Thalestris24

Hi again Can you confirm if you have reducing coma corrector? If it's a SW 0.9 one then your fov will then be 1.41 x 0.94. So 20% bigger will be 1.41 x 1.2 -> 1.69, say 1.7 and 20% smaller will be 0.94 x .8 -> 0.75. So those numbers will determine the index files you need and you can put 1.7 into scale maximum. Hope that works now! Phew! Louise

Hi again Actually, your fov calculation is wrong - for a explorer 200 and a 1000d, it should be 1.27 x 0.85, so 20% larger should be 1.27 x 1.2 -> 1.83 deg, say 1.9 deg. 20% smaller should be 0.85 x .8 -> 0.68 deg so you need to use those values to determine which index files you need. Then you just need to put 1.9 into scale maximum. I suddenly realised your calcs were wrong when I was looking at my own for a 150pds and 1100d... Sorry, wasn't thinking before, d'uh. Louise Oops! Sorry just realised you have a coma corrector - if that's a reducer also, you'll have to multiply the values to allow for that.

Hi Assuming your fov calculations are correct, the scale maximum value should be 0.282 degrees - say 0.3 in round numbers I don't think you really need to specify the scale min value (can be 0) or the -H and -L parameters. Hth Louise

Wow! Need my sunglasses on to view that one!

Hi Hope you don't mind me butting in again. But FWIW mine doesn't move in RA as easy as it does in DEC with clutches loosened, so it takes more effort to unbalance it in RA. However, it's still possible for me to move the mount in RA (with no scope) using one hand (I'm only little!) and the rotation is smooth, if a little 'heavy' feeling. I can move it in RA with the scope attached using just one finger. Also tracks fine. I think it's really hard to convey what these things are like, or what they should be like, just in text and pictures. Maybe video is the answer to sharing such info! When I next rebalance mine I'll try and make a video of it Louise

Hi I had similar concerns however I just think it's a characteristic of the mount. If it slews quite happily and tracks and guides ok then maybe just leave well alone and be happy. Louise

Hi Adam In principal you can but it's not very practical I'm afraid. They are really for use with monochrome ccd's with filter wheels. You might be able to attach one filter at a time but that would be very fiddly. Even then you'd really need dark skies as you'd require long exposures - the narrowband filters seriously cut the amount of light reaching the sensor. Um, as this is a pinned topic you may not get more replies as members don't tend to scour them for new posts. Better to create a new topic Louise

Hmm... a bino microscope would be much better, I'm sure!

Hi Gina Something like this might be handy! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bresser-Microscope-5802000-Biolux-ICD/dp/B0017J7NW6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1400262882&sr=8-2&keywords=binocular+microscope Dunno how you manage without a microscope! Must be very hard to see detail! Louise

Hmm.. it's a bit like a politician or a salesman telling people what they want to hear... For not much more than the price of a 60da you can buy a ccd with a higher QE. If the 60da was a mono with microlenses it might be worth it! Louise

Maybe not - they probably have a very integrated production line. Of course, there wouldn't be a mass demand for them anyway. Oh well. Louise

Hi Yeah - one day! I really don't have time to do anything much with it at the moment. It will almost certainly have imperfections though. It's a darn shame Canon don't produce some of them without CFAs in the first place! Louise

Hi guys Got my debayered 1100d today - have posted a quick daytime comparison in the 'cameras' section if anyone is interested. Cheers Louise

Awesome! I've yet to even image a galaxy at all so have to hand it to you. 41 hours - that's true dedication! Thanks for sharing it with us. Louise

600 is for the uncooled mono 1100d - I don't think it's changed recently. I decided the cooled version was too expensive for me!

Hi Well they are a business so have to allow for losses plus they work on new cameras so higher risk. They are short staffed too at the moment. I suppose 600 Euros isn't exorbitant for the amount of work involved. They don't guarantee perfect sensors so there will be imperfections. Hopefully flats will hide them Louise

Thanks - it's taken them an awful long time! I hope it's not too long before they actually ship it. Patience is a virtue... I believe they do a lot of their method under a (presumably low-power) microscope and in a flow cabinet. I imagine they use a hot air gun rather than a butane torch - the flame temperature must be potentially rather high! Good luck Louise

Hi Gina Not sure if anything on the JTW debayering tutorial might help or suggest a way forward: http://www.jtwastronomy.com/tutorials/debayer.html They informed me a few days ago that they've successfully debayered the 1100d I ordered Cheers Louise

It's defo a high risk endeavour which is why I paid someone else to do it for me! Whether the mono 1100d is actually worth the cost remains to be seen! Good luck again Louise

Hi Gina Just to be sure - have you tried resetting the camera settings? Being cmos, the sensors are likely to be static sensitive so easily damaged that way - a possibility, maybe.. Louise

I wouldn't give up on it yet - there could be several reasons for the error. Maybe this might help: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=4105.0 Edit: oh ignore that, it's for Magic Lantern... Sorry. I noticed you've posted here with error 70 before, Gina! Louise

Rather you than me! Good luck Louise

Oh ok Thanks Louise

Hi Interesting piece of software. Was wondering which version you have? Can it be used like ccdinspector? Cheers Louise

Thinking about it, it's only the sensitivity of individual pixels that count for the debayered sensor. Unless you 'bin' 4 x 4 (by some means) which would defeat the object of gaining resolution. So, on that basis, a debayered sensor could need up to twice the integration time... I suppose much will depend on the arc secs/pixel that one is imaging at as well as the particular target. Oh my, it's getting late and my brain has had enough! Louise