noah4x4

Sole UK Importer David Hinds will normally locally fix problems like this. Suggest you check with them before the sending scope to the USA. Buying Astro gear from Amazon is often problematic. Much better to buy from a specialist retailer like FLO or Widescreen Centre or Rother Valley Optics.

A Starsense autoalign doesn't care which horizon your OTA is initially pointing at provided your OTA is set at its Index Marks. It always follows the same pattern of motion. So if it does encounter obstructions, next time try a different start point. I now aim mine at my house (the biggest obstruction) so that it moves into unobstructed skies. The exception is a Starsense All Star Polar Alignment (ASPA) on wedge where in the Northern Hemisphere your OTA must point South. Works even better with GPS.

If you love the Feathertouch Microfocuser, try the MKIT20 autofocus controller that works with it. Adds yet another dimension.

If you can't quickly resolve this then Email Dean at Starizona. Very helpful with all things Hyperstar. Starizona can supply the correct Hyperstar adapters for any popular camera.

I have used Infinity (software) and Sharpcap and Sequence Generator Pro. Infinity has the shortest learning curve, hence is awesome for beginners. It is also tailored for Atik cameras, hence has helpful presets. By contrast, Sharpcap (and SGP) accommodates a myriad of manufacturers and their various foibles, so is inevitably more challenging. Sharpcap has more Astrophotography processing features, but then Atik owners also have Dusk and Dawn software. Infinity is targeted at EAA rather than AP (but inevitably overlaps). It is interesting that ZWO appear to be attempting to mimic Atik by launching its own more simple software. I suspect there is growing concern that it has become heavily dependent on software that is reliant on a single third party developer. I suspect ZWO also recognise the challenges for beginners given Sharpcap has now become so challenging. The Infinity camera and Infinity software is great, but I can't see it offering advantage over ASI294. However, I own an Atik Horizon which is cooled and awesome for deep sky. If I was looking towards Atik for an upgrade from ASI294, I would consider the new Atik Horizon II which is is genuinely ground breaking. A large sensor, high resolution deep sky camera that additionally has a fast frame mode for Solar System objects and benefits from Infinity software, that (IMHO) is compelling, but £1,250.

Brilliant, especially if you have poor eyesight or sciatica. I also have a GPS module, so I switch on and my Evolution now aligns itself perfectly every time. Critics will say "unnecessary" which is true. But the same is true of automatic transmission or sat-nav in a car. Why buy cotton if you can afford silk?

There is one aspect of EEVA where high resolution, large sensor, small pixel truly excels. I use Hyperstar @f/2. This means my images appear 25x faster, hence no requirement for wedge, polar alignment or guiding, etc. It also increases my FOV x 5, which is great as I can capture (say) the beauty of the Horsehead and Flame Nebula or many asterisms in one. The downside is for (apparently) small objects you then require greater camera Zoom. My camera exceeds 4k UHD and my system is 'end to end' 4k UHD. Having so many tiny pixels available means that when applying Zoom, you can go much deeper before the image pixelates (goes blocky). Hence, small pixels, large sensor makes a Hyperstar (or NightOwl) system much more flexible.

The benefit of Turn Left at Orion is not for use as a sky map for events as it is inevitably out date the minute it is printed. If you want current sky news instead use an APP or online source. The benefit is that it shows novices exactly what to expect via an eyepiece. I only used my copy for a month, suffice to realise that my £2,000 investment in expensive eyepiece upgrades had been foolish as all I might ever see from my severely light polluted back yard is a 'faint fuzzie'. I wish somebody had said "read this book first before spending ANY money". I now pursue Electronically Assisted Astronomy as it is the only way I can satisfy my desire to see more and my Televue eyepieces are back in their boxes redundant. I am not saying that we should discourage novices from pursuing visual, simply that we have a responsibility to manage their expectation to help them avoid expensive purchases that won't safisfy them where seeing conditions are poor. Turn Left at Orion is perfect for his, especially the (free) on-line resource.

I bought a house with a single width, but triple length garage. Absolutely useless for multiple cars, so I converted the rear third into a gym for my wife complete with seperate glazed door access, plasterboard walls, sprung floor, full length ballet style mirrors. That was 16 years ago. Once it became disused (she prefers to go to an outside gym to eat cake with her pals), it created a perfect "mission control" for me. I leave my scope fully assembled, carry it five yards to its location and connect two Intel NUCs with Iris Plus Graphics over Windows Remote Desktop with RemoteFX compression disabled to create a perfect indoor 4K UHD resolution remote controlled electronically assisted observing environment. I gave up visual astronomy from my back yard long ago due to light pollution, but with camera on Hyperstar I don't think I could better enjoy this hobby given my Bortle 6 skies in my idyllic warm and cosy man-cave complete with TV, fridge/mini bar etc.

Take a visit to your local pub or brewery and get inspiration from the little wooden 'cradle' racks that support beer casks. I made one to fit my 8" OTA. Works a charm whilst a trip to the pub on a mission is a great activity on a cloudy night.

I have the original Horizon OSC. It is awesome on DSO's and particularly good when paired with Hyperstar in an end to end 4k UHD environment and used for short stacked exposures. The faster frame rate of the new version looks interesting for planetary use, but I think that Atik is being over optimistic when suggesting existing Horizon owners might upgrade. The existing camera is simply too good to discard!

I don't use a laptop for astronomy (I use Intel NUCs), but do so for cricket scoring where sunlight glare on laptop screen is a problem in open locations. What I do there is use a fold-flat plastic storage box of the type supermarkets use for displaying vegetables. I cover this with a thin plastic sheet adhered to it to make it light and waterproof. This is similar to Davey-T's box contraption, but more robust and (almost) ready made. They come in a variety of sizes to suit small or large laptop. Cost around £3 from B & Q or Tesco. It neatly folds flat for transport or can be used for storage, so is dual purpose (I carry printer in it, then use it as a sunshade/laptop protector). https://www.diy.com/departments/home-furniture-storage/storage-shelving/storage-crates/DIY1484069.cat

Was now't to do with me suggesting buy second hand from its Camera Jungle rather than new from Jessops. Might be greater bargains to be had if there is a clearance sale?

There is something I don't quite get with this camera. Why embrace a 1" SQUARE sensor with 3008 x 3008 pixels when most other high resolution CMOS astro cameras in a similar price range have rectangular, larger sensors and hence offer a wider FOV? I can see how a square naturally fits the typical cylindrical shape of a telescope OTA. But will the Andromeda Nebula fit? Then, what about display (for EEVA etc)? How will an image appear on screen or in a browser? The typical width/height/pixel ratio of a regular HD or UHD monitor is 1.7 : 1. The typical ratio of photo frames is 1.4 : 1. These are UK standards (which appear to be universal except for some US print standards). Most astro cameras in this price range are 1.4 : 1. So their output nicely fit a 1.7 : 1 screen allowing for typical software controls alongside (or will fit A4/A5 for print, which are also 1.4 : 1 etc) Yet this camera sensor ratio is merely 1 : 1. Won't this square image have wide black vertical bands to its left and right on most regular HD or UHD monitors? Or will the horizontal pixels stretch/distort to fit? No doubt somebody can explain the justification?

Whatever camera, you consider take a look at Camera Jungle.com. This second hand camera exchange is run by Jessops and you can purchase unused unopened (still originally boxed) DSLR cameras at incredible discounts. Of course, they are last year's obsolete retail model, but still good for purpose. I picked up a Nikon DX5200 body for around half price. But Canon EOS appear more popular as the software options appear wider. But why DSLR? I find that an astro camera tends to be much more forgiving. I gave up with a DSLR after about a year, instead bought an Atik Horizon camera, and never looked back. My DLSR had a 200 page manual and consequently I never fully mastered it.

There is a new kid on the block, inexpensive point to point WiFi transmitters. https://www.amazon.co.uk/KuWFi-Wireless-wireless-transmission-application/dp/B07F384KKQ/ref=sr_1_1?crid=JTYZ3HIP2PXF&keywords=kuwfi+300mbps&qid=1575039808&sprefix=Kuwfi%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1 I use these to wirelessly transmit a 1080p video camera stream over 200 metres at 'live' cricket matches to then upload streaming video for broadcast. Rated at 300Mbps and 1 Km range ( a bit optimistic!) they can easily handle most point to point computer data transmission likely to be necessary in our hobby. You need only limited knowledge to set up a local wireless network between any two computers/devices. I don't actually need these at home for astro purposes as the distance is shorter from my office to yard. Here, I can simply create a local WAN between two Intel NUCs with Iris Plus Graphics. I run all astro software (scope, camera and focuser) on the NUC at the scope and control that from indoors using the second NUC using Windows 10 Pro Remote Desktop with RemoteFX compression disabled (via Group Profiles). The latter step removes the artificial limit imposed by Microsoft that prevents a single user choking a commercial network. Here, I have no problem with this wirelessly supporting 4k UHD camera. I have also formed a bridge to the Internet between my indoor router and external observatory using BT discs that are surprisingly good over up to 20 metres. Whilst unnecessary in my astro situation, I have little doubt that combining this twin computer/Remote Desktop technique with the KuWfi units would work over seriously long distances, providing there is a clear line of sight between them. 240 power is required, but in the cricket scenario, I create this in a wholly portable remote unit by connecting a 12v 18Ah mobility scooter battery to a 12v DC/AC 240v Inverter that in turn will power the Power over Internet (POE) point to point transmitter and camera. Having said that, nothing beats cat6a cable! I also agree, Powerlines are troublesome, but the new BT discs are remarkable.

By coincidence, this has recently been extensively debated in Cloudy Nights. What emerged was a conclusion that for every different rig there is an optimal signal to noise ratio/limit that can be reached by applying various combinations of multiple stacked exposures x the SAME aggregate time. That optimal ratio can however differ from evening to evening dependent on sky conditions. Whatever ratio(s) works one night might be less effective on another. I find this is particularly notable on Hyperstar that (say) converts an f/10 OTA to f/2 and is hence 25x faster. Frankly, I can't see any tangible difference in my results between 60 x 5 second stacks when compared to 5 x 60 second stacks (both five minutes of total acquisition), except that the latter demands overcoming greater technical challenges to avoid the impact of field rotation, but that might also additionally be attributable to my Atik Horizon being exceptional low noise and my eyesight not being wonderful. But on another night, the total acquisition time to produce the same result(s) might be longer or shorter, dependent on local sky conditions. The good thing about being able to embrace extreme short exposures (say 10 seconds) is you have time to try a number of combinations in any single session. Where this is material to me is that at f/2 and below 20 second exposures I can discard my wedge and I don't need polar alignment or autoguiding. So stacking more x shorter subs works best for me as it is not too technically challenging. At my age weak eyesight and sciatica means less knob twiddling is good. I can also be set up in a few minutes between persistent UK clouds. Hyperstar has been a real game-changer for me and I can also see why RASA scopes are popular. Total acquisition time seems to be more important than the length of individual subs. But it seems that each rig will differ from another as to where the optimal ratio lies, and each night's conditions will require some adjustment.

There is some excellent advice in this thread. Unfortunately, you are on the same path I took and most others too. I bought a cheap telescope (which is fine for starters), then spent a fortune on cheap eyepieces, filters and other dross that offered zero improvement. I then bought a more substantial telescope and wish I had not wasted my money on cheap accessories/eyepieces. Your view will only ever be as good as the weakest link in your optical chain. Putting an expensive eyepiece in a cheap telescope is like putting lipstick on a pig. It won't imprive things. Putting a cheap eyepiece in a quality telescope makes it a pig. Don't waste money, buy quality. Junk kit has negligible resale value. I suggest enjoy your new starter's scope for a few months with only its supplied accessories and only move on once you better understand the money pit that you are falling into. It will be OK for Moon/Planets and some accessible DSOs (like Orion Nebula), but buy a copy of "Turn left at Orion" to understand the limitations.

Many of us have been replicating this for some years. You don't need an all in one device. I use a Celestron Evolution telescope; Hyperstar (hence at f/1.9); Atik Horizon OSC camera (16 megapixel) and similarly use short stacked exposures to create near live viewing. I then wirelessly transmit the images to a computer indoors and view on a 4K UHD monitor. It's generally referred to as Electronically Assisted Astronomy (EAA) but here in SGL they now call it EEVA (Electronically Enhanced Visual Astronomy). I guess the latter is aimed at emphasising its about viewing and not about imaging, albeit the use of a camera seems to enrage some visual astronomers. But it's the only easy way to witness colour in nebula, but still not cheap.

Why not embrace Celestron's own CPWI for Windows? It is free, dedicated to Celestron scopes, uncomplicated and works great. You can connect to laptop by cable or use a Celestron WiFi dongle.

If buying a DSLR take a look at a used or nearly new one in the 'Camera Jungle' on-line store. Camera Jungle is owned by Jessops and often you can cheaply pick up a perfectly good UNUSED camera that has simply been superseded by a new model. My bargain Nikon D5200 was delivered in original OEM sealed packaging. However, I echo all that has been said about your mount. You will struggle with a DSLR. A dedicated astro camera will be a tad easier.

Best three locations I have enjoyed....one distant, one European, one local.. 1. Galapagos Islands Truly awesome, with much more to offer and now more accessible/affordable. 2. Caldera of Mt. Tiede Tenerife. Long drive up to 12,000 ft from the beaches, but well worth it, even with just binoculars or small suitcase friendly telescope. 3. Orford, Suffolk. I made three (expensive) week long trips to Kelling Heath, plus one to Keilder Forest and I never once saw a star due to cloud. So I found what is probably the nearest half -decent location to London. But frankly, I now rarely leave home and instead rely on camera/Hyperstar to beat light pollution. But with 6,000 new homes erected in my vicinity in less than a decade that is becoming more challenging. I fear astronomy might soon become as difficult to pursue from within England as Coral Reef Scuba Diving or Snowmobile racing.

A potential idea to give you far more flexibility..... 1. 12v DC battery (as proposed) to power a.... 2. Bestek 12v DC to 240v AC 300W Power Inverter (around £29.99 from Amazon). Having available 240v in tne field means your choice of regular (now mains equivalent) monitors is then vastly greater. This is how caravanners and campers might resolve this. Perhaps carry the battery and inverter in a tiny 'toolbox'. Carefully calculate the amp-hours required from 1. My experience with tiny 12v field monitors isn't good. You are typically restricted to 720p resolution. The above route means you can use a regular 12" or 15" monitor offering 1080p HD or even 4K UHD. Regular monitors are in mass demand and hence typically cheaper than specialist models.

I have the similar NexImage Burst and if using an Alt-Az scope I found it very difficult to hold a planetary image in its FOV without accurate polar alignment (on wedge), and detailed attention to tracking and backlash accuracy. The magnification is so great and the FOV so small it requires pin-point precision. To be frank, it was more luck than judgement.. But below is an image of Jupiter. To be honest, after capturing this, I gave up and moved onto a DSO camera as the planetary camera was frustrating to use.

It is the same basic principle Skipper Billy. My core point was that not every 12v battery offers a true12v and an inverter/regulator adds the 19v stability one ideally needs. I wholly agree that using a 12v DC to 240v AC inverter then using AC/DC adapters to produce the correct lower outputs is less electrically efficient than a direct 12v DC to 19v DC converter. However, the fact mine offers a 240v possibility (from12v) gives me more options on a miserable cloudy night. in tent or caravan. I can then power toaster, TV or fridge (but pub always wins).