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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wieben

  1. Hello. I have been using the same setup, both using a 80mm guide scope, 50mm finder guider and with an OAG. it all works, with the OAG as the best option and the 80mm as the worst. It’s really the wind which is the biggest enemy with this setup. The EQ6 can handle the weight, but you want as much shelter from the wind as possible.
  2. Very exciting indeed. Fingers crossed, and hope to se the usual great Mesu performance. Br. Heine
  3. Interesting read. I’m looking into putting a larger scope on my Mesu, so following this topic closely. Currently my Mesu is comfortly holding my 10” Quattro tight, but I plan to upgrade to a Hubble Optics HNA 16” or preferably 18”. The weight is 35 kg for the 16” and 45 kg for the 18” plus focuser and camera equipment, so could end around 50 kg fully loaded if aiming for the 18”. Your observation of possible flex with a load of 60 kg worries me, as I wouldn’t expect the mount to show visible flex. Could possible flex originate from the RA bearings? When you describe the movement/flex visible at the circular RA plate I assume you refer to the round black plate on top of the RA axis...the one where the mechanical lock can grab the RA axis?
  4. Hello Bill and Tony, Thanks for sharing experiences with the larger scopes on the mesu. It's reassuring to see the Mesu is up for the job. Bill, I understand that 14" with the dew cap is not happy with wind gusts. Maybe adding heating on the secondary, removing the dew cap and leaving the truss open would make the guiding less sensitive to wind. I'm considering the Hubble Optics HNA (maybe they can build a 16") or the 14" truss newton from Altair Astro (if I can get an offer and an estimation of the weight). Br Heine
  5. Hello all, The performance of the Mesu200 is unquestionable excellent, and I'm very happy with the performance I get from mine with a 10" Quattro riding on top. It performs very well handling a pixelresolution of 0.94" (camera resolution not the RMS which is much better of course). Planning for a future permanent setup under excellent seeing, I wonder if there are any users who has experience regarding the upper limit of the Mesu200 for photographic use. It's tempting to try with a large newton astrograph, but wonder how it would handle a weight close to 60 kg and 0.5" pixel resolution. Common sense tells me to aim for less and not go beyond 40 Kg/1600 mm focal length. Any thoughts? Br Heine
  6. Great picture with excellent sharpness and balance.
  7. Wieben

    M33 LRGB

    Thanks for the comment. The seeing was great....probably helped by the fog. Transparency still OK straight up.
  8. Hello all, Last weekend I attended the local star party here in East Denmark - Avnø Star Party. It's a former airfield with nice dark skies. We were lucky to get clear skies. I spend the first night acquiring SII for the Pelican nebula (Image posted in the narrow band challenge) and the second night dedicated M33. Even though we had very high humidity and fog, the data came out nicely. Almost all the time was spent on luminance and only half an hour was left for each colour channel. All 5 minutes subs. It was a surprise the color came out OK with so little data. I blended in 1,25 hours worth of old Ha data (terrible focus), and used it very subtle to boost the red channel. FWHM for the remaining data was fine at 2,2". SQM measured at 21.3. Thanks for watching.
  9. Hello, Here is my version of the Pelican Nebula. Data capture done during several nights from the 14th august to 22nd September 2017. Location, country side one hours drive south of Copenhagen. HA 5nm: 47 x 600 second subs, moon lit nights. OIII 3nm: 29 x 600 second subs, no moon. SQM 21.10 SII 3nm: 37 x 600 second subs, no moon SQM 21.30 Total exposure: 18 hours 50 minutes Calibrated and stacked followed by deconvolve and DPP in Maxim. Layered as Hubble palette and final curves in Photoshop. Reduction of magenta saturation and lightnes to adjust star color in the flattened image. Equipment: Mesu200 mount. 10" Skywatcher Quattro, Atik 460m camera and Astrodon filters. Offaxis guided. Link to full resolution: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-WsltPPgG5JeXFIZnA5d3ZkYmc Thanks for watching.
  10. Hello Paul, I'm using the Altair Starbase for my Mesu200 and 10" SW Quattro. I'm a mobile imager, so setting up in the field for each session. I find the Starbase excellent and very solid. The legs of the tripod are permanently attached and folds in/spreads in a second, so setting up is very quick. Beware the total length when folded is fairly long, so you need a bit of space in the car. The legs are not separate, and detaching them for each session is not the intention of the design. I didn't measure but folded the top of the tripod will reach your chest. I can measure if you want to know the space required for transportation to the field. I always use the tripod set up with the legs fully spread. In that case you need a fairly level ground as the feet adjusters have limited travel. The legs does allow for greater adjustments if single legs are not spread to the maximum. I'm very happy with the Starbase. It's rock solid, quick to set up, looks great and I like the open spaces in the pier section allowing space for installation of a mini PC and lipo bank (future project). Cheers, Heine
  11. I have been through the exact same thoughts. An almost new 2nd hand Mesu made the choice a little easier. I just got the equipment delivered this week. Dry run in the flat setting up the software. First light should happen soon. So excited. On paper I think the Eq8 looks great, but based on the positive reports from fan base of the Mesu, this would be the safer albeit more expensive choice. I will post more in a separate tread later. BTW. Went for the Altair Starbase. Great "engineered" match. Br. Heine
  12. If I should buy again, I would still stick with the 10". As a reference to support your choose I got a cheap 2nd hand 5" SW newton. I thought it would be great for the windy days. That little scope has never left my closet :-)
  13. Hello Peje, The combination of the EQ6 and a 10" newton works excellent if there is no or light winds. If you have no shelter from the wind, only the clouds will be a greater enemy than the wind. I always setup in the countryside, and if it is windy I have found locations where bushes give shelter. That works almost every time. If you have no shelter at all, the setup should work to around 3-4 m/s wind max. I'm overall very happy with the combination. Br. Heine
  14. Thank you for your replies. I'm leaning towards the Starbase. Do any of you have the measurements if the pier section? Size of the top, space between inner pier decks and the gap between the side plates? I haven't been able to find this online. It would be cool to build in a mini PC and battery bank between the decks. Best regards, Heine
  15. Hi MrsGnomus, Yes, Lucas is indeed very helpful. He is recommending the Berlebach, but also sells adapters for the Losmandy and states it should be very easy to make one for the Starbase. I just prefer metal above wood, but haven't completely discarded the Berlebach.
  16. Thank for your advice. A Mesu is on the way. So excited to get everything setup and dialed in. LOL@Gnomus regarding the essential accessory. The training has begun. Maybe I can just workout dragging the mount and save the gym membership from now on :-) Essential preparations for going mobile with the Mesu Cheers, Heine Wieben
  17. Hello guys, Which tripod would you recommend for a Mesu 200? I'm considering the two below options: Losmandy folding HD tripod or Altair Starbase I'm looking for maximum stability for my mobile setup, and of course it doesn't harm if it is quick to set up and looks great. Also the Berlebach Planet comes to mind, but I prefer a metal tripod. Clear skies, Heine Wieben
  18. Hi guys, Thanks for the new comments. If I upgrade it will be the Mesu. I feel this will be the safe choise. Having a piece of kit where you just feel glad every time using it will soothe the initial pain from the hit on the bank account. I'll probably manage to persuade myself during this autumn. Regarding the split option. I am considering this version, but at the same time I like the rigidity/simplicity of a one piece kit. Maybe the one piece version can make sense from a transport point of view. I've been thinking how to secure the gear in a safe way in the back of the car, and might have found a solution. I have a modified Mitsubishi Outlander with no back seats. The boot floor is basically extended all the way up to the front seats as one flat surface. This gives lots of available space. The height allows the 10" Newton OTA to stand upright. The idea is to build a kind of mounting frame consisting of a floor plate the width of the boot secured to the boot floor, and a smaller leveled top plate (leveled 10" or so) where the mount sits on top. The mount is then bolted on the top plate just as when it sits on a tripod or pier. Next to the leveled top plate a vertical rod mounted on the floor plate can clamp on the OTA dovetail and holds the OTA firmly upright. As you can see I'm still in the process of telling myself I absolutely need this mount . I'm sure I will succeed sooner or later. I have a friend living up north in the country who upgraded to the Mesu. When I go visit and see the mount in real life, I bet it will be like back when the wife persuaded to get a dog. Once you go and see the puppy, you know you will bring the beast home ?
  19. Thank you Olly, Steve, Pieter and Steve R, for your good advice. The Mesu really sounds like the wise pick. My current EQ6 carries my Newton OK, but I feel it is the mount is preventing me from improving the FWHM results any further. I'm convinced the Mesu will be the best to battle the wind and have a more smooth tracking. Not that the EQ6 haven't served me well, cause it has. Steve, scary with the mount moving around in the back of the car. I have been thinking what's the best way to secure it in the car. In an event with a hard brake on the motorway, I wouldn't like to have almost 30 kg metal loose in the boot. Steve and Pieter, thanks for the inputs for the tripod. I'll probably sell the EQ6 with the old tripod, so will find a sturdy one for the new mount. EQmod is not a must. I use Maxim, so as long as there is a driver for the Sitech it should be business as usual I guess. usually I just do one star alignment and plate solving to save time, so haven't moved to sky modeling etc. Guess I need to check the finances....the Mesu sure is tempting. Cheers, Heine
  20. Helle guys, Hope for some advice or thoughts on the dilemma Mesu200 vs. EQ8. I'm planning upgrading from an EQ6, mainly to get better tracking, and reduce the dependency of no or very light breezes. All imaging is done in the field using a 10" Newton. It will be a long while before I will get a stationary obs, so the load capacity is not the most important factor at this time. The weight of the mounts doesn't scare me. If I go for the Mesu I will still choose the the "one piece" version. The pros for the EQ8 is obviously the price, which is roughly half of the Mesu. Also EQMod is nice, and the handles might be a great help in the field. What worries me is if I can expect much significantly better tracking and wind resistance from the EQ8 compared to my current EQ6. Also backlash issues and tuning nightmares, is something I prefer to put behind. The Mesu is probably the safe, but also expensive choice. Besides from the cost the only thing which worries me is how cumbersome the Mesu is to use in the field. What tripod is recommended? I'm thinking Losmandy folding HD tripod. Any thoughts or comments appreciated. Clear skies, Heine
  21. Hello Nytecam and Adrian, Thank you for taking your time to help. I think I found the failure. Under the "setup camera" in Maxim I had chosen binning 1x2. Setting the binning to 2x2 in the guider settings as suggested by Adrian works, but is binning the already 1x2 binned input. Changing the drop down to some thing different than "Binned 1x2" gives a test output which can then be 1x1 or 2x2 etc. Wonder if it will work if "no guider" is chosen. At least the test exposure is now less rectangular than before. Will test under next available clear sky. Thanks guys. Br Heine
  • Create New...

Important Information

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