Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Stephen

  1. Not a chance, the only mirror I own is for shaving
  2. My FSQ 85 or Velvet's FSQ 106 or Ibbo's WO 132 or Ibbo's RC Undecided yet!
  3. Seems a little steep to me, not sure what the re coating cost is but you can buy a new one for under £2K?
  4. Got a reply from SkyWatcher (finally!) Guess I will be applying the update then
  5. As above I suspect the ribbon cable - killed a 450D the same way / result. However the camera continued to function fine when controlled by a PC so I didn't loose too much sleep over it
  6. I can hear a million (well maybe a few less) wallets crying out as their owners read this
  7. In astro software terms I believe it's unitless - though it's a count of pixels if that helps any
  8. The 8" is gathering a lot more light than the 6" ... I would like to see what's in that image when you process the red/lp out of it ... it looks quite detailed behind the glow?
  9. Hmm thanks for the info - I will have to email them and ask if it preserves the LP aspect of the 2.09_LP as I rather like less power use
  10. That would be plain mean putting Gizmo on the lander :evil6; Looking good Velvet!
  11. First things first, get the imaging camera focused as perfectly as you can (either using Bahtinov mask, FWHM, Focus Max, whatever you plan to use) Don't stress about getting the Lodestar stars pin point focused - close enough is good enough (and some would argue better!) Don't worry if they aren't perfectly round, I've guided on sea-gulls many times Get the latest drivers from SX web site, especially if you are running Win7 or Win8 - there is a link right at the top of the main page for the latest certified drivers Use 2s exposures on the Lodestar, it's my opinion (others will vary) that less than that and you are chasing the seeing conditions (star appears to move due to atmosphere rather than actually moving due to error) Pay attention to the status bar in PHD, it tells you what it is trying to do whilst calibrating and will help you understand if it's not moving, or not moving enough to fully calibrateMore to come if I can think of anything
  12. The difference is IR cut mate - if you put a CLS on a camera with no IR filter you will have no IR cut and probably get star bloat
  13. Nope other way around. If it's a standard (non modified) then you can get away with the cheaper CLS
  14. No, the LP one is either the CLS (for cameras with inbuilt IR filter) or the CLS-CCD (for those without)
  15. I don't think Earl can use the DF2 with the inverted adaptor. Am I right earl in saying its draw tube, DF2? If that's the case the inverted adaptor would put the reducer inside the DF2, that's not going to work
  16. All I can say is three months in my eq8 is still performing impeccably Though I have put the pier in the shed and switched to a tripod as it's just too awkward and heavy IMHO for portable use
  17. Here we go ... quick and ugly, no processing, no darks - for some reason Maxim does not want to open these You have the same interference patterns in your lights as well. Those "steps" as you call it may also be interference. Have another go and try to keep the power cable well away from the USB cable. If you are using a USB hub for other devices, try running separate cables.
  18. You have interference in your darks, that's straight forward enough. Do you have power cables running near the USB cables?
  19. Yup, that's your PA at fault That's because you have not debayered your colour images, you are looking at the bayer matrix pattern there. Debayer all the images, then stack See what it looks like when debayered, there do seem to be a few though See aboveAs you posted the fits I'm just going to try and stack and debayer here Give me a few mins ...
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.