Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Just realised I’d posted the wrong link https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-diamond-steeltrack-focusers/baader-steeltrack-diamond-rt-for-refractors.html Baader do a huge range of adapters to fit anything. https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p8211_Baader-2--Diamond-Steeltrack--Refractor-Focuser.html
  3. Perhaps, I have never used an OAG before, guess I will find out. My filters are the ZWO filters, they quote 'add 1mm'. How do I actually see that the backfous is correct? Just that I can focus sharply?
  4. I can see there are various connectors there. I'll drop FLO a line to see what can be done. Thanks Rob
  5. I use mine with a celstron liFePo4 battery as small and light.
  6. Thanks John. I assume the Baader ST focusers flange is equal to the FT one?. I know I would still need the Bresser Adapter, but that's fine. Humm I do like those ST focusers I have to say.
  7. Hi guys OK I seem to have managed to connect up and once connected I hear the ticking of the mount But I do not seen to be able to control the slew with the computer using PhD I cannot remember if I could control it before any information or help I would be grateful guys, thanks in advance barrie
  8. The Mmonlite looks nice but Isn’t perfect. there are others of similar quality for less. The Baader Diamond Steeltrack is a stronger and more durable focuser that is very highly regarded. The Feathertouch is superb but so eye wateringly expensive nowadays.. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-diamond-steeltrack-focusers/baader-steeltrack-diamond-nt-for-newtonians.html
  9. Hi. If someone would like to disassemble azimuthal bearing from a newer version of SW GoTo dobson, you can see https://www.astro-forum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=25807. Only in czech language, but lot of pictures.
  10. Thanks folks - will have a look at the links. Slainte Mhaith.
  11. Update: 15 Aql is an optical (line of sight) double rather than a gravitationally bound system, and is listed in Haas but not the Cambridge Atlas. No less attractive for that mind you! 14 Aql is not in either volume, but Stellarium has it as a double. I believe it is a spectroscopic double, so cannot be split visually. Doug. [ @StarryEyed - Kevin - I was undecided between that and orangeish/orangeish!]
  12. Welcome and that's lovely you are excited about your telescope. Using a wedge does mean it becomes equatorial in how it tracks. The users on this thread with your mount are not using a wedge through may be using a smaller telescope. Here's to clear skies.
  13. C11 Edge Weight is 13kg, plus Accessories and apply the 2/3rds rule for Astrophotgraphy... You are looking at a mount that can handle around 23kgs of weight. The CEM60 is a very good choice I think
  14. Thanks Dave for the compliments, much appreciated ! My HEQ5 is like going on steroids... I have built an Arduino accessory that removes most of the PE in the RA stepper motor (the stepper itself has a fast, 0.6 seconds, PE) which makes life easier for the autoguider. Will make a write-up of it when time allows. Ragnar
  15. Possibly not the best solution..... but I’ve use a C11 at f10 for spectroscopy mounted on a NEQ6PRO for the past ten years, no issues no drama.
  16. I Appreciate your replies all!. Thanks I will contact Bresser as suggested firstly, may still go down the Moonlight or even the Feather touch upgrade as noted on the Bresser site (also movable to other Bresser & ES ED scopes) Rob
  17. Today
  18. Doug. "orangey/orangey" I say things like this all the time and constantly get pulled up on them at work. I'm happy happy to see I am amongst like minded people. orangey/orangey.... Kevin
  19. Hmm, that's a shame. You don't happen to have any experience with any of these: https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8069_TS-Optics-Altazimuth-Mount-with-Fine-Adjustment-and-Quick-Release.html https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p1753_TS-Optics-Altazimuth-Mount-GSAZ-with-fine-adjustment-and-tripod.html The first seems to be the same as the VersaGo III/Twilight 1, and the last one the GSO Skyview. Both seems like a step up from Az-3/Az-5 in regards to stability, without a giant leap in price.
  20. Sure, here's device manager: Driver details: COM settings: How device appears under Devices and printers: Repeat error message from EQMOD Setup: And bonus Toolbox COM test: Thanks for helping me out so far.
  21. Two thoughts: 1) if you're going to swap to a 106 much of the extra cost will go into giving you a corrected circle your new camera cannot exploit. Surely this would be a waste, though there is no way past it if you sstick with 1.25 filters which are on their limit with the APSc chip anyway. So what would you hope to gain with the 106? With the small pixels of a CMOS camera you won't be short of resolution in the 85, you'll have a wider FOV and a better telescope. See point 2. 2) The ED 106 can be a bit of a devil, quite apart from the QC issues which have plagued all FSQ modelss of late. It is terribly prone to temperature-induced focus drift. Your 85 and our 106N Fluorites are better in this respect. I would only change to a 106, myself, if I were also going to go to full frame or larger, like the 35x35 Kodak, but then you need even bigger filters, the square ones. An APSc CMOS in the Baby Q would be great, I suspect and, for me, preferable to the same camera in a 106ED. We already know that the QSI683 works sweetly in the Baby Q. Olly
  22. After the three screws shown above were sawn shorter, all three sets of hardware were installed... The extensions are now completed. Next, I will need to matte-blacken the hardware on the inside, along with other related areas.
  23. What about the mount not showing up in the phd2 drop down list? Is it not an axiom mount?
  24. Hi John, Sounds like you're a regular visitor also? I have kit here such as EQ6 mounts, some small APO's plus a Meade 10" LX200 which I hire out, so perhaps you may be interested to use some of the equipment I keep? Saves a lot on excess baggage charges which are very expensive these days, I know the restaurant you mean (Mirador El Time). Its a great place with magnificent views across to Los Llanos and El Paso. Been there many times. Regards JohnM
  25. I searched for ages about the CGE and found reference to a "socket head screw" in, or projecting from, the mounting top plate. Nothing visible on "yours?" Later examples seem to have a worm, or threaded rod, fine adjustment in azimuth. A costly design solution unless you need it every night. Owners complained [in another place] about the PA altitude adjustment being heavy but found the azimuth easy. Presumably they could just rotate the tripod if they hit the end stops. It really makes you wonder if the mounting was set up wrongly in the first place. With no further azimuth adjustment possible because of the solid pier. Even so I find it hard to believe they'd make a mounting which couldn't be rotated 360°. Leaving the big locking knobs only to provide security for the final adjustment. If you are a member of "The Other Place" you could start a topic on "CGE azimuth adjustment." They seem to have have more Celestron CGE owners than over here. With several threads cropping up. Unfortunately the countless examples of CGE user manuals online are all but identical! None of them helped and the relevant drawing 2-10 [?] showed only the PA altitude adjustment. As a final resort I'd be tempted to remove both, big black knobs and rotate the whole mounting to where it needs to be. Then see how if it wobbles or moves around without the locking knobs. You might even find additional screw holes hidden in the lower plate but I doubt it. Most users would never need them nor find them. There might well be enough weight to hold it down securely on a fixed pier but you really don't want it "swinging around." Don't lose the knobs! Such facilities are notorious for "helpful people" losing stuff over the years. They could be an American thread form and irreplaceable locally except at highly inflated astro spares prices.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.