Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

etunar

Members
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by etunar

  1. Thanks for the links - i did the worm adjustment by following the first video. Not sure how applicable the 2nd video is if you have the belt mod? I have not done the star test before - probably worth a try. After i did the worm adjustment and used the guide assistant on PHD2, it did report negligible backlash though which was a nice suprise.
  2. Yea worth a try. I have readjusted the worm gear as well to see if it helps
  3. direct EQDIR at the moment. I am dithering - but not every image - every 5 image if I remember correct.
  4. If I remember correct, the restart was due to meridian flip. On my last go, I intentionally woke up around the time on previous nights when i started to have problems (2-3am), and checked for cable snags. I couldn't see anything obvious. USB connection to the mount is via a powered usb 3 hub. Seems ok as I have not had problems with the main camera (using a 1600mm now instead of 6D).
  5. you have been more than helpful for someone who doesn't have an EQ mount. I am suprised too - i thought there were lots of people with heq5s..
  6. i know you said that - but when i asked how do i check for tight spots, i didn't get a response?
  7. So does anyone have an idea for a solution?
  8. I guess that's good. PHD was working fine at least. By the way, how do you tell the lurches in the debug log? When I look at it, it all looks random to me. So do I just re-adjust the worm gear to loosen them up a bit without introducing backlash?
  9. Thanks. Those times line up with the trails in the subs i think. I checked for cable snags and I can't see anything obvious. How can I check for tight spots in the worm? as i said i couldn't hear anything obvious when slewing at high speed. The phd message was "PulseGuide command to mount has failed – guiding is likely to be ineffective" - which seems like an occasional loss guide commands?
  10. Last week I discovered a reasonably wobble on the RA axis on my HEQ5 which ended up causing lots of double stars on my subs (i am guessing because the mount kept wobbling between the two positions.) So I did the worm gear adjustment and the wobble seems to have disappeared. I did a full slew rotation check and couldn't tell any binding/grinding (I had binding at 1st attempt but was resolved after further adjustments). Thanks to the clear skies last few nights, I had it running throughout the night 3 times now. My overall guiding is much better than before, averaging between 0.6 and 0.8 To
  11. I'm thinking the same. Been going back and forth between 1600 and 2600 but if a mono 2600 is coming soon, possibly worth holding on!
  12. Thanks for sharing your data Datalord. Not having worked with proper mono stacks before I thought I'd have a go. - Used the base stacks and stretched in photoshop. - Created starless copies of both ha and O3 using starnet - further minor stretch on the starless copies. - combined the starless copies into HAOO. - used the copy of Ha that was stretched at the beginning as a luminiosity layer and blended with the colour image. It was interesting to work with - that blue quickly disappears under red despite looking bright in mono images. Very clean data to work
  13. Haha. I can relate to that. I love my combo of 6D, 135mm and star adventurer combo. It's a perfect travel setup i think with no laptops etc.. This is also one of the reasons why I'm more hesistant about buying an OSC - while it will definitely be an improvement over 6D, I am chuffed with what I can get from dark sky locations with it.
  14. oh definitely. I dont like doing short subs at all. too many files to manage as well. How come you have gone back to a 6D after asi1600 if you don't mind me asking?
  15. I thought about CCD, but I was a bit intimidated by very long exposure times (20-30min) people tend to use for subs.
  16. I do get that if you have the same sensor in mono vs osc, mono will be more efficient/faster. What makes my decision difficult is how does a 4-5 year old sensor from asi1600 compare with the newer technology sensor from asi2600 with higher QE, larger well depth, 16 bit etc.. cost wise the initial outlay is roughly the same between the two (I'm ignoring astrodon/chroma filters for the time being).
  17. indeed. Everytime I read about cameras I change my mind.
  18. I checked the field of view on astronomy tools website - I think the smaller field of view can actually be a bonus with extra reach - although until I try I will never know. I am definitely not afraid of monochrome, it's just the some of the common problems of the panasonic sensor on asi1600 - although it may be a case of you hear the problems more than the positive feedback. And also how does 4-5 year old 12 bit monochrome sensor compare with a newer 16 bit colour sensor. I think the cost of 1600mm pro with filter wheel and filters (not astrodon/chroma) is roughly the same
  19. I have been doing this for many years using a star adventurer with a canon 6d and different lenses upto 200mm from dark sky locations. I wanted to get proper scope and EQ mount for a while but I didn’t think it was worth it shooting from the cloudy UK and I didn’t realise bortle 5 skies were good enough for it. After realising I was wrong I bought a HEQ5 and WO zs61. (I wanted a relatively small scope to begin with). next thing I want to get is a dedicated astro camera. And of course going mono makes the most sense. Coming from a landscape photography world, bigger sensor is a
  20. To answer my own question, i had an email from FLO this morning to say WO have reported these units defective - so i guess that explains it all.
  21. Hi all, I have recently made the jump from star adventurer to a proper mount (heq5) and purchased a small refractor (WO ZS61 with Flat61R) from FLO to use with my canon 6D. I haven't had many clear nights to set up flattener properly until last night. I have initially fiddled with it for few hours and maybe got it 80% correct. But then after reading about it I realized using a filter changes the light path (1/3rd of the thickness of the filter). I was trying to adjust it again last night. I can't quite figure out if I have it right and this is the best this flattener will do with a f
  22. So I take it accurate star masks are a crucial step for processing any astro image?
  23. nice one. I never knew there was so much detail around M45! Looks like a tricky one to process with all the subtle detail.
  24. all 3 are great images. 8 minutes on star adventurer is very impressive. was it guided?
  25. lots of subtle detail. the more you look, the more you see!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.