RE: [ap-ug] Re: ap field flattner?


Oct 1, 2010

 


----------------------------

#51608 Oct 1, 2010

I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.



However, it not really a that great of a result.







www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893



www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888





Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.



I checked it the spacing appears correct.



Is this typical performance?

It may be Version1 of the FF



Max



----------------------------

#51610 Oct 1, 2010

"However, it not really a that great of a result"

In what respect?

You've picked rather bright stars which are saturated.

The halo around the stars is, more than likely, a reflection from your filter and coverslip.

(What filters are you using and how old are they?)

To judge 'flattness' you should compare relatively dim stars at the center and at the corners/edges.

Kent Kirkley











-----Original Message-----

From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:11 pm

Subject: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance







I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.



However, it not really a that great of a result.







www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893



www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888





Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.



I checked it the spacing appears correct.



Is this typical performance?

It may be Version1 of the FF



Max











---------------





To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#51612 Oct 1, 2010

Kent,



Nothing is saturated in these images



You must not like my streching for the JPG.



The elongation is verses in the corners is still very clear.



I am not referring to a few halos on the brightest star.



Thanks



Max









--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@... wrote:

>

>

> "However, it not really a that great of a result"

> In what respect?

> You've picked rather bright stars which are saturated.

> The halo around the stars is, more than likely, a reflection from your filter and coverslip.

> (What filters are you using and how old are they?)

> To judge 'flattness' you should compare relatively dim stars at the center and at the corners/edges.

> Kent Kirkley

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:11 pm

> Subject: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

>

>

>

> I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.

>

> However, it not really a that great of a result.

>

>

>

> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

>

> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

>

>

> Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.

>

> I checked it the spacing appears correct.

>

> Is this typical performance?

> It may be Version1 of the FF

>

> Max

>

>

>

>

>

---------------

>

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#51629 Oct 2, 2010

Sure wish I could get results like that!. I've been using the FSQ rather than my 130/8..



I wonder how much "slop" the flatteners are designed for.. That is, mine measure out within the +/- 1mm but I've never gotten pinpoints to the corners..



Percy

--- On Sat, 10/2/10, lmbuck2000 lmbuck2000@...> wrote:



From: lmbuck2000 lmbuck2000@...>

Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Date: Saturday, October 2, 2010, 1:34 PM















.



























you should get much better results than that.







i use the 67PF562 with an AP130GT and STL-11000 camera. the coupling i use is from A-P specifically for their FF and STL cameras. perfectly round stars corner to corner.







files.me.com/lmbuck/o5l21d







was the spacing for the adapter based on correct OPTICAL backfocus with your filters installed (not physical backfocus)?







lee







--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "maxmsm" maxmirot@...> wrote:



>



>



> I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.



>



> However, it not really a that great of a result.



>













































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#51631 Oct 2, 2010

Actually it looks like the top picture which is marked 67PF582



Max





--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@... wrote:

>

> Does your '67PF562' flattener look like the picture on the AP website?

>

>

> That is, is the body 4 or so inches long?

>

>

> AP doesn't currently list a '67PF561' but that might be because

> they no longer offer it after coming out with the '562'?

>

>

> If yours is not 3-4 inches long and only a couple inches long, then

> you have an older version and that might be the problem.

>

>

> Kent Kirkley

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Sent: Sat, Oct 2, 2010 9:47 am

> Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

>

>

> I have the 67PF562.

> Actually I got off someone else that had 2000 F6 so it might be a 67PF561

> version 1. It say 130mm F6 on the edge of glass so it is the right part. I am

> sure the V2 is little better than V1 but no this much.

>

>

> Howard and FLI gave the specs direct to Precise Parts. I suspect the spacing is

> not right.

>

> I don't think this what Roland would allow.

> This is on a 16803 35mm square.

>

> Max

>

> --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@> wrote:

> >

> > I'm on my second AP flattener for my 130/8 and I'm still not happy with it at

> all... Similar to the performance that Max displayed on his site... This is with

> the 67RLEOS and the 67PF582... Shows up very easily with the full frame (35mm)

> sensors that I'm using...

> >

> > Percy

> >

> > --- On Fri, 10/1/10, kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@> wrote:

> >

> > From: kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@>

> > Subject: Re: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> > Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 1:48 PM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ..

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Max:

> >

> >

> >

> > Ok, yes I see the elongation you're talking about.

> >

> > It is radial so I still think the spacing might be off.

> >

> >

> >

> > Spacing on field flatteners is rather critical.

> >

> > What is the number of the one you are using?

> >

> >

> >

> > I'm sure Roland will post his opinion.

> >

> >

> >

> > I've had two separate and different AP field flattener problems.

> >

> > First, the original flattener for the Traveler still showed bloated

> >

> > stars in the corners (film 6x7cm) and suffered from what Roland called 'focus

> selectivity', if

> >

> > I remember correctly. AP introduced a new flattener which corrected this.

> >

> >

> >

> > Second, when I first received my AP160 and 1x field flattener both Dave

> Radosevich

> >

> > and I were showing bloated stars in the corners. As it turned out, the

> flattener

> >

> > cell was too short but AP produced an extension which corrected the spacing.

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent Kirkley

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:54 pm

> >

> > Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent,

> >

> >

> >

> > Nothing is saturated in these images

> >

> >

> >

> > You must not like my streching for the JPG.

> >

> >

> >

> > The elongation is verses in the corners is still very clear.

> >

> >

> >

> > I am not referring to a few halos on the brightest star.

> >

> >

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> >

> >

> > Max

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@ wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > "However, it not really a that great of a result"

> >

> > > In what respect?

> >

> > > You've picked rather bright stars which are saturated.

> >

> > > The halo around the stars is, more than likely, a reflection from your

> filter

> >

> > and coverslip.

> >

> > > (What filters are you using and how old are they?)

> >

> > > To judge 'flattness' you should compare relatively dim stars at the center

> and

> >

> > at the corners/edges.

> >

> > > Kent Kirkley

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:11 pm

> >

> > > Subject: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > However, it not really a that great of a result.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I checked it the spacing appears correct.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Is this typical performance?

> >

> > > It may be Version1 of the FF

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Max

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

---------------

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> >

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

---------------

>

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#51632 Oct 2, 2010

It was set to optical back focus using 2mm filters.



Max

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "lmbuck2000" lmbuck2000@...> wrote:

>

>

>

> you should get much better results than that.

>

> i use the 67PF562 with an AP130GT and STL-11000 camera. the coupling i use is from A-P specifically for their FF and STL cameras. perfectly round stars corner to corner.

>

> files.me.com/lmbuck/o5l21d

>

> was the spacing for the adapter based on correct OPTICAL backfocus with your filters installed (not physical backfocus)?

>

> lee

>

>

>

> --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "maxmsm" maxmirot@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.

> >

> > However, it not really a that great of a result.

> >

>



----------------------------

#51633 Oct 2, 2010

Actually the old version was 67PF56

Searching Astromart it appears the 67PF56 have a shorter housing

see for an example. The long housing must be with the 67PF562



www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=565831



Max

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@... wrote:

>

> Does your '67PF562' flattener look like the picture on the AP website?

>

>

> That is, is the body 4 or so inches long?

>

>

> AP doesn't currently list a '67PF561' but that might be because

> they no longer offer it after coming out with the '562'?

>

>

> If yours is not 3-4 inches long and only a couple inches long, then

> you have an older version and that might be the problem.

>

>

> Kent Kirkley

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Sent: Sat, Oct 2, 2010 9:47 am

> Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

>

>

> I have the 67PF562.

> Actually I got off someone else that had 2000 F6 so it might be a 67PF561

> version 1. It say 130mm F6 on the edge of glass so it is the right part. I am

> sure the V2 is little better than V1 but no this much.

>

>

> Howard and FLI gave the specs direct to Precise Parts. I suspect the spacing is

> not right.

>

> I don't think this what Roland would allow.

> This is on a 16803 35mm square.

>

> Max

>

> --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@> wrote:

> >

> > I'm on my second AP flattener for my 130/8 and I'm still not happy with it at

> all... Similar to the performance that Max displayed on his site... This is with

> the 67RLEOS and the 67PF582... Shows up very easily with the full frame (35mm)

> sensors that I'm using...

> >

> > Percy

> >

> > --- On Fri, 10/1/10, kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@> wrote:

> >

> > From: kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@>

> > Subject: Re: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> > Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 1:48 PM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ..

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Max:

> >

> >

> >

> > Ok, yes I see the elongation you're talking about.

> >

> > It is radial so I still think the spacing might be off.

> >

> >

> >

> > Spacing on field flatteners is rather critical.

> >

> > What is the number of the one you are using?

> >

> >

> >

> > I'm sure Roland will post his opinion.

> >

> >

> >

> > I've had two separate and different AP field flattener problems.

> >

> > First, the original flattener for the Traveler still showed bloated

> >

> > stars in the corners (film 6x7cm) and suffered from what Roland called 'focus

> selectivity', if

> >

> > I remember correctly. AP introduced a new flattener which corrected this.

> >

> >

> >

> > Second, when I first received my AP160 and 1x field flattener both Dave

> Radosevich

> >

> > and I were showing bloated stars in the corners. As it turned out, the

> flattener

> >

> > cell was too short but AP produced an extension which corrected the spacing.

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent Kirkley

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:54 pm

> >

> > Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent,

> >

> >

> >

> > Nothing is saturated in these images

> >

> >

> >

> > You must not like my streching for the JPG.

> >

> >

> >

> > The elongation is verses in the corners is still very clear.

> >

> >

> >

> > I am not referring to a few halos on the brightest star.

> >

> >

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> >

> >

> > Max

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@ wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > "However, it not really a that great of a result"

> >

> > > In what respect?

> >

> > > You've picked rather bright stars which are saturated.

> >

> > > The halo around the stars is, more than likely, a reflection from your

> filter

> >

> > and coverslip.

> >

> > > (What filters are you using and how old are they?)

> >

> > > To judge 'flattness' you should compare relatively dim stars at the center

> and

> >

> > at the corners/edges.

> >

> > > Kent Kirkley

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:11 pm

> >

> > > Subject: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field flattner.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > However, it not really a that great of a result.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I checked it the spacing appears correct.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Is this typical performance?

> >

> > > It may be Version1 of the FF

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Max

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

---------------

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> >

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

---------------

>

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#51634 Oct 2, 2010

Max..that's what I was 'afraid of'. :))





You have the older version flattener for the 130 f6.





I have no experience with the 130 or your flattener, but, as I mentioned, I

had a similar experience with the 1st. version flattener for the Traveler.

The newer version, 67PF46 , shows pinpoint stars in the center and edges.





On the other hand, the 67PF582 flattener for the AP155EDFS I had was fine.





Kent Kirkley

















-----Original Message-----

From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sat, Oct 2, 2010 4:51 pm

Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance





Actually it looks like the top picture which is marked 67PF582



Max





--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@... wrote:

>

> Does your '67PF562' flattener look like the picture on the AP website?

>

>

> That is, is the body 4 or so inches long?

>

>

> AP doesn't currently list a '67PF561' but that might be because

> they no longer offer it after coming out with the '562'?

>

>

> If yours is not 3-4 inches long and only a couple inches long, then

> you have an older version and that might be the problem.

>

>

> Kent Kirkley

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: maxmsm maxmirot@...>

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Sent: Sat, Oct 2, 2010 9:47 am

> Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

>

>

> I have the 67PF562.

> Actually I got off someone else that had 2000 F6 so it might be a 67PF561

> version 1. It say 130mm F6 on the edge of glass so it is the right part. I am

> sure the V2 is little better than V1 but no this much.

>

>

> Howard and FLI gave the specs direct to Precise Parts. I suspect the spacing

is

> not right.

>

> I don't think this what Roland would allow.

> This is on a 16803 35mm square.

>

> Max

>

> --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@> wrote:

> >

> > I'm on my second AP flattener for my 130/8 and I'm still not happy with it

at

> all... Similar to the performance that Max displayed on his site... This is

with

> the 67RLEOS and the 67PF582... Shows up very easily with the full frame

(35mm)

> sensors that I'm using...

> >

> > Percy

> >

> > --- On Fri, 10/1/10, kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@> wrote:

> >

> > From: kgkirkley@ kgkirkley@>

> > Subject: Re: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> > Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 1:48 PM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ..

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Max:

> >

> >

> >

> > Ok, yes I see the elongation you're talking about.

> >

> > It is radial so I still think the spacing might be off.

> >

> >

> >

> > Spacing on field flatteners is rather critical.

> >

> > What is the number of the one you are using?

> >

> >

> >

> > I'm sure Roland will post his opinion.

> >

> >

> >

> > I've had two separate and different AP field flattener problems.

> >

> > First, the original flattener for the Traveler still showed bloated

> >

> > stars in the corners (film 6x7cm) and suffered from what Roland called

'focus

> selectivity', if

> >

> > I remember correctly. AP introduced a new flattener which corrected this.

> >

> >

> >

> > Second, when I first received my AP160 and 1x field flattener both Dave

> Radosevich

> >

> > and I were showing bloated stars in the corners. As it turned out, the

> flattener

> >

> > cell was too short but AP produced an extension which corrected the spacing.

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent Kirkley

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:54 pm

> >

> > Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

> >

> >

> >

> > Kent,

> >

> >

> >

> > Nothing is saturated in these images

> >

> >

> >

> > You must not like my streching for the JPG.

> >

> >

> >

> > The elongation is verses in the corners is still very clear.

> >

> >

> >

> > I am not referring to a few halos on the brightest star.

> >

> >

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> >

> >

> > Max

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, kgkirkley@ wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > "However, it not really a that great of a result"

> >

> > > In what respect?

> >

> > > You've picked rather bright stars which are saturated.

> >

> > > The halo around the stars is, more than likely, a reflection from your

> filter

> >

> > and coverslip.

> >

> > > (What filters are you using and how old are they?)

> >

> > > To judge 'flattness' you should compare relatively dim stars at the center



> and

> >

> > at the corners/edges.

> >

> > > Kent Kirkley

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> >

> > > From: maxmsm maxmirot@>

> >

> > > To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> >

> > > Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 12:11 pm

> >

> > > Subject: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field

flattner.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > However, it not really a that great of a result.

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

> >

> > >

> >

> > > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Adaptor was made by Precise parts specs were direct from AP to them.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I checked it the spacing appears correct.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Is this typical performance?

> >

> > > It may be Version1 of the FF

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Max

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

---------------

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> >

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> >

> > see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

---------------

>

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

> see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>









---------------





To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-ug list

see groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-ugYahoo! Groups Links













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#51636 Oct 2, 2010

maybe you're using the wrong scope :-)



i have to admit, every time i see a shot from this thing, i think "wow, nice stars" :-) maybe, i'm lucky with a "just right" setup.



i'm spoiled, too. i tried renting scope time on one of those big fancy RC scopes. i was very disappointed -- although scale and aperture did add some value.

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@...> wrote:

>

> Sure wish I could get results like that!.. I've been using the FSQ rather than my 130/8...

>



----------------------------

#51639 Oct 3, 2010

Not sure what you mean.



Kind doubt the AP130 EDFS is the wrong scope. They perform wonderfully with right flattner.



I also have 12.5 Planewave it has perfect stars across the field.

I have had 2 RCs with field correctors they are very over rated.



Max

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "lmbuck2000" lmbuck2000@...> wrote:

>

> maybe you're using the wrong scope :-)

>

> i have to admit, every time i see a shot from this thing, i think "wow, nice stars" :-) maybe, i'm lucky with a "just right" setup.

>

> i'm spoiled, too. i tried renting scope time on one of those big fancy RC scopes. i was very disappointed -- although scale and aperture did add some value.

>

> --- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@> wrote:

> >

> > Sure wish I could get results like that!.. I've been using the FSQ rather than my 130/8...

> >

>



----------------------------

#51640 Oct 3, 2010

the 'wrong scope' comment was a joke to percy for saying he was using an FSQ (takahashi). sorry for the confusion :-)



lee

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "maxmsm" maxmirot@...> wrote:

>

> Not sure what you mean.

>



----------------------------

#51648 Oct 3, 2010

Lee - on the nights I want non round stars at the edges and corners, I'll use my AP.. Otherwise the Tak FSQ is the only one that works right. ..



Perhaps AP shipped me the wrong flattener?. The spacing seems dead on but it could be the optics..



Ideas or insight?



Percy.

--- On Sun, 10/3/10, lmbuck2000 lmbuck2000@...> wrote:



From: lmbuck2000 lmbuck2000@...>

Subject: [ap-ug] Re: AP field flattner performance

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Date: Sunday, October 3, 2010, 12:04 PM















.



















the 'wrong scope' comment was a joke to percy for saying he was using an FSQ (takahashi). sorry for the confusion :-)







lee







--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, "maxmsm" maxmirot@...> wrote:



>



> Not sure what you mean.



>













































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#51657 Oct 4, 2010

In a message dated 10/1/2010 12:11:57 PM Central Daylight Time,

maxmirot@... writes:



> I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field

> flattner.

>

> However, it not really a that great of a result.

>

>

>

> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

>

> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

>



You may have an older 5"F8 field flattener. Where did you buy this

flattener?



Rolando





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#51700 Oct 6, 2010

Hello all!



Did quite a bit of checking with the mechanics and optics of the 130/8 and everything down the imaging chain.. I've been getting distorted star patterns at the edges of the frame similar to what others were getting.



The spacing was dead on.. This was with the new 67RLEOS adapter and field flattener.. I'm currently using a full frame camera from Canon. Camera chips at Canon are squared up at the factory and due to the severity of distortion, I highly doubt that a flat chip would produce a curved field.



So what's left?. The optics.. On a guess, I took apart the field flattener.. Never had it apart before and thought it would need a large spanner tool to work it loose.. But, there are two set screws on the side and the whole thing came apart quite nicely..



I then inverted the lens assembly for the flattener.. Reassembled everything and put it back into the imaging train.. The result?. PERFECT PINPOINT STARS to the edge of the field.. Will it take my FSQ out of action?. Nope - but it does give me another viable scope to image with rather than putting up with distorted stars from the (then) AP flattener.



A couple of things worry me though.. When I had first purchased my original flattener, I was using the original AP adapter.. 67RTEOS.. This was anywhere from 8mm to 10mm too short from the recommended 3.4 inches of distance to the focal plane.. I'm told that there was a variance with the t-rings on the market and some were smaller than others.. When I spoke with someone at AP, he mentioned that it didn't matter with film - something I took with a huge grain of salt.. This was quite a few years ago..



There was some back and forth conversations and Roland finally sent me a different flattener.. I tried it out and it was even more distorted.. Mind you, the flattener that was sent out did not appear to be in brand new shape - there were marks, nicks, etc on the casing..



In mid to late 2006 (if I remember correctly), AP came out with the 67RLEOS adapter.. A very nicely made piece - but it still needs the index markings to line up with the EOS mount.. This piece impressed me so much that I eventually used it for my FSQ terrestrial and astro photography.. Much more solid than the thin cast aluminum pieces that the other company has to offer..



I was fully expecting the 67RLEOS and the field flattener to produce pinpoint stars with a 35mm sized frame.. When I took the first image through that combination I was VERY disappointed - so much that I almost sold off all the AP gear that I had..



So what made me try the lens inversion?. It's the only thing that I could think of and the only variable left.. Usually AP is VERY good at quality control, but this was highly unexpected from a company with a "legendary" (from the ads!) reputation.. If ONE of them slipped through (and mine did) there might be possibilities that others may have slipped through the cracks of AP QC central.. On the 130/8 and 155/7 flattener, there isn't an obvious curve to the lens assembly.. It's not like looking at the 130/6 where you can pretty much tell the virtual markings..."front towards stars" by the curve of the lens..



Bottom line - for those that are getting distortion and if you have the right spacing and the right flattener, try the lens inversion trick..



Finally a happy AP customer and ending a multi year frustration with the flattener issue.



Percy









--- On Mon, 10/4/10, chris1011@... chris1011@...> wrote:



From: chris1011@... chris1011@...>

Subject: Re: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Date: Monday, October 4, 2010, 11:07 AM















.



















In a message dated 10/1/2010 12:11:57 PM Central Daylight Time,



maxmirot@... writes:







> I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field



> flattner.



>



> However, it not really a that great of a result.



>



>



>



> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893



>



> www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888



>







You may have an older 5"F8 field flattener. Where did you buy this



flattener?







Rolando







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]













































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#51701 Oct 6, 2010

Good work.



Max

--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@...> wrote:

>

> Hello all!

>

> Did quite a bit of checking with the mechanics and optics of the 130/8 and everything down the imaging chain... I've been getting distorted star patterns at the edges of the frame similar to what others were getting.

>

> The spacing was dead on... This was with the new 67RLEOS adapter and field flattener... I'm currently using a full frame camera from Canon.. Camera chips at Canon are squared up at the factory and due to the severity of distortion, I highly doubt that a flat chip would produce a curved field.

>

> So what's left?.. The optics... On a guess, I took apart the field flattener... Never had it apart before and thought it would need a large spanner tool to work it loose... But, there are two set screws on the side and the whole thing came apart quite nicely...

>

> I then inverted the lens assembly for the flattener... Reassembled everything and put it back into the imaging train... The result?.. PERFECT PINPOINT STARS to the edge of the field... Will it take my FSQ out of action?.. Nope - but it does give me another viable scope to image with rather than putting up with distorted stars from the (then) AP flattener.

>

> A couple of things worry me though... When I had first purchased my original flattener, I was using the original AP adapter... 67RTEOS... This was anywhere from 8mm to 10mm too short from the recommended 3.4 inches of distance to the focal plane... I'm told that there was a variance with the t-rings on the market and some were smaller than others... When I spoke with someone at AP, he mentioned that it didn't matter with film - something I took with a huge grain of salt... This was quite a few years ago...

>

> There was some back and forth conversations and Roland finally sent me a different flattener... I tried it out and it was even more distorted... Mind you, the flattener that was sent out did not appear to be in brand new shape - there were marks, nicks, etc on the casing...

>

> In mid to late 2006 (if I remember correctly), AP came out with the 67RLEOS adapter... A very nicely made piece - but it still needs the index markings to line up with the EOS mount... This piece impressed me so much that I eventually used it for my FSQ terrestrial and astro photography... Much more solid than the thin cast aluminum pieces that the other company has to offer...

>

> I was fully expecting the 67RLEOS and the field flattener to produce pinpoint stars with a 35mm sized frame... When I took the first image through that combination I was VERY disappointed - so much that I almost sold off all the AP gear that I had...

>

> So what made me try the lens inversion?.. It's the only thing that I could think of and the only variable left... Usually AP is VERY good at quality control, but this was highly unexpected from a company with a "legendary" (from the ads!) reputation... If ONE of them slipped through (and mine did) there might be possibilities that others may have slipped through the cracks of AP QC central... On the 130/8 and 155/7 flattener, there isn't an obvious curve to the lens assembly... It's not like looking at the 130/6 where you can pretty much tell the virtual markings..."front towards stars" by the curve of the lens...

>

> Bottom line - for those that are getting distortion and if you have the right spacing and the right flattener, try the lens inversion trick...

>

> Finally a happy AP customer and ending a multi year frustration with the flattener issue.

>

> Percy

>

>

>

>

>

> --- On Mon, 10/4/10, chris1011@... chris1011@...> wrote:

>

> From: chris1011@... chris1011@...>

> Subject: Re: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Monday, October 4, 2010, 11:07 AM

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ..

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> In a message dated 10/1/2010 12:11:57 PM Central Daylight Time,

>

> maxmirot@... writes:

>

>

>

> > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field

>

> > flattner.

>

> >

>

> > However, it not really a that great of a result.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

>

> >

>

> > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

>

> >

>

>

>

> You may have an older 5"F8 field flattener. Where did you buy this

>

> flattener?

>

>

>

> Rolando

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#51702 Oct 6, 2010

"It's not like looking at the 130/6 where you can pretty much tell the virtual markings..."front towards stars" by the curve of the lens."



I think your suggesting it should be convex towards the objective.

Do you know for sure the what the orientation is on the original F6 67PF56 ?

The lens for the second model 67PF582 may different too.





Max



--- In ap-ug@yahoogroups.com, Percy Mui esotar330@...> wrote:

>

> Hello all!

>

> Did quite a bit of checking with the mechanics and optics of the 130/8 and everything down the imaging chain... I've been getting distorted star patterns at the edges of the frame similar to what others were getting.

>

> The spacing was dead on... This was with the new 67RLEOS adapter and field flattener... I'm currently using a full frame camera from Canon.. Camera chips at Canon are squared up at the factory and due to the severity of distortion, I highly doubt that a flat chip would produce a curved field.

>

> So what's left?.. The optics... On a guess, I took apart the field flattener... Never had it apart before and thought it would need a large spanner tool to work it loose... But, there are two set screws on the side and the whole thing came apart quite nicely...

>

> I then inverted the lens assembly for the flattener... Reassembled everything and put it back into the imaging train... The result?.. PERFECT PINPOINT STARS to the edge of the field... Will it take my FSQ out of action?.. Nope - but it does give me another viable scope to image with rather than putting up with distorted stars from the (then) AP flattener.

>

> A couple of things worry me though... When I had first purchased my original flattener, I was using the original AP adapter... 67RTEOS... This was anywhere from 8mm to 10mm too short from the recommended 3.4 inches of distance to the focal plane... I'm told that there was a variance with the t-rings on the market and some were smaller than others... When I spoke with someone at AP, he mentioned that it didn't matter with film - something I took with a huge grain of salt... This was quite a few years ago...

>

> There was some back and forth conversations and Roland finally sent me a different flattener... I tried it out and it was even more distorted... Mind you, the flattener that was sent out did not appear to be in brand new shape - there were marks, nicks, etc on the casing...

>

> In mid to late 2006 (if I remember correctly), AP came out with the 67RLEOS adapter... A very nicely made piece - but it still needs the index markings to line up with the EOS mount... This piece impressed me so much that I eventually used it for my FSQ terrestrial and astro photography... Much more solid than the thin cast aluminum pieces that the other company has to offer...

>

> I was fully expecting the 67RLEOS and the field flattener to produce pinpoint stars with a 35mm sized frame... When I took the first image through that combination I was VERY disappointed - so much that I almost sold off all the AP gear that I had...

>

> So what made me try the lens inversion?.. It's the only thing that I could think of and the only variable left... Usually AP is VERY good at quality control, but this was highly unexpected from a company with a "legendary" (from the ads!) reputation... If ONE of them slipped through (and mine did) there might be possibilities that others may have slipped through the cracks of AP QC central... On the 130/8 and 155/7 flattener, there isn't an obvious curve to the lens assembly... It's not like looking at the 130/6 where you can pretty much tell the virtual markings..."front towards stars" by the curve of the lens...

>

> Bottom line - for those that are getting distortion and if you have the right spacing and the right flattener, try the lens inversion trick...

>

> Finally a happy AP customer and ending a multi year frustration with the flattener issue.

>

> Percy

>

>

>

>

>

> --- On Mon, 10/4/10, chris1011@... chris1011@...> wrote:

>

> From: chris1011@... chris1011@...>

> Subject: Re: [ap-ug] AP field flattner performance

> To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Monday, October 4, 2010, 11:07 AM

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ..

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> In a message dated 10/1/2010 12:11:57 PM Central Daylight Time,

>

> maxmirot@... writes:

>

>

>

> > I just got the adapters to use my AP 130mm EDF F6 and it is field

>

> > flattner.

>

> >

>

> > However, it not really a that great of a result.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018893

>

> >

>

> > www.pbase.com/maxmsm/image/129018888

>

> >

>

>

>

> You may have an older 5"F8 field flattener. Where did you buy this

>

> flattener?

>

>

>

> Rolando

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#70065 Feb 28 2:05 PM

I just recently received this in a accessory purchase.

Can someone help me identify which one it is?

And maybe value?

Thank you.



Scott.



----------------------------

#70067 Feb 28 2:48 PM

I'm not sure how to attach pics



----------------------------

#70068 Feb 28 2:50 PM

groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ap-ug/photos/photostream/lightbox/1338977185?orderBy=mtime&sortOrder=desc&photoFilter=ALL



----------------------------

#70069 Feb 28 2:51 PM

xa1.yimg.com/kq/groups/1182961/sn/46128226/name/2015-02-28+15.23.18.jpg



----------------------------

#70070 Feb 28 3:44 PM

It looks like the Photographic-Visual Telecompressor (0.75x) Part#27TVPH







www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/photo_acc/photo_acc







Dave







From: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ap-ug@yahoogroups.com]

Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 2:51 PM

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [ap-ug] Re: ap field flattner?











xa1.yimg.com/kq/groups/1182961/sn/46128226/name/2015-02-28+15.23.18.jpg











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#70071 Feb 28 4:31 PM

Your right thank you.



----------------------------

#70078 Mar 2, 2015

Scott, ��That is the 0.75x Telecompressor (27TVPH).

��Regards, ��George ��George WhitneyAstro-Physics, Inc.Phone:�� 815-282-1513Email:�� george@...

��From: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ap-ug@yahoogroups.com]

Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 4:50 PM

To: ap-ug@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [ap-ug] Re: ap field flattner?



Contact Us
This Site's Privacy Policy
Google's privacy policies

S
e
n
i
o
r
T
u
b
e
.
o
r
g