Stub Mandrel

Well the Greeks named it 'galaxy' because it looks like a stream of milk spilt across the sky. Find a really dark site and you will understand why!

If you have a 6" newtonian, consider getting a quality x3 barlow and a dedicated planetary camera, even an AS1120. IMHO these will give you a greater improvement over using a DSLR than changing to a Mak (and I like Maks). My avatar image was taken with a 6" newt.

I've polished a stainless steel teaspoon, then quarter filled it with whiteboard cleaner. I'll wait for it to evaporate and report back on any residue (unless the fumes make me too blaaaarghll...

Interesting link. With the SW CC and 130P-DS (f4.7) my curvature map is almost identical to the ES one in that link, except my curvature is only 12% rather than 26% and the corner stars are as round as a round thing. Strange that many people prefer the Baader? Could it be that the 'economy' Skywatcher CC is the best of the bunch? Does suggest it might do a good job with the 200P-DS? Not sure how big the weight difference is between 200P-DAS and 150PL, but the 1200mm 150PL guides well on a HEQ5.

200P-DS with 0.9 coma corrector would give you very close to 1" per pixel with the ASI1600.

I was just going to post exactly that... Other products use ethanol and glycol solution, Zeiss use propanol solution. I have used whiteboard cleaner which is methoxy propanol.

This is at 0.25" per pixel ... but on grass over a fairly sandy soil.

ood question! I found: " Thermoelectric cooling modules are considered to be highly reliable components due to their solid-state construction"

When I image planets with an x3 barlow for 3,600mm focal length the impact of standing near a tripod leg is very easy to see. I now try to be away from the legs and lean over to adjust the mount when doing an accurate PA.

Err... That was the original concept behind RepRap... FWIW this is my spool holder, uses bearings in the reels.

If you assume Sharpcap's calculation of accuracy is correct, then my alignment with a new-style polarscope is about 17" and using the Sharpcap routine I can get it below 0.5" with no more than patience. Using the polarscope three-star alignment typically gives me the second and third stars within about 0.1 degree (estimated from camera field of view). Last time using Sharpcap at better than 0.5" I didn't have to adjust for my second and third stars even after slewing from Altair to Andromeda. That said, last night I did planetary imaging as an equivalent of 3,600mm with a just polarscope alignment. The planets stayed pretty much centred even over periods of 15 minutes or longer, maybe I was lucky?

Probably be visible in a scope all day, if you can be sure of staying out of direct sunlight.

Given the rings around the bright stars I think it's a reflection somewhere along your tube/focuser.

Great report,. I can feel your excitement!

If you see stars like in the photo above you are not terribly far from being in focus. Just turn the knob in the direction that makes them smaller. In images brighter stars look bigger, I am still getting used to the fact that to you eye all stars look more or less the same size - a pinprick.