![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi,
10 days ago I got the chance to see first time in my live the Aries made Safix ( spherical aberration corrector)and bought one for testing on diffrent telescopes. The Safix was designed and is manufactored by Aries in Ukraine, to improve the spherical correction of smoothly over or undercorrected telescope systems to improve not only the startest but mainly the infocuse image. The design contains from a multicoated lens system in a tunnable housing with outer microscaling to read out the position of best spherical correction for the specific telescope. On diagonal side it comes with a standart 1.25" barrel and at eyepiece side it comes with 3 diffrent long eyepieceholders with compression ring. This diffrent holders shall be used for diffrent focallenght telescopes. - Mechanics The tunning works like a helical focuser with no shift. The anadizing is good , but not of that shiny high quality we know from some US or Taiwan made anadized products.The compression rings sitting somewhat to deep maschined in the eyepieceholder so its function is only to not scratch the eyepiece barrel. The eyepiece holders are well made in its inner diameter so the to deep sitting compression rings doe not shift your eyepiece out of axis, but I prefer if that would be improoved to give such compression ring his full working potential. - Optics and coating: my sample show no bubbles, no dirt or dust, no scratches and a goldish kind coating , not the colors we know of modern multicoatings. Talking to Aries about that, Valery Deryuzhin told me that kind of coating is used to support a natural white image . This natural white Image I can confirm by looking straight through the coated glas on a white piece of paper but also watching white stars, the image remains neutral white as it shall be, so the coating doing here job well - performance: the performance I tested in 3 ways a, on the bench against articval star b, on a day time object c, under real sky on stars and Planets the used telescopes for testing this device: a, 4" Fluorite Apo with smooth global undercorrection estimated at startest with about 1/3 to 1/4 wavefront p.t.v. b, a small high quality maksutov Cassegrain with a smooth 1/5 wagvefront undercorrection c, a massproduced but smooth visual zonal free Schmidt Cassegrain 10" with about 1/4 wavefront ( visual estimation) on all above scopes I found the same results a, the scopes showed on the bench and under real sky a symmetrical image with a nice airydisc and diffraction rings soroundet. In all scopes the diffraction rings took to much energy out of the airydisc and spreadet some straylight into the black sky, when slightly or more outside defocused. Now I installed the Safix. First finding you must do about same level of backfocuse change as the Safix have its own mechanical lenght. This is a limitation for telescopes with to small backfocuse , like modern Dobs and Newtonians and of course Mak Newtonians with only a little backfocuse, here the safix cannot be used, because it does not come to focuse.In the apo I have had to remove the stardiagonal and observe in straight mode, because it have had also not enough backfocuse. Now I started to use the helical focusing tunner . Turn the tunner step by step and after each step do a startest, see if image got more equal in startest or worser. If worser you turn the wrong direction, if better continue this way. Sooner or later you will find a position where the startest show you a equal image inside and outside of focuse. Now compare the infocuse image with and without the Safix and you find the following: without safix you see the way diffrent images and the straylight out of focuse in the black sky and the numbers of diffraction rings is about 3-5 piece. Install the safix now with your best findings, and you will see no more straylight in the black background, the airydisc increased its diameter slightly and got higher energy , the numbers of diffraction rings decreased. On the bench I found that I could improve the image of that apo to the level of a real very high end quality apo, to my own surprise, since I did not expected such dramaticle improvement. Under sky I used Castor douple to see what happened.Here the diffraction ring became much fainter and the image was more stable and the splitting was simply much easier. At Jupiter I found with the Safix a increased amount of details on the belts. Saturns Cassini got cleaner and much better visible. Daytime: I have to be honest due sunny days with for shure not best seeing, I could not see a real diffrence. Not yet I have tested if the safix does anything good on scopes with zonal deffects or not, but what I found is that the safix is a tool which can improve your optical medium to low end scope into a real high end optical telescope if the under or overcorrection is the only mistake. So far I can say this Safix is one of the most impressive accessories I have come across in past 15 years and I wam wondering very much, that there is not yet a Safix hysterical out thanks for any reply clear skies Markus Ludes -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? | TKalbfus | Policy | 265 | July 13th 04 12:00 AM |
Repost: Scientific Peer Review: Is It A Thing Of The Past? | ~A~ | Astronomy Misc | 2 | February 2nd 04 04:57 PM |
Review: Bushnell Voyager 78-9440 (was Seeking review of BushnellVoyager line) | Glenn Holliday | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | November 17th 03 02:28 PM |
International Joint Mercury Exploration Mission 'BepiColombo' Moves to Next Stage after Review by SAC | Ron Baalke | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 20th 03 07:14 PM |
Orion Expanse E.P. Review | Bill Greer | Amateur Astronomy | 14 | July 28th 03 12:26 AM |