RayD

That's a good thread actually as it shows how close the guide camera needs to be to the OAG. It may work but I think you need to measure or work out how far the ASI sensor is from the centre of the prism, and see if you can get the Lodestar sensor exactly the same distance away. I think it will hard, but if others have done it, then it must be doable. The Lodestar is C mount, and it looks like the ZWO OAG (I've not seen one in person but that's what it looks like on the images) is T2, which means you will need some sort of adaptor, and even then it will only be able to go down as far at the top plate of the OAG. The Lodestar sensor is then 12.5mm back from that point, so it should be pretty easy to work out with a set of vernier gauges to see if it will fit. I can't see your supplier giving you duff information, so it must be something we're missing or something wrong with the OAG/prism.

Well, I would say the ASI 120MM will definitely work, assuming there isn't an issue with the OAG of course, and I have/do use one and it works great. However, I didn't mean to ditch the FR completely, I meant just to see if you can get the Lodestar working in conjunction with the ASI 1600, then put it on. The problem as I see it with trying to set this up with the FR on, is that you need to get the distance from the FR to the ASI and the Lodestar spot on before you can start to focus. By ditching it for now, you can get the 2 aligned just by having both in focus, and then put you FR on and set the distance just to the ASI sensor as the Lodestar will just follow suit. If you have a ASI 120MM the first part may be easier, but if as you say others have used the Lodestar with the ASI 1600 and the ZWO OAG, then it must be achievable, but perhaps just needs a little more fettling and thinking? I really do hope you get it sorted Rodd as all that kit is great stuff, so once resolved I'm sure we'll see more of your great images taken with it.

I don't think you would need to do that, it's all good kit. I just think the Lodestar was designed to work primarily with SX cameras, which typically have 17.5mm back focus. The ZWO has 6.5mm, so there will be a bit of fiddling to do to get them to work together. This of course is even more difficult with a reducer as the focal point behind the reducer is fixed which it would not normally be on the FSQ 106 if using it without it. I would give it a go without the reducer as this will give you more leeway given that you have no fixed point other than when it is in focus and see how you get on with that. But to start you will need to work out a way to to get the Lodestar sensor as close as you can to the prism, as the camera sensor is pretty close, and the pair need to match.

No problem at all, my statement wasn't meant to be antagonistic, just stating that however unlikely, once all the obvious has been eliminated, what is left must be the answer. Great if the Lodestar works with the ZWO kit as it is a great camera, I use 2 of them myself. I just wouldn't surprise me if it needed a bit of encouragement to work. I'm out of ideas I'm afraid as I have to admit, getting the OAG's I use actually working (I have 3 of them) I found pretty easy. Getting them to perform well at what they do is another thing entirely of course Hope you get it sorted though as it must be more than a little frustrating, but certainly don't think that because it's new it can't be broke. Especially if it has had a journey from China to endure.

Maybe Rodd, but you're then arguing against your own queries. As you well know, providing the distance of the sensors of your imaging camera and your OAG camera are in the same place in relation to the focal point, then they MUST both be in or near focus as this is how it works. With the Lodestar I can understand the issue as the sensor is 12.5mm back from the barrel, so you may not achieve it unless your turret can protrude inside the chamber as it can on the SX one. If you have now used a ASI 174, which I and you assume is fully 'compatible' as far as sensor distance goes, then short of an obstruction or other physical issue (presumably you have checked that the Lodestar actually works and can focus by other means) then there aren't that many other things it can be.

Well then that says to me it's a faulty OAG with a misaligned or damaged prism.

You may need to swap the Lodestar for a ASI120MM or similar, or a camera where you can take the C mount connection off to push the sensor closer to the prism.

Yes I appreciate they are different, I was just trying to obtain a focal point for your Lodestar to see if it can move in close enough when mounted to the OAG. I would say not due to the very short back focus on the ASI1600.

As I noted Rodd, you may not be able to use a Lodestar with the ASI1600 and OAG in its standard configuration as the ASI has a particularly short back focus distance. I think the ZWO OAG is really designed for use with the ZWO cameras, the 120MM usually, which I believe also has a 6.5mm back focus. The Lodestar has 12.5mm, so you simply may not be able to get it close enough. With the SX OAG I got mine to work as the turret goes inside the camera chamber, but I don't think this is possible with the ZWO one.

You could try by eliminating an issue with the OAG prism by installing the Lodestar directly in a 1 1/4 eyepiece holder in your focuser to make sure you can indeed get focus, and it will then let you calculate a rough distance. It's a basic starting point but may stop you chasing around in circles.

Tim and Ken are spot on. The Lodestar can be a bit awkward to focus with an OAG, especially with the ASI1600, which from memory only has something like 6.5mm sensor distance. I did a simple YouTube video here showing how I overcame this with the Atik 16200 and Atik OAG, but with the ASI it is very tight.

Eeeeeewww........I think I know his UK Cousin!

Perfect, followed by 'snake pit', and then by a full assortment of Raiders of the Lost Ark style obstacles to negotiate

Holy cow I've just seen this thread. I didn't know people did this......that's scary! I've seen what paint stripper does to paint, I dread to think what it would do to a camera sensor!

You can set it up to send you emails if various things happen or, more specifically, don't. It potentially saves a wasted night if for example your guiding fails to set after a meridian flip, it will send you an email to tell you. A very hand feature.

Not high and mighty at all, Mike. I chose to upgrade for similar reasons and, like you, mine was $39 so made sense to do it at this point. I also wanted the notifications module, and I hadn't paid for that add-in on 2.X, and really glad I did as they work brilliantly.

Yes I think there really needs to be something in it that works for you otherwise 2.X still works absolutely fine and I'm sure is still going to be used for a while to come.

No you aren't wrong at all, you're 100% correct. I was wrong as I just vaguely recalled Jared saying they were expecting to have a major release per year, so set in my mind this effectively being an annual fee. As you rightly say, if you don't want to update you don't have to, so it doesn't have to be an annual fee if you choose this route. Thanks for the feedback on the videos, much appreciated

Also fair to note that they do emphasise this is NOT a subscription model as I wrongly called it. If you want the projected annually released major updates you will have to pay, if you don't then you can keep your current version.

Thanks for that Gary, I thought I'd seen it somewhere which was why I had in my head it would be an annual fee. @iwols for interest here are the noted major changes: · Planning tools o Show target rise and set on an easy to read graph o Easily identify when it is “safe” to start imaging (twilight, etc) o Choose start and end times quickly by clicking on the graph o See an itemized list of errors and warnings to help you plan the capture sequence o Define your own custom horizon to reflect your environment o Check the status of the moon · New features for start and end times o Define times by altitude (or by time of day) o Lock time or altitude § When time is locked, the time will remain static from day to day and the altitude will vary § When altitude is locked, it will remain static and the time will vary · Integration with FocusLock (still beta) o See FocusLock status without needing the FocusLock application o Perform basic operations direct from SGPro o Restart the current frame if FocusLock reports you are out of focus m (will block until focus is re-acquired) o Prevent FocusLock from altering the focuser position during image integration · Update manager overhaul, managing SGPro versions is now easier than ever o Receive notifications that your SGPro is out of date o Snooze these notifications for 7 days (more time intervals soon) o View release notes in a new, rich text formatted, area o Download and upgrade without ever going to the MSS web site o Opt-in to the beta-track directly from the update manager to get notifications of new betas (or new releases… whichever is the latest) · Gear o Support for Gemini SnapCap FlatBox device o Support for Canon Digic 6 and 7 cameras o Native support for ZWO ASI (beta) o SBIG RBI Implementation · Misc changes o Addition of “per event” gain control o A sequence can now import targets from other SGPro sequences o Updated CTYPEn FITS headers to report projection as gnomonic (instead of default) o SGPro will now more accurately detect the need to auto connect with a flats box o Recovery mode stabilization o Added camera gain to the file namer (%cg)

Ah yes that was it. You are right and I do apologise for giving the wrong information. @iwols it is the major releases, which from memory Jared said they are expecting one a year which is why I had in my head annually.

I think they will still do a discount if you have the 2.X license, so worth checking. No it is now an annual subscription which seems reasonable as the guys do need to support it, but with full time jobs I think they struggled with the income stream the way it was. I believe it is $99 per annum, but that includes all the optional add-ons that you had to pay for separately in 2.X. The planning tools are quite good, and let you see the altitude of your target with a graphical curve complete with the dark periods shown for your location, and you can then plan, start and stop an imaging session accordingly. There are some pretty good details on it on the MS site, but I have used it and it is excellent, a really nice addition.

There are a number of differences, with the main one being the subscription model (you have to pay for it annually). The major functional change is the addition of the planning tools, which are pretty good. It's worth having a look at the Main Sequence website and forums to see the change list, but it's up to you if you feel you want to go the subscription route. They will only be providing major updates now for 3.X, with only critical updates being applied to 2.X

All very valid solutions. I run a Lakeside via my Pegasus Hub Ultimate and it was very easy to make a lead to suit (took 15 minutes or so). The Sesto Sense is also very good at the moment, and you can see the 'bench' operation in my video here. I haven't used it in anger yet, but I'm all set and in the position to do so now, so will add a video with it after proper use. The obvious big benefit of the Sesto Sense is the lack of external controller. You can move it by hand when powered down, but this means the calibration needs redoing as the counts are lost. Yes I tend to agree with the bulkiness of the Lakeside controller. It is very functional and reliable, but can be a bit of a chore to house it. This is specifically why I went with running it from my Pegasus Hub, and it runs perfectly via that. The benefit of the Lakeside over the Sesto Sense is that to use on multiple set ups you only need one controller, and can then get motors and brackets at a much cheaper price and run them by swapping over the controller. You can't do this with the Sesto Sense and would need a complete unit for each one. I'll keep people updated on its performance as the Lakeside has really proven itself in the long-term, but the Sesto Sense hasn't yet, so time will tell if it really is a viable contender.

Ooh it's a new model with new livery. Be interesting to know if it differs in any other ways.