Merlin66

I lost the rubber feet years ago....they eventually crack and fall off. A solution is to buy some rubber stoppers used on kitchen chairs (or the smaller walking stick stoppers) and use them.......

Chris, In all honesty if you want to progress in astronomy, you'll have to bite the bullet and get used to the EQ mounts. I understand your initial concerns, but believe me it all comes together with practise, and practise. Aligning the finder is best done during the day with the telescope pointing to a known distant object........

+1 from me. SolarChat is the largest most active solar site in the world.

Rich, Notwithstanding the concerns raised re possible "issues/problems" with EQMOD - I have and use the handcontroller connection at times....I can still use the handcontroller to give me RA/Dec movements. No issues, no drama (as yet!)

Yes. I successfully use the ST-4 connection to guide ten minute subs on a C11 working at f10 with my NEQ6 mount. I use PHD2 or more recently AstroArt for guiding. No issues, no drama.

Comes down to Personal preference. I use the ST-4 connection because I used ST-4 long before I used EQMod. Both work equally well.

Here's my TS102 set-up.... The rear cell is interchangeable to allow the PST Stage 2 mod or the Baader Cool wedge to be fitted. I also have the original SM60 external etalon mounted on an ED80. The 100mm spectroheliograph is still in construction - maybe complete in the next month or so.......

Peter, What can PS CC do that PaintShopPro can't do for you?

Hmmm OK My central bolt is fixed in the pier... I then assemble the extension and "wind" it down hard using the BOA around it.... If you can jamb the central bolt/ knob/ between the tripod legs you could probably use the same method - or a BOA on each?.

Are you applying the BOA to the extension tube??? There should be no interference with the tripod.....

I've recently replaced the tripod on the NEQ6 with a pillar. This has a M12 x 1.75 central bolt. The extension just screws onto the bolt (with the bottom disk inverted) - the BOA pulls it up nice and tight! - I don't think you'll break an M12 bolt! Looks MUCH better than those "Owl Cage" attachments. IMHO the rubber is too soft, and when you tighten down hard it will just shear.......

You can use a BOA wrench on the extension to get it even tighter on the middle bolt. I have heard of adding a fine emery paper pad/disk to the top of the tripod to prevent any unwanted movement.

I use one of these on my NEQ6pro mount. The C11 and spectroscopes needs 4 counterweights, so there's a fair load up top. It works very well. No issues, no drama. (I'm about to set-up a permanent pier - it will have a M12 x1.75 centre bolt to take the extension (rather than having the complex?! Owl cage arrangement) Much neater and functional)

Roger, I can't talk about the AZ-EQ mount... BUT I have been using EQMOD and CdC for the past few years (an NEQ6pro mount) and never found a problem syncing a selected star (in CdC). I then use an off-set to GOTO my target - usually a faint spectroscopic object. Don't know if this helps.....

They use similar etalons, the 50 has a helical focuser, the 60 a Crayford.

Steve, You need to re-read the previous messages... To maintain the design optical distance you need to add the filter compensation. My last words......

Probably does..... Any element corrector/ reducer etc. has a design spacing to the CCD chip to give optimum performance. When the filter is introduced between the element and the CCD then the change to the optical length needs to be considered. Andrew's answer above gives the solution, taking into account the effect of the filter.

Andrew, You are 100% correct! I apologise for muddying the water... I'll take my pills now and lie down.....

Andrew, The reason I didn't use the "optical" path for the corrector was that the corrector "doesn't" see the filter, and, as far as it's concerned it's still functioning as if it were at a 55mm spacing. The filter just takes the focus from the corrector (at 55mm) and moves it by 1mm to reach the CCD. Think through the set-up if the filter were 18mm thick! The 6mm change in the focal position would not change the design of the corrector.....it would be (55+6=61mm) from the CCD. Yes No??

Guys, Stop. Think about it slowly and clearly.... The two "issues" are - mechanical "fixed" distance and "optical" path distance. The difference is +/- the filter "correction" depending on your frame of reference. I'm thinking with a corrector ( as distinct from a reducer) - the optics of the corrector are designed such that when placed in the optical path (somewhere) that the design distance from the corrector to the focus, and hence the CCD is a fixed distance. If we then place a filter element (say 3mm) between the corrector (say requiring 55mm spacing) and the CCD; looking at the optical path the design distance for the corrector remains unchanged but the "optical" path increases by 1mm. To me this says that with a filter the 55mm spacing would actually be 56mm - the corrector still functioning at it's 55mm plus the, added 1mm. If we maintained the "physical" spacing of 55mm, the corrector would have to be placed (55-1=54mm) from the CCD, which is not it's design position.

Terminology..... If you want a fixed distance between the reducer/ corrector and the CCD chip say 50mm. When you add a 3mm filter element, the physical distance would need to be 49mm and the "extra" 1mm coming from the filter change of focus position...

CdC is a star mapping program - independent of the type of telescope... If you're looking for the addition functionality of GOTO with a specific mount, then look for the ASCOM drivers for that mount.

+1 from me!

Alan, Simple as.... When you set up CdC with your longitude and latitude in the Setup menu, move to the "Solar System", click the "Comet" Tab and then the "Load MPC file" That's it!

Themos, If you really want to get southern hemisphere user feedback you should cross post in IceInSpace http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/