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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_solar_25_winners.thumb.jpg.fe4e711c64054f3c9486c752d0bcd6f2.jpg

ste7e

Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About ste7e

  • Rank
    Nebula

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.flickr.com/ste7esmith

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Newcastle-under-lyme, Staffs
  1. Mine works fine, too. I was just intrigued, really. Maybe the SynScan firmware hasn't been updated yet to recognise this mount.
  2. Curiouser and curiouser... maybe it's to do with the handset firmware version. I think I updated to the latest but maybe I should check.
  3. I think they use the same handset for all their SynScan mounts. But the handset should query the mount to identify it and only ask the question for dual-mode mounts. That's my assumption from reading the manual, anyhow. That's what made me ask if mine is the only EQ6-R that does this or is it the same for all?
  4. Hello all Whenever I switch on my EQ6R-Pro the SynScan handset asks me if I want to use Eq mode or AltAz mode - which shouldn't be an option according to my thinking. The EQ6-R is an Eq-only mount isn't it? Also, my PHD2 logs report the mount as an AZ-GT6. Is it just my mount that is a bit confused about its identity or do other EQ6-R users see the same thing? Steve
  5. I have a trivial question on a damp cloudy Sunday afternoon while I sit contemplating my AP rig... Why does the SynScan handset on my EQ6-R Pro ask me to select EQ or AltAz mode every time I power up? Does it identify the mount as an AZ-EQ6, maybe?
  6. 1) it's not so much that I think the figures are wrong. It's more the inconsistency that I'm finding a problem. I use PHD2's drift alignment tool to fine tune my PA and I'm getting a pretty flat line - down to a few arc mins and settle for that. But then I do GA and I'm being told that it's much worse that the drift alignment reported - something like 26'. 2) GA is showing 9.28px 3157s. My scale is 2.68 arc-sec/px, so that works out at about 25 arc-sec. Is that something I should try to tune out of the mount or should I let PHD handle it?
  7. I've been searching through this topic but I can't see what the parameters suggested by @Shelster1973 are... Can anyone enlighten me? I'm struggling with some strangeness in PHD2 with this mount at the moment - GA is reporting really high Dec backlash which I can't detect in the mount myself and I'm getting distinctly inconsistent reports of bad PA although guiding is pretty good (under 1" most of the time anyway but it seems PHD is working hard to keep it at that) so maybe I shouldn't worry about it. Anyway just thought I'd give Shelster1973's parameters a go … if I could only find them ...
  8. Hi Obi I had the same problem with mine - a little bit of play in the RA axis. This was my second EQ6-R, my first one having been replaced because of the clutch slip problem I posted about above. I knew that it was possible to have no play in the RA axis because the first mount didn't have any. And, I had experienced the same problem with my HEQ5 and adjusted the worm drive on that to remove the play. But as this was a different mount I didn't know how to adjust the EQ6-R. So, I got in touch with the supplier - the ever-helpful Adam @ Rother Valley Optics - who managed to get a document from his suppliers with the necessary instructions for adjusting the worm drive to tune out the play. Now I have virtually zero play and I'm a happy bunny. Instructions for adjustment are attached for anyone else with the same problems. Steve SW_EQ6-R_backlash_adjustment.pdf
  9. I'm still considering my options on this one. I'm now wondering about getting the Celestron Luminos 2.5x Barlow instead of the Powermate. I've read reviews that say it's as good if not better for observing. Is there anything else I need to take into consideration for imaging, though? If it's as good for observing, will that simply mean it's as good for imaging?
  10. I'm still at the "thinking of" rather than the "planning to" stage. Hence the post to help me decide Collecting more subs at longer exposure times is a strong consideration.
  11. Hi all I'm thinking about investing in a Powermate for planetary imaging and I'm wondering if I'll be able to use it for DSO imaging, too. It'll make my decision easier if I can use it for both I currently image at F/5 - SW 200PDS on an EQ6-R with an ASI1600MM. Any thoughts/experiences? Thanks Steve
  12. You might be right... I'll look to see if that's what's happening
  13. But when you get them locked solid, is your mount then unmovable by hand? Or, if you did what I'm doing - putting a single weight on the extension shaft and trying to lock the mount in a horizontal position - would it move?
  14. I've tried to do a test to quantify the problem. This is what I do: install the counter weight extension shaft put one of the weights on the shaft and position it right at the joint between the standard and the extension shaft don't put a scope onto the mount rotate the RA axis so that the shaft is horizontal tighten the RA clutch while supporting the weight shaft When I then let go of the weight shaft, the RA clutch cannot hold it horizontal and the mount rotates until the shaft is pointing at the ground. From what you've said, Rob, your mount wouldn't rotate in these conditions. Is that right? Does it sound like I have a problem with my clutch? Or, am I expecting too much from the mount? Steve
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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