How to Set the Correct Back Focus for Your Telescope (Guide)
Figuring out the correct back focus for your telescope can be a daunting task to beginners and experienced astrophotographers alike. In this article, we’ll go over why back focus spacing is so important to get right, everything to consider for back focus spacing, and how to use adapters and spacers to get your back focus spacing perfect.
What is Back Focus, and Why it Matters for Your Telescope
Back focus, in its simplest definition, is the measurement between the last optical component, such as a corrector or reducer, of your telescope and the focal plane. When using your telescope stock without any accessories, you can easily reach focus because the telescope’s focuser travel is designed to move around this distance. However, when you’re using a corrector or reducer, back focus must be a set distance away.
Measuring Back Focus When Using a Corrector or Reducer
When back focus becomes really critical to get right is when you’re using an optical corrector or focal reducer with your telescope or one that is integrated into the design. Both optical correctors and focal reducers are designed to work best when the focal plane is at a set distance away. If you don’t space the focal plane (e.g. camera sensor) at the recommended distance away from the corrector, then the corrector will not work as intended. This usually results in elongated or misshapen stars, most noticeably towards the corners (off-axis) in the image. It becomes especially noticeable when using large sensors like full frame and/or a fast optical system.
Accessories That Require Correct Back Focus for Your Telescope
The Radian 61's integrated corrector requires 55mm of back focus
Optical correctors and reducers can also be built right into the telescope, which is becoming more and more popular for astrograph telescopes that are specifically designed for imaging. If you use any of the below telescopes, then make sure your back focus spacing is accurate.
Common Telescopes That Have Correctors Built-in & Their Back Focus Spacing
- Radian 61 Refractor — 55mm
- Celestron EdgeHD series telescopes — 55mm (with add'l T-Adapter)
- Celestron 8" RASA — 25mm (with included T-Adapter, incompatible with DSLRs)
- Celestron 11" & 36cm RASA — 55mm (with included T-Adapter)
- Meade ACF series telescopes — 55mm (with add'l T-Adapter)
Back Focus for Fast Telescopes and Large Camera Sensors
Back focus spacing becomes even more critical to get right when you’re using a telescope/corrector with a fast focal ratio, or when you’re using a camera with a large camera sensor such as full frame or larger. The reasons for this are simple. The faster the focal ratio of a telescope (or corrector), the narrower the focal plane is and therefore the more precise focus has to be. Second, the larger a camera sensor is, the more corrected the image field has to be to cover the entire image. If the corrected image field isn’t large enough to cover the full sensor, then stars may appear misshapen or elongated towards the corners of the image since it’s not fully corrected.
Where Do I Measure Back Focus From?
Back focus is most commonly measured from the flat edge of the corrector/reducer facing the camera, not including the threads on the corrector/reducer. You can use a tape measurer (or more ideally, a pair of calipers) to measure back focus. See the diagram below:
My Camera Says I Need 55mm Back Focus. Is This Correct?
Let’s get one thing out of the way: back focus is a property of optics, not cameras. That being said, 55mm is an industry-standard length of back focus for many optical correctors and focal reducers. So, while 55mm is usually correct for most setups, we always recommend double checking the manuals and diagrams for your corrector/reducer or telescope (if it has a corrector built in) to be sure. These can usually be found on the manufacturer's product page. If it's not listed, contact the manufacturer.
A wide (M48) T-ring for use with Canon cameras
I’m Using a DSLR or Mirrorless Camera. Do I Need to Worry About Back Focus Spacing?
Usually not, but it depends. As mentioned above, 55mm is an industry standard for back focus length. You can reach that using a T-ring, which are used to attach cameras to telescopes and other optical accessories. No matter which camera brand you use, T-rings are designed specifically to provide 55mm of back focus spacing from the telescope end of the T-ring to the camera sensor. If your recommended back focus is 55mm, then you'll be ready to go with only a T-ring. However, if your recommended back focus length is longer than 55mm, then you will need to use spacers or a T-adapter to make it longer. If your recommended back focus length is shorter than 55mm, you will want to use a T-minus ring (also known as a short t-ring) if possible to get to the recommended back focus length.
How to Tell if Your Equipment's Back Focus is Off
If you suspect that your back focus spacing is off and it’s producing stars that are elongated in the corners, use our Back Focus Spacing Guide below. If your stars appear to radiate away from the center, then your camera sensor is too close and you need to add more spacing. If your stars appear to be concentric around the center, then your camera sensor is too far and you need to remove spacing. Please note that sensor tilt and optical aberrations, such as coma and astigmatism, can also cause stars to appear elongated on their own and are unrelated to back focus.
This back focus spacing guide is sized to be saved on your phone for easy reference.
How Do I Set the Correct Back Focus Spacing?
To change back focus spacing, you need to add (or remove) spacers, sometimes also called extenders, within your telescope's imaging train. To do that, you'll need to physically thread the spacers into the imaging train at some point in between the camera and your telescope. It usually doesn't matter where, but if you're using filters or a filter wheel of any kind, you'll want to keep the filters as close to the camera sensor as possible. If you're using filters, see the section below on how filters add back focus distance.
How to Use Spacers for Back Focus
Spacers come in many different lengths to accommodate all different back focus spacing needs. They also come in a variety of thread sizes, such as M42 and M48, so be sure to choose the right size threads for your system. To make this easier, many astronomy camera manufacturers (such as ZWO) include the correct spacers to reach 55mm back focus. Spacers can be as short as less than 1mm and as long as necessary. Below are some common spacers, including the common 21mm and 16.5mm spacers that come included with most ZWO cooled astronomy cameras:
Common spacers that come with astronomy-dedicated cameras
To ensure all spacers and components in your imaging train can thread together, you will need to know the size of the threads on the end of your telescope or corrector/reducer. This is most commonly M48 or M42 size threads, but thread size can depend on the corrector, reducer, or telescope. Make sure your t-ring and/or spacers you have can thread together between the telescope, camera, and any accessories in between. ZWO has a helpful back focus guide on how to thread their included adapters together to reach 55mm of back focus.
I Use Filters in My Imaging Train. Does this Change My Back Focus?
Yes, using filters of any kind in your imaging train will alter your back focus slightly. Putting a filter into the optical path always increases the back focus distance. To calculate how much back focus spacing you need to add, take the thickness of the filter and divide it by 3. So, if you have a filter that is 3mm thick, you need to add 1mm of spacing to your imaging train to retain the correct back focus. Therefore, a 55mm back focus with a filter that is 3mm thick added to the imaging train would become 56mm. In practice, however, 1mm off from back focus spacing is usually not very noticeable unless you're using a large sensor or a very fast optical system.
Example of 55mm back focus with an off-axis guider in the imaging train
How do filter wheels/drawers, off-axis guiders, and other accessory in the imaging train affect back focus?
Filter wheels, filter drawers, and off-axis guiders all have thicknesses that will add to the overall length of your imaging train, and these need to be factored in when calculating back focus. Each individual part has their own thickness, which you can usually find in the product manual online. Some manufacturers produce these components with thicknesses that match the spacers included with cooled astronomy cameras, so that you can easily swap out a spacer for an off-axis guider, for example. For that reason, we usually recommend sticking with one brand's product ecosystem as their components are sometimes interchangeable.
I have a Petzval/Quadruplet Refractor. Do I Need to Adjust Back Focus Spacing?
The benefit of the Petzval/Quadruplet refractor design, such as the William Optics RedCat 51, is that the focusing mechanism moves the entire image train. This means that for these telescopes, all you need to worry about is reaching focus, which is rarely an issue, and your back focus spacing will be correct.
Is Back Focus Spacing Important for Planetary Imaging?
While it depends on the sensor size being used, back focus is not nearly as important to get correct for planetary imaging. The reason for this is because incorrect back focus spacing usually effects off-axis portions of the image like the corners. Since most planetary cameras use very small sensors unlike cooled astronomy cameras for deep sky, back focus is not nearly as critical and the effects of incorrect back focus spacing are usually unnoticeable.
Back Focus Spacing Summary
Back focus spacing is important to get right for nearly any deep sky imaging setup, especially those using large sensor cameras or fast focal ratio telescopes. All optical correctors and reducers require a specific back focus length, so be sure to check the manual or diagrams to find out what that measurement should be. Most often, it is 55mm, which is easily achievable with a T-ring for DSLR/Mirrorless cameras or adapters included with cooled astronomy cameras. However, if it’s other than 55mm, you may need to purchase separate spacers for your setup.
Shop Spacers for Back Focus |Shop T-Rings for Cameras
34 Responses
Hinrich
Great article. One correction: adding flat glass, like a filter, to a converging light cone actually SHORTENS the required back focus. So, a 3mm thick filter reduces, not extends, back focus requirements by about 1mm
Frank
I have a W.O. FLT 132 scope and the 68III flattener. The flattener is adjustable and it looks like the WO website says to set it at 7.7mm. I’m lost here because do I include that 7.7mm in the overall 55mm back focus or adjust the flattener first, then add the 55mm behind the adjusted flattener? Also,is it allowable to adjust the flattener a little more than the 7.7mm, say to 8.7mm, to compensate for my filters instead of adding extra back focus spacers??
Brian F
@Allen Baylus — You can accomplish less than 1mm of spacing using a variable spacer. There are also some spacer rings sold by Baader and others that are 0.5mm thick.
Brian F
To the two comments below this claiming the back focus for SCTs is incorrect: the article states that back focus for the Celestron EdgeHD series and Meade ACF series is 55mm WITH an additional T-Adapter.
The T-Adapter accounts for the additional spacing you need to set back focus at the intended distance. For example, for the larger EdgeHD series telescopes that need 146mm back focus use a T-Adapter that is 91mm in length. 146 – 91 = 55. So, the article is still correct, you just need to use the T-Adapter, which you should be if you’re imaging anyway.
Bruce
Two comments. Your reference to Edge HD backfocus at 55mm is incorrect. The 9.25, 11, and 14 all use 146.05mm with or without a reducer. The “standard” 55mm measurement from camera sensor to some camera attachment is irrelevant as long as the overall image train from thread top to sensor is 146.05. Second, your illustration shows that backfocus is measured from the flat edge of the reducer/corrector. With Edge, measurements are from the outermost surface of the threads (either the lock ring or the .7 reducer). I have read that Celestron caused some confusion on this with an earlier manual that showed measurements from the flat edge as your article suggests. Although Celestron has corrected the error, it still circulates on the internet.
One question: I have seen comments here and on other sites that backfocus is irrelevant if there are no flatteners/reducers/correctors in the image train. I’ve seen others say that scopes with flatteners before the focuser don’t have back focus issues. I get all of this. My question is with specific regard to Edge SCT’s. My understanding is that their internal flattener is in the baffle tube just before the light exits the back. That makes me think that the flattener is after the focuser so it does have to observe back focus limits. Am I thinking correctly?
Dean Miskovich
At the top of this article you state that the Back Focus Length for the Meade ACF series SCT’s is 55mm. This is not correct. According to Meade, the BFL for the ACF’s is 6.11" or 155.19mm. This will require a much greater spacing than other types of telescopes listed.
warren flynn
I have a Celestron 8" with the Celestron 0.6 reducer. I believe back focus is killing me. Stars are not perfectly consistent with “too far” image in this very helpful article. I have seen two separate “opinions?” of the correct spacing for the reducer, common is 105MM and another for 85MM. If I was a betting man, I think is should be 55MM, since my stars seem elongated with 85MM (more on one side – which may still be residual tilt issue). Celestron has nothing in their manual or on their website. Any help would be greatly a
warren flynn
I have a Celestron 8" with the Celestron 0.6 reducer. I believe back focus is killing me. Stars are not perfectly consistent with “too far” image in this very helpful article. I have seen two separate “opinions?” of the correct spacing for the reducer, common is 105MM and another for 85MM. If I was a betting man, I think is should be 55MM, since my stars seem elongated with 85MM (more on one side – which may still be residual tilt issue). Celestron has nothing in their manual or on their website. Any help would be greatly a
Ron Kramer
Backfocus is EXTREMELY sensitive and important on fast scopes as you stated above. I use a F2.2 rasa with a full frame sensor camera and I’ve spent hundreds of dollars to get spacing/tilt tools to help with the job. Software such as ASTAP, CCDIns., NINA plugin Hocus Focus are 3 such tools.
After hours for several nights, I was pleased with my tuning. But adding the filter throws it out… I was googling how much space to add for my NBZ filter. I wasn’t sure of adding or removing. You let me know I need to add a bit. I’m using an Octopi unit for tuning. Tonight I will tune it back 1/2mm or so to find the new placement. Yes backspacing is important but TILT goes along with it.
Thanks for the confirmation. At dark – I’ll be out doing my final tuning. If the RASA is off at all with a large frame camera it will give very poor results.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/portranet/albums/72157717959454497
OPT is my go-to place for help and gear. I’m so grateful OPT shipped my ASI094 to China for repair. The repair and the handling fee were both shockingly low. I was to scared to ship my 4,000 camera to China.
Allen Baylus
follow up question – the Optolong L-eNhance Light Pollution Filter 2" has a Thickness of 1.85mm – using the rule above "take the thickness of the filter and divide it by 3: you end up with 0.616mm.
I can not find the thickness of the Baader Neodymium but I see references to 2mm, which would be 0.666 mm.
How does one add less then 1mm backfocus?
Farzad
I am dealing with an 8" Celestron Edge HD, and I have a motorized focuser (Moonlite CHL 2.5) behind the scope for automatic focusing. The 105mm back focus (using a 0.7 reducer) is the sweet spot and I can achieve that using the electrical focuser that I use by pushing the imaging equipment in and out until I have good focus. I do that in combination with fine adjustment of the main mirror before locking it up and I use software like NINA to make final adjustments. I do see stars being elongated on one side and not the other when imaging at F7, but not when imaging at F10. Could this be a problem with the reducer optics?
Thanks
allen baylus
I just purchased a Celestron focal reducer for my Meade LX-50 8 inch SCT.
The back focus is stated to be 105mm.
My ASI295MC Pro has 17.5 between the sensor and the end of the adaptor.
So I need 87.5mm of length. The camera came with 37.5 to give us the 55mm we needed for a typical scope. so I would need to add some length in order to get the proper Backfocus.
I put in 20mm of tube plus the adapter puts me at 85mm.
Is the missing 2.5mm critical?
Larry Hibbitts
Hi there – having problems getting focus with my Redcat 51.
I have a ZWO Manual filter wheel, and am using a ZWO 224MC camera.
Suggestions on spacers to use for this?
paul
Hey OPT team. question. most (or all?) flatterners/reducers/combos intended for DLSR use have 55mm of back focus. How does that match up with the newer mirrorless standards such as the Canon RF system? That has a flange to sensor distance of 20mm.
OPTeam
Hi Steve,
It depends on which telescope you’re using, but most likely not. If you want to confirm, shoot us an email at internetsales@optcorp.com and we’ll help you out!
- OPTeam
Steve Hand
I do not have any optical correctors or reducers but I do use a filter draw with an L-enhance filter, I still dont have to worry about back focus do I ?
OPTeam
Hi Benjamin,
You’re welcome! You’re correct, back focus is not an issue for planetary imaging. The only time back focus can be an issue for planetary is if you have too many accessories in your image train that your focal point is beyond the range of your focuser travel, but that should not be the case for you with your setup. If you are only imaging the planets, keep them centered (on axis) in your ASI294MM sensor’s field of view and you will not encounter any optical issues caused by back focus.
— OPTeam
OPTeam
Hi Tomas,
Technically, yes, you do need to account for some refraction caused by the AR/protective window, but this is either already accounted for by camera manufacturers in their back focus distance listed, or it is so negligible that it very rarely causes issues.
— OPTeam
OPTeam
In the article, we wrote that back focus is a property of optics, not cameras. When you see a camera manufacturer like ZWO advising how to get 55mm back focus, please note that they are not saying 55mm is the correct back focus you need for your telescope’s image train. They are merely instructing how to get to 55mm as that is the most common distance (industry standard) for many telescopes and correctors. In your particular case on the Esprit 120, the included Field Flattener does have a back focus of 75mm as you mentioned, but also comes with a 20mm long adapter that results in an M48 male connection on the camera side. When you use this included adapter, you are left with a remainder of 55mm back focus to your sensor. This article on ZWO’s website tells you how to get to 55mm with the ASI2600 and other cameras using their accessories: https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/tutorials/best-back-focus-length-solutions-55mm.html
Hope this clears it up! :)
Benjamin
Hi, thank you very much for this very clear article.
I read that back focus is not a big problem for imaging planetary, but to do it, I will use the following set up :
a C8 telescope, a crayford with a motorised focuser (ZWO EAF), a barlow, an ADC (ZWO), a filter wheel (ZWO EFW 7×36) and a monochrom camera (ZWO ASI 294MM PRO).
Can you please tell me if I have to take care of the back focus (55mm according to the camera’s notice + back focus added by filter?) and if yes, from what I have to measure it ?
Best regards, Benjamin
Dave
@Damien – where are you seeing that the ASI1600 specifies 55mm backfocus? Their manual states that it has a backfocus distance of 6.5mm, so you need to add enough spacers (or other equipment like OAG and filter wheel) to match the distance specified by your flattener, 75mm in your case.
tomas
When calculating the additional back focus due to filters, what about the camera glass window in front of the sensor. Is additional back focus adjustment needed due to the shift caused by the camera glass window?
Damien Finlayson
Hi there – I’m confused as to who is right. Is it the camera manufacturer or the telescope manufacturer? I’ve got a Skywatcher Esprit 120 and the telescope manual states the backfocus from the flange of the field flattener to the camera sensor should be 75mm but ZWO (for example) states its ASI2600MM Pro camera (with an APS-C sensor) needs 55mm backfocus. Why do the two equipment manufacturers have different backfocus values and whom is right? It’s confusing. Cheers!!
OPTeam
Hi Martin,
When using that telescope for imaging, we strongly recommend the matching Sky-Watcher reducer/flattener for it. The correct back focus spacing for that reducer/flattener is 55mm. You can find that product here: https://optcorp.com/products/sky-watcher-0-85x-evostar-72ed-reducer-flattener
Once you have that, then you can just use the included spacers with your ZWO ASI183MC. This will give you the correct length of 55mm. Contact us at internetsales@optcorp.com if you need more help!
OPTeam
Hi Walter,
What you are referring to are Petzval or Petzval-like telescopes, which are covered in the article. They are separate from most traditional telescopes and should be treated as such.
— OPTeam
Martin Brennan
I’m struggling to achieve focus.
Zwo 183mc Pro C and Skywatcher Evostar 72Ed DS Pro.
I’ve got all manner of spacers easily exceeding 55mm, but this makes no difference. Focus can’t be achieved. what am I doing wrong?
Walter Zambotti
This article assume the corrector/reducer is incorporated as part of the focuser train. When the corrector/reducer comes before the focuser there is no back focus issue and the focuser can be used to bring the image into focus on the focal plain as expected. Such scopes as the ASKAR FRA series would be prime examples of this.
Prithwish Saha
I have Meade infinity 80mm and I have problem
Focusing with T-ring and T-adapter on my Canon 60D
Lamar
Hello,
I have a Meade 12" LX850 f/8 ACF OTA and I have the Meade #777 OAG attached to it. The imaging camera is a ZWO ASI2600MC Pro.
Should I be able to just thread the OAG onto the SCT threads and the ASI2600MC-P onto the OAG to achieve the 55mm back focus you mention in the article?
I think I will be longer than 55mm since the Meade #777 OAG itself is about 42mm long. And the focal length will be much shorter than the 2438mm printed on the OTA.
Right now I have about 40mm spacers attached to the end of the OTA, then the OAG, and finally my ASI2600MC-P and through plate-solving I am getting 2438mm focal length. But on bright stars (maybe on all but most noticeable on bright stars) there is “smearing” that points away from the center of the frame — like you show when the camera sensor is too close.
So my question is how far should the ASI2600MC-P sensor be away from the back of the Meade 12" ACF OTA to achieve pinpoint stars?
Thank you VERY much for your help.
Lamar
Antonio
Greetings,
I read with interest the article on the backfocus.
Now I have many doubts: they gave me an optec lepus reducer for sc 9.25 hd edge.
In the article we talk about a defined distance of 55 mm, while for the reducer they speak of 100 mm.
The question is: should I use 55 or should I add extensions to reach 100 – backfocus ccd atik?
Thanks and congratulations for the article and the photos
Axel
Hi; I have a question: I have a Celestron C11 SCT with the advanced VX mount. After reading your backfocus blog, I bought the f6/3 reducer corrector, the t-adaptor and the t-ring for my Nikon DSRL. The question I have , how can I add a non-clipping filter (CLS-CCD OR any other filter) to the system, without affecting the focus not the length. Thank you. Axel Vargas MD
OPTeam
Hi Roger,
The reducer, reducer/flattener, or coma corrector are designed to go directly onto the back of the telescope, and not placed anywhere after accessories. Field flatteners and coma correctors specifically are generally designed to be multi-purpose and can fit in a wide array of telescopes. Reducers and reducer/flatteners, on the other hand, are often designed specifically for one brand or even model of telescope for the reasons you mentioned. We always recommend going with the reducer or reducer/flattener made for your specific telescope, and those products will have already determined the best level of reduction for that telescope. In your example, that is 0.7×. There are a couple of different models of the Explore Scientific 102mm f/7 refractors, but if you’re referring to the FCD100 version, then you will want to use the Explore Scientific 0.7x Reducer/Flattener (part # ES-FFFR507X-00) and the matching adapter for 2.5" HEX focusers (part # ES-510366).
Hope this helps! If you have any more questions, please contact us at internetsales@optcorp.com.
- OPTeam
Roger
Hi
A related auestion is where in the optical train the reducer (or flattener/reducer) must(!) be positioned in the optical train to enable the best flat field as possible. Not all optical tubes can host a reducer/flatterer and achieve a flat image circle at target FL due to the fact that the OTA is too long to be able to reduce FL. The Explore Scientific 102/f7 is a good example ( got one)..
So what is to best way to determine the maximum allowed reduction of FL given any OTA?
Hinrich
June 05, 2023
Delete that, despite drawing myself a picture I had the refraction backwards. Adding glass does diverge the beam temporarily 🤪