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.

Welcome to Stargazers Lounge

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements



Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

82 Excellent

About The-MathMog

  • Rank
  • Birthday 29/08/93

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. Sorry if I missed it, but what galaxy is it exactly? Quite a beautiful one with its almost flower-like structure.
  2. Just a note. The mains power supply you posted, says that it delivers 1.5 amps. From the manual, the AVX mount states that it requires 3.5 amps. This could lead to tracking or alignment issues. I've heard about quite a bit of guys, who had issues with their mounts, which turned out to be insufficient power. Also to ensure that the power don't drop below that during cold weather, 5 amp adapters is often recommended.
  3. Depending on how your camera actually handles ISO, I personally would actually increase the ISO quite a bit, and then either decrease the sub length (to allow more subs in a night), or increase the sub length if your mount allows it, to gather more light. I've found with my nikon D5200, that increasing the ISO helps me collect a lot more data, and bringing it out without having to stretch it as much, which also brings the noise level up. As long as you have enough subs to basically neutralise the noise, it should be fine. I mostly do ISO 6400, and then do as many subs as I can. At least 30. Also try with and without darks, that can again be camera dependant. For me personally, I pretty much HAVE to use darks, if I want a good image
  4. I am looking into getting a coma corrector at some point. It might be after I get a new OTA, as that one will likely have more coma, and that coma isn't the biggest of issues right now. BUT, I've been surfing around, trying to figure out how coma correctors actually work and what other effects they might have, and it has been a bit confusing to me, especially concerning focus. I've read several places that some CC's will either require in-focus or even out-focus, even out-focus in such a case where prime-focus, which wasn't possible before, actually can become possible. I'll quote what I read, but I'd like people to give some comments on how that would work out: "I've found that the GSO requires about 10mm of focuser in-travel when using the supplied eyepiece holder and an additional 25mm of spacing between that holder and the optics unit. For every additional 4mm of spacing, you save about 1mm of in-travel required. So I guess if you put 110mm of spacing in there, you wouldn't change the focus point at all. Of course, the correction would be awful. If you screw the same 70-75mm of spacing onto the back of your 2"-1.25" adapter, you'll need about 1.5 inches of out-travel to reach focus. Since my focuser won't go that far, I just pull the whole assembly up and out of the focuser about and inch or so. Thus, you'll always be able to reach focus with 1.25" eyepieces and possibly even with cameras setup for prime focus photography via the T-mount adapter that wouldn't be able to reach focus otherwise." Louis D - This was interesting to me, as I am actually not able to achieve prime-focus as of right now with my current OTA (Celestron 130SLT), and was wondering if acquiring a CC now instead of later, would be able to fix this for me? And if so, does the focal-length attributes of the CC determine this? Like some CC's acting as a 0.9x reducer or a 1.15x. And what CC's would you recommend that I eventually get? My current plan for the new OTA, is a Skywatcher 8'' Quattro CF, so I'll want a CC for it eventually, but if the CC can also "fix" focus issues with my current OTA, that would kill two birds with one stone as I currently have to use a barlow to focus my Nikon D5200. So any insight into this or general advice would be very welcome! -Mathias M. M.
  5. Did you ASPA RIGHT after you did the first one? Not refreshing all the star-aligns first? If so, then it would always miss, if you adjusted the PA. Or by unsync do you mean doing the star-aligns again? Just asking to clear up any confusion for me And how long can your mount keep a star centered during an exposure? Hmm. A few last questions too, before running conclusions. Simple of course, but important nonetheless. Have you tightened the bolt underneath the mount head into the stand properly? Tightening it up a bit after doing the last Az adjustments can help a bit too. It should be tight enough for the mount not to easily move, but loose enough for those last Az-adjustments. Also, you should be able to tighten both Az bolts properly. It takes a bit of practise to do that properly, as you mentioned, it can move a bit in the last adjustment, but by that point, you should predict what the final movement would be, so that it ends up centered and also tight. Sure it can't stay completely centered if you bump into it, but it shouldn't move a lot either. You are not by any chance on soft ground either? If it still doesn't work out for you, then the best you can do is simply to contact the place you bought the mount and get a replacement (or even refund if that is what you want) while you still can. Errors do happen from time to time, either under development or during rough shipping (though it would have to be veeery rough, for a mount to be faulty). But do check those last things beforehand. Everything should be tightened down firmly for the mount to work at its optimum
  6. Thank you. For these I tried stacking them manually. Doesn't take long, and I feel that I am in a bit more control of the process. At least until I figure out the programs. I've tried using registax, and I've never gotten good results from that. At least not with the moon. A few frames was always misaligned, and couldn't figure out why. Tried several different options, with more or less align points. Different stacking settings etc. Haven't tried out AS2, but will give it a go. I've also downloaded PIPP, which a lot of people seem to prefer for the alignment of frames, but again haven't had the time to play with it, as I am spending most of my time shooting galaxies lately But honestly even with Deep Sky Stacker, I don't get very pleasing results either, when shooting deep sky. I've at least gotten a lot better results by manually creating dark-frames, subtracting them from my lights and then aligning my galaxy frames in photoshop. Either DSS might not like my frames, which doesn't have pinpoint stars because of barlow-induced-coma, or it is likely a case of "Error 40" though as we say here (where the error lies 40 cm from the screen), but I've wasted enough time without a breakthrough, that I've just put in on the shelf for now. Until my patience returns
  7. As mentioned, I have been capable of getting unguided subs of 180s with it (possibly more, haven't tested yet, as I can guide now), which was using a 2.25x barlow effectively giving my newtonian a focal length of 1450~. Not quite the 8'' cassegrain FL, but up there so 90 should indeed be possible. Though I have to mention, that that was after I PEC trained it. At that focal length or more, tiny periodic errors in gears become quite noticeable, and before doing the "training" I had to throw away half of my subs of 120 secs, as periodic errors would return every 8-9 minutes or however long it takes. That PEC training worked wonders though, for what I initially thought was star trails. You can do manual training (though a bit tedious to do for 8 minutes), or you need a camera to make the adjustments, and by then you are pretty much guide-capable anyway. But to be honest, I think a lot of mounts would struggle to not get star-trails at that focal length, as the PA really needs to be incredibly precise. Then it also comes, not only to how accurately the mount can be PA'd, but also how capable you are yourself
  8. Before it got completely dark (Unfortunately even the astro-darkness of the night is gone) I thought I would try doing a quick shoot of the moon. I did 20 shots but ended up only using 1 of the images as the atmosphere was very turbulent. Even stacking all of the others together didn't produce a better image than this one. Sure it removed the bit of noise that was present, but it just blurred out details. I could have taken a video instead, but I don't have any experience in processing that, so I just went "safe", until I would go shoot some galaxies instead anyway Iso: 400 Exposure: 1/80th Nikon D5200 Celestron 130 SLT Celestron AVX
  9. It is a decent alignment. Not good, but decent. Getting a better one than that takes precision, either centering every star in a very high magnification eye-piece, and making sure you slew to it from the same side each time (as slop in the gears can also produce errors). That or you simply have to do "drift aligning". It is often easier to do than one might think, but it takes some testing and practise. Regarding the slew to your first star, this sounds perfectly normal. You have to remember, that when you polar align, you don't polar align your scope, but your mount. There will almost always be a small difference between your scope and your mount, and this error is partly what shows up when you do your first slews. When you star-align, you then actually align your telescope, and the mount can then calculate what I believe is known as "cone error" which is the error between the mount and the telescope. My scope does the same. Even with a pretty good initial PA, it will still miss the first star a bit because of this and is perfectly normal. Depending on how accurate you were, then I'd say yes, you should expect an increased accuracy in PA. There are of course some limiting factors as to how accurate the mount can calculate it, but a lot closer or even under 1 arc minute should be possible, and then drift align is your only option. I am using a Celestron 130 SLT OTA. But I am only using the 6mm + 2.25x Barlow combination for alignment, as it is indeed a bit too much magnification for most circumstances.
  10. As he mentioned, his scrolling text screen is blurring, making it hard to read, probably due to power or settings. My old SLT mount did this too, and it can be really hard to read anything when it does that
  11. I don't think that the mount can actually remember its home position after turning it off/on. That is why it asks you to set it to the index? Not 100% sure though. As far as I remember, the warning is actually just the mount telling you, that adjusting the polar alignment, will ruin your star alignment? Before you do the Latitude and Azimuth adjustment, the mount should have slewed to the star one last time, but most likely missing, as it is slewing to where the star should be, and then asking you to adjust the mount. Maybe you are pressing enter twice sometimes? When syncing the star, you first press "enter" after centering it in the finder, and then press "Align" when centering it in the EP. Then press enter again to start the polar aligning, it slews to the star (the position it should be in), you adjust the Lat/Azi bolts centering it, and then press align. I made that mistake with my previous mount, that I pressed Enter or Align twice at both screens, and thought it had already went on to the next screen. It can of course be hard to read with a screen that blurs, which my old Nexstar SLT mount also did (Maybe a power issue, but I never checked). Try changing the text scrolling settings or the brightness and see if any of it helps.
  12. First, are you using any other programs simultaneously with the mount on your computer, like NexRemote? If you've set them up for the same Com Port then this can be an issue as they can't communicate over the same. Had that issue myself a few times. And if not, try running it in compatibility mode. Also fully updated Stellarium version? I am also using Windows 10 and it works fine for me. But I'll try and play around with it now, and try and remember if I did anything specific for it to work.
  13. Well until you get a stronger power-supply you will still encounter these issues, as I am pretty much certain this is the main root of your issue. If you provide 3A to a 3.5A rated mount, then it is literally not getting enough power to track properly, and this sounds consistent with what you've observed, with the star being tracked properly for a few minutes, then moving around inconsistently. Also, if you check the "Polar Alignment accuracy" in the handset after having done the ASPA, then that number is not accurate at all, because your handset can't know what the alignment is AFTER you've done the correction. If you did everything 100% after the book, then the alignment should be 0.0% off, which the mount think you did, but more than likely it is not. Only way to know what it actually is, is as mentioned, either looking at the PA accuracy BEFORE doing the ASPA or turning of the mount and star aligning again. That way the mount can give an actual estimate of how good your PA is Another question, do you know how big your field of view is with your camera. Not that I think this is the problem, but if you have a very small field of view, then periodic errors will also begin to show more noticeably, as they did when I barlowed my DSLR. Then doing a PEC training routine fixed that problem. But that was ofc only an issue in one axis.
  14. You're very welcome! Might as well help a fellow astronomer and dane! When buying powersupplies just always check for the power that the equipment requires and then find a power-supply that delivers MORE than that if possible. Especially for hobbies like ours when we're outside, the power it delivers can actually drop below its stated amp, so if you had a 3.5A it could at times still not provide enough power as the cold would make it perform worse than expected. Also to note, the one I linked is not specifically designed for outdoor use, so try at best to keep it dry/under some protection. Not sure how crucial it is, but better be safe. What I did was that I got a "frying plastic bag" that you put chickens in into the oven, and wrapped it around the AC-adapter, to keep it away from moisture. I didn't chose a regular plastic bag for the freezer as they aren't to be exposed to more than like 60 degrees celsius, and I was not sure how hot it could/would get
  15. Well I am glad I could provide some insight. The reason I do it twice is not for the star alignment, but for improving the polar alignment. When you adjust the polar alignment after the first ASPA, the correction also includes the potential errors in the star align. So by doing it all again, you will most likely futher improve the polar alignment, given that you do the star-aligning very accurately, in my case using a 6mm eyepiece + 2.25x barlow A proper power-supply might very well be something you should try out! From the manual it states that it requires "12V DC 3.5A" so if you provide it with 3A as you mentioned that might very well be the issue! My power-adapter is a 5A. And I see you're also from Denmark, so I'll share the one I bought.