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_30_second_exp_2_winners.thumb.jpg.b5430b40547c40d344fd4493776ab99f.jpg

cotak

Members
  • Content Count

    209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

206 Excellent

About cotak

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://bubbletrees.smugmug.com/Astrophotography/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto, Canada
  1. Update and a public thank you to Starlight. So I ended up getting a 2" feather touch focuser. I needed the adapter for the GSO truss newt which initially Wayne from Starlight provided a part number for, but it turns out to be the wrong part and doesn't mate to the scope base plate. Wayne took back the adapter and made me a custom one and made it right in a way that really shows they do care about the out come for their customer (note you do have to be patient as it takes a while for these things). Now I can report that the feather touch crayford is indeed a step up from the 2.5" large format moonlite. The feather touch and no flex within reasonable hand pressure even with the force application being made 8 inches away from the focuser body. I guess for this person at least going forward I'll be sticking to the feather touch focusers. Design wise it is definitely better than the way a moonlite is put together. In my own opinion the moonlite looks better but is only slightly better mechanically than most included focusers on mass market OTAs. Now I have to fix the secondary flop after I removed it from the stalk to remove the massive foam tape used at the factory which I think was causing astigmatism, the 3 blobs of silicone should be better but now the 88mm mirror moves with changing angle of the scope.
  2. Good luck. My dealer just ignored me after a while.
  3. It's the encoder. The reader alignment to the ring has to be precise or it'll cause more problems than it solves. Realignment is not advisable at home per iOptron support. All this is under the SDE topic threads on CN.
  4. I would not waste too much time like I did. I think your copy has some of the highest oscillation ever seen with a recent model cem60ec. You should get a new copy. For your reference, my copy has a 1-2" peak to peak oscillation at the know SDE period of 5.4 seconds. Yours appears to have similar but at a much higher peak. This could be due to encoder issues. And according to iOptron it's a factory only fix. In other exam experience sending to their factory for fix has been problematic, with long waits and unsure results (some folks have received them back with nothing fixed). It is the reason why I haven't sent mine back yet because I am have no return policy to fall back on, and it would cost me hundreds to ship the mount to them for a roll of the dice. So if you just got this mount. It is time to exercise your return policy.
  5. In my experience the balance only impacts random deviations, not constant. And we are talking balancing 44-50lb of newt that I see the deviation from balancing issue.
  6. You should do your data capture for GA soon. Your graph is pretty extreme and you'd want to know if it's a mount issue or if it's your configuration. I plunked on my OAG and it improves my PhD results fair bit so it does seems does not work well with EC mounts and short guide lengths, but why I don't really know as of yet. Next for me is to check encoder ring.
  7. Hi Folks A friend from CN looked at your logs (Andrew from down under) and he thinks your mount might have some really out of spec SDE to the tune of 8-10 arc-sec. You need to run a fast capture run (0.5s or faster and subframe mode) in GA and see if you really have such an out of spec copy. If so you need to return it asap. My personal experience has been not so great with iOptron in regards to SDE on my mount. I am in the final stage of checking if my encoder ring fall off. And if not then it might be a return for repair situation for me as well.
  8. You don't really guide this thing. It's more nudging it for drifts. With the SDE it's doing it's little dance around the center point anyhow so it's not exactly going to be where you pointed it.
  9. So we know from the analysis on CN that the EC mounts will decide on its own how to actually react to a guide pulse. This makes the calibration not always the way PhD expects.
  10. If you can return it, I'd suggest just get the non-EC version. The EC is very hard to get guiding well. Generally the analysis of data suggest that the best bet is to go for longest exposure you can use. And lowest guiding rate. When I have and OAG running with a long focal length I find it works quite well. With shorter guide scope now on an 80mm for wide field, I am finding PhD seems to think there are larger deviations. And the guiding is worse, to the tune of 0.9 for 6 second exposures. I just took delivery of a zwo OAG which is thin enough to work with the 80mm and reducer. If it works better like that I'll report back.
  11. Thanks for the info gorann. Looks like the jury's still out.
  12. You don't have to make any adjustments between winter and summer? How large is your temp swing between the seasons? I am curious if the new EQ8 might be something worth my while to look into.
  13. Been busy with work and the mount issues but I tried everything and it's still not working out. Eventually after trying to get as tight the pressure adjustments as possible I cracked a bearing and now need to be replaced. So as preparation for replacing the bearing I took the thing apart. My, why is this thing sold at this price and has this reputation for being very good (pardon my personal opinion)? It is mechanically only very slightly better than the GSO linear rail focuser. After examining the internal structure I am extremely doubtful it can be ever adjusted to resolve my issue. I have an older version of their focuser so maybe the modern one is better but if the mechanics are generally the same I think that would be unlikely.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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