tooth_dr

My first cooled ZWO camera

That’s a nice result 👍🏼

I'm based in Mid-Ulster, reasonably dark too. I'm guessing Co Down rather than Tyrone or else it's a hell of culture shock from Sheffield lol

Brendan Firstly apologies for always answering your threads! Ive come across this question a few times and it does vary from camera to camera. Some cameras like the Nikon D5300 prefer 200, and others such as Canon 1000d this might be ISO 800. In short answer to your general question - there is ‘noise’ in every image you take, including read noise. Taken fewer images at a lower ISO might be better to maintain dynamic range but it’s a trade off with increased read noise. Id stick with 800 for your canon and work your times around the sky where you shoot at

Welcome to SGL @Rekrab what part of the country are you from?

I could be talking rubbish here but the mk ii doesn’t have the same encoders as the mk i so the settings are different.

I had to change my settings to ignore, rather than polite, or it kept doing the above.

Congrats on the mount! Like a shortened bent pier 👍 I'm not sure what you mean exactly about the manual bit - I turn mine on, connect to SGPro, and the SiTECH panel opens. Once I click 'unpark' the motors tracking at sidereal rate, and when I start the imaging sequence in SGPro, it slews and platesolves.

Thank you so much for the comment.

I figured that may be the case but I’m not sure how valid that point is now that there is a replacement model. If the replacement model was also defective then that would be different. I just felt your post didn’t accurately reflect the current status of the Mesu mount

I’m using a Mark I MPCC

Not much help to you but I use the 383L+ with the MPCC and 1.25” filters at F4.7 and I don’t recall this issue but I’ll check back through my older data from last year to see if it’s present and I didn’t notice.

I bought a Mark ii mesu 200 mount last Jan. I paid my £6k, stuck it on a pier, entered the correct parameters, and started using it. Simple as that. I spent my time tuning my EQ6 with belts etc, for several years before that, but in the end I reached it’s capacity with my Epsilon 180. I now have the Epsilon and two other scopes and cameras mounted at the same time and still get better guiding.

Would you mind sharing the teething issues and problems you have read relating to the mark ii Mesu?

The 2” filter will simply screw onto the end of the CC

EZCAP is software for QHY, it is listed on the website

Sorry Steve! I was actually referring to the QHY268MONO However I did pay for my ZWO2600MC from you on the 15th December, patiently awaiting it's delivery

You just accept the compromise of not refocusing. Or slew to a bright star and refocus, or use a motorised focuser/software which measures all the stars in the field and doesn't require a bright star to work so you don't have to move the telescope.

You can take in luminance only and the flat should be ok for all four filters The process of taking flats is the same with mono and osc, using the same flat panel.

Signatures unfortunately arent visible on mobile browsing

My point being get the CCD version and then you are covered whatever scope you use with no detriment. Cant seen any mention of a telescope on the thread? I also had the same camera with the same mod and I had a non-CCD version of the CLS filter 👍🏼

Good man Brendan

Sorry the link was confusing! I don’t see any detriment or issue with using the CCD version at all, and only potential benefits. Worse case - it’s no different to the non CCD version. Best case - stars are tighter. So stick with your choice, it’s not a wrong one.

It’s misleading as it doesn’t specify what type of modification. Have a read here, CLS CCD versus CLS. You can be sure that IR is cut if you buy the CLS CCD version, rather than relying on the camera LPF-1 filter. There are mixed views on the LPF-1 filter effectiveness. If the cost differential is minor why not eliminate that possibility of bloat and just get the CCD version?