seem to adjust it in any way to keep my St8300m/fw/OAG from unrolling the focuser under its own weight. I am going to end up moving a Moonlight from another scope to this one.

      Thanks in advance for any info on the flattener/reducer situation.

      Craig

    • notgnirramot
      Congrats on your new to you scope. I have the same Light version, I also image with the ST8300, FW5, & the SBIG OAG. My Focuser holds the load, but I tighten
      Message 2 of 5 , May 19, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Congrats on your new to you scope. I have the same Light version, I also image with the ST8300, FW5, & the SBIG OAG. My Focuser holds the load, but I tighten it down so that the fine speed does not work. At some point I will upgrade to a Moonlite Focuser as I did for my Megrez 80.

        I originally purchased a Flatener/Reducer III and found it a complet waste of time with the FLT 110. W/O gave me full credit toward an exchange for the adjustable IV version, which works really well. With your camera setup you will be nearly out of the adjustment range.

        Tom

        --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Craig" <cgsathome@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi -
        > I'm a new member and recently purchased a very lightly used 110FLT Light. I have been able to start acquiring images using the AT2FF (which I already owned) with a reasonably flat field. The scope also came with a WO III flattener/reducer. This doesn't seem to work well at all with the 110 FLT.
        > There are many threads about flatteners and reducers in this group, not all leading to concrete conclusions. If someone has experience with these, could you provide me input on the following?
        >
        > 1) it is true the flattener 3 isn't a good match for the 110 FLT (at least at the stated spacing of 55mm from sensor face)?
        > 2) if #1 is true, is there an application/focal length where the Flattener III is useful?
        > 3) does it turn out that for someone interested in a reducer/flattener combo that the current version of the flattener IV (which can adjust to match different FL scopes) performs acceptably (that is, reduces field and produces reasonably flat stars across field)?
        >
        > By the way, the scope itself seems to optically perform very well... Mechanically, I don't think the Rack and Pinion power focuser is going to work. I can't seem to adjust it in any way to keep my St8300m/fw/OAG from unrolling the focuser under its own weight. I am going to end up moving a Moonlight from another scope to this one.
        >
        > Thanks in advance for any info on the flattener/reducer situation.
        >
        > Craig
        >
      • Craig Smith
        Thanks for the input, Tom. I was at the Texas Star Party, and apparently the warmth during the day removed all residual friction from my power linear focuser.
        Message 3 of 5 , May 19, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for the input, Tom.

          I was at the Texas Star Party, and apparently the warmth during the day removed all residual friction from my power linear focuser.  The standard adjustments had no effect, and I had to tighten the locking screw with (shudder) pliers to get it tight enough to support the weight of the camera.  I was mortified to do this, but had little choice at 1700 miles from home.

          Any way, I transferred a Moonlight from an outgoing scope, yesterday, so that's, that.

          Can you clarify which end of adjustment range I will be at?  The SBIG stack is in the neighborhood of the standard 55mm, so I would have thought the adjustment would be mid range at the recommended target 73mm spacing for the 110FLT?  Or is more back focus used up to get through whatever T-ring is used?

          Thanks again!

          Craig

          Sent from my iPad

          On May 19, 2013, at 10:57 AM, "notgnirramot" <notgnirra@...> wrote:

           

          Congrats on your new to you scope. I have the same Light version, I also image with the ST8300, FW5, & the SBIG OAG. My Focuser holds the load, but I tighten it down so that the fine speed does not work. At some point I will upgrade to a Moonlite Focuser as I did for my Megrez 80.

          I originally purchased a Flatener/Reducer III and found it a complet waste of time with the FLT 110. W/O gave me full credit toward an exchange for the adjustable IV version, which works really well. With your camera setup you will be nearly out of the adjustment range.

          Tom

          --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Craig" <cgsathome@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi -
          > I'm a new member and recently purchased a very lightly used 110FLT Light. I have been able to start acquiring images using the AT2FF (which I already owned) with a reasonably flat field. The scope also came with a WO III flattener/reducer. This doesn't seem to work well at all with the 110 FLT.
          > There are many threads about flatteners and reducers in this group, not all leading to concrete conclusions. If someone has experience with these, could you provide me input on the following?
          >
          > 1) it is true the flattener 3 isn't a good match for the 110 FLT (at least at the stated spacing of 55mm from sensor face)?
          > 2) if #1 is true, is there an application/focal length where the Flattener III is useful?
          > 3) does it turn out that for someone interested in a reducer/flattener combo that the current version of the flattener IV (which can adjust to match different FL scopes) performs acceptably (that is, reduces field and produces reasonably flat stars across field)?
          >
          > By the way, the scope itself seems to optically perform very well... Mechanically, I don't think the Rack and Pinion power focuser is going to work. I can't seem to adjust it in any way to keep my St8300m/fw/OAG from unrolling the focuser under its own weight. I am going to end up moving a Moonlight from another scope to this one.
          >
          > Thanks in advance for any info on the flattener/reducer situation.
          >
          > Craig
          >

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.