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.

stargazine_ep2_banner.thumb.jpg.e37c929f88100393e885b7befec4c749.jpg

BlueAstra

Members
  • Content Count

    1,876
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

196 Excellent

2 Followers

About BlueAstra

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Manchester-UK
  1. I'm looking to change my camera mounted on an Esprit 150 to improve the pixel resolution (limit 0.77 arcsec) while trying to maintain FOV. I currently have an SXV-H16 which gives me a FOV of 0.83 deg and pixel resolution of 1.45 arcsec. I believe both the cameras quoted use the same chip and would give me FOV 0.68 deg and resolution 0.89 arcsec. Does anyone have any experience of these cameras, any preference between them, or maybe an alternative?
  2. Here's the table for your scope:
  3. The following table may help (values calculated for your scope): The Max A"*50 is the theoretical maximum magnification, the Max Dawes is a practical magnification limit. The exit pupil essentially tell you how bright the image will be, with a larger pupil letting more light into the eye. Note as you get older the ability to increase your eye's pupil size decreases.
  4. For interest, this is two separate combined daytime images taken some years ago with my Canon 1000d and a lodestar guide camera, showing the relative field of view size and position. The OAG location is not perfect, ideally it wouldn't interfere with the main camera FOV. The OAG prism shouldn't 'block' any information from the main FOV, just reduce its brightness slightly.
  5. I think I read somewhere that smaller apertures look through a smaller ‘plug’ of atmosphere, so are less susceptible to seeing effects. This could explain why the C5 looks better than the C9.25 if you have poor to moderate seeing. Conversely, the larger apertures would look better if seeing was excellent.
  6. Another thing to note is that the SCT is a mirror system so doesn’t suffer from chromatic aberration. You probably need a triplet refractor to get minimal CA. Another difference is that SCT can need collimation, whereas refractors rarely need it.
  7. Well, Takahashi have an enviable reputation for build quality and optical performance. Just check the camera is well matched in terms of pixel resolution and field of view. Its not very heavy so shouldn't need a particularly large mount. I would say with the right camera ideal for deep sky wide field photography with a portable rig.
  8. For Sale - SOLD 10” Ritchey-Chretien Telescope Altair RC250-TT Truss Telescope with: Focuser tilt adjuster Primary & Secondary dew heater strap Mini dovetail clamp (for red dot finder) Starlight Instruments Feathertouch FTF-3015-B-A R&P focuser + custom adapter Baader Steeldrive focus motor Cloth light shield Mirror Covers Primary Mirror Fans Focus Spacer Tubes Dual Losmandy Rails Stock Focuser (replaced by Feathertouch) I got the RC250-TT from Altair Astro. Its been installed in my roll-off observatory since 2015. The observatory has heating and de-humidifier to keep storage conditions good. Collimation was good from delivery, and I’ve never actually had to collimate it. Mirrors recently cleaned. I’ve now moved to a wide field refractor setup so no longer need the telescope. Original price of telescope plus subsequent upgrades: £3255 Selling Price: £1700 If you don’t want the Feathertouch rack and pinion focuser I could remove it and re-install the stock focuser, but that may affect collimation and focus accuracy, especially under heavy loads. This would bring the overall price down to £1450 I also have a Takahashi collimating telescope (£175 new, never used, sell for £125) and a Revelation 0.75 focal reducer (£70 new, sell for £35) as optional extras to anyone buying the telescope. Would prefer pickup, meeting at a convenient location, or delivered personally if local as I don’t trust shippers to handle the scope gently. I’m located near Manchester. Graham
  9. Apparently its a known bug. The solution is to type: cd "C:/program files/pixinsight/bin" (including exclamation marks) into the PI process console command line. In my case I had installed PI in the D drive of my desktop, which was probably the reason it couldn't find the files. I used "D:/program files/pixinsight/bin" which got it working on the desktop. I installed PI into the C drive of my laptop and Starnet loaded and worked OK without the fix.
  10. Tried that as well and unfortunately still not working. The image is a non linear 24MB tiff file.
  11. Tried File/Open/ from inside PI but that didn't work either.
  12. Not sure if this is any good, but LED remote control light panel at Lidl for £35
  13. I still get the 'checkpoint' error when used with PI. Downloaded from Sourceforge twice and installed twice. Process installed OK and Starnet in process menu. Process runs then comes up with following error: StarNet: Processing view: sh2_101_RGB_ps1 Writing swap files... 2320.814 MiB/s Starting star removal procedure... Stride: 128 Image size: 2048x2048 Number of channels: 3 Color space: RGB Bits per sample: 16 Has alpha channels: false Float sample: false Restoring neural network checkpoint... *** Error: Checkpoint file not found! Reading swap files... 1564.680 MiB/s <* failed *> Computer: Dell XPC8500 Core i7-3770 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM W10 Home 64bit, 18362.418 PI v01.08.05.1353, API v160
  14. Coming in a bit late on this but I once had a 10” Newtonian which had a similar problem of slipping down the tube rings, and also rotating due to the weight of the camera on the side. I solved it by wrapping some insulating tape round the tube where the rings where, to give the rings something to grip. I always wondered about the practice of using soft felt to grip on a smooth polished surface.
  15. A motor focuser can hold the focus knob tight and prevent movement if that is the issue, although it could be a temperature effect. Was the scope at high elevation with the weight of the camera pulling it down? Is the camera equipment within the load limit of the scope?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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