PadrePeace

I’m using an APS-C Canon 650d with the Askar FMA180 scope. This makes the 180mm Askar a 288mm FL scope with my APS-C on it. So What? What are you guys using as the Focal Length setting in NINA given that the crop sensor has a x 1.6 factor effect on FL? or Can the crop factor be ignored? If so, what is NINA using that FL data for? PadrePeace

If anyone is interested the secret to stacking in Autostakkert was provided to me by: https://www.astrobin.com/users/cafuego/ quote: I put AS into surface mode and set Jupiter as the anchor. After analysis, add a few manual align points around the edge of the planets and on the moons and you should get result 🙂

Sorted it. Had a really brief window of clear sky tonight so grabbed what I could and processed it as best I could. SW150PDS; ASI224MC; 2x Televue Barlow; AZEQ6 mount. Processed in PIPP and Registax. Chris

E532DFCD-864F-4F4B-9848-02B634FF3428.tiffE532DFCD-864F-4F4B-9848-02B634FF3428.tiff

I don't do planetary imaging much but felt I had to have a go at the conjunction for obvious reasons. I managed to get out early enough tonight to capture video of the conjunction though it is terribly low in the west. 2min capture length (18000 frames) using SharpCap and a SW 150PDS, ASI 224MC (first light) and a FL of 750mm. The histogram drove the settings to balance Jupiter against Saturn which is much dimmer and a fast exposure to try to beat the seeing at such a low elevation (10degs). Here are the settings for file: [ZWO ASI224MC] Debayer Preview=On Pan=0 Tilt=0 Output Format=AVI files (*.avi) Binning=1 Capture Area=1304x976 Colour Space=RAW8 Temperature=15 Hardware Binning=Off High Speed Mode=On Turbo USB=100 Flip=None Frame Rate Limit=Maximum Gain=495 Exposure=0.001106 Timestamp Frames=Off White Bal (B)=95 White Bal (R)=52 Brightness=0 Gamma=50 Auto Exp Max Gain=300 Auto Exp Max Exp=30 Auto Exp Max Brightness=100 Mono Bin=Off Subtract Dark=None Display Brightness=1 Display Contrast=1 Display Gamma=1 I stacked the file in AutoStakkert selecting Alignment Points on both planets. The first image attached is how the resulting tiff has come out. The planets both appear trailed as if stacking has not stabilised the movement in the video. Mount tracking was very steady with no anomalous movement. The second image represents stacking with alignment points on just Jupiter. The third image is a screen shot of the post stack graph which looks odd to me. Can anyone help to unravel how I might process the conjunction when there are two planets in view as I'm sure this is what is causing the stacking software to trail the final tiff file? Chris Peace Jupiter Conjuction_17_10_24_g6_ap19.tif Jupiter Saturn Conjunction_17_14_26_g6_ap16.tif

I’d say that faint line is a bad pixel column on your sensor. I have a similar one but not all the way up the screen. Calibration removes it. Nothing else you can do.

I was wrong to call this out and didn’t do my research well enough. Apologies all round and especially to the seller. Thanks for straightening me out John. 🤐

https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=167596 so what’s this? £700 new from Altair Astro.

Personally, I’d have washed my hands of that one.. think about it.....😂

eBay has them, UK stock, for £299. Just saying. Of course it could be that the so called C19/lockdown upturn in sales of astronomy/astrophotography gear reported by retailers has run its course for some as the realities of our hobby and UK weather are starting to come home to roost. anyone out tonight?

Saw this so I questioned him on his ad as it didn’t say if it came with a tripod etc. He kindly sent a copy of the receipt from Telescope Express for 299Euros plus postage (330E). It was just for the mount and nowt else. I think he’s genuine but I guess the poor fella will never shift it at that price even if they are in short supply. Who could possibly need one that badly? Come to think of it how come TE were selling them for so much in the first place? Scalping?

I run this same rig with the focuser, a 460EX/EFW guided by a 60/30 mini guide scope and a QHY5L-II M and so if you could slip a Lum layer of Ha in there somewhere it has the makings of a very capable scope. I’ve additionally also played with mounting the DSLR as a counterweight for double shooting. No images yet though but balance will be key. Happy to share the SW adventurer adjustment mod with anyone having difficulties with the IOptron system.

Here's my effort with the ASKAR 180 at NGC7000. A very busy target with so many stars but chosen to test the scope into the corners. Doubt it will win IoTD but this new scope is setting the standards at only 180mm for a flattened triplet with ED (unspecified) glass, likely to be 51 class I'm guessing. Rig: IOptron Starguider Pro with ipolar. SW 1.75'' tripod Canon 650D modified Askar 180/40 triplet Pegasus Focus Cube V2 mounted with one of AdamJ's 3D printed casings. Camera and scope mounted through bits stollen from a Star Adventurer mount to give me better control of initial target alignment. All comes in at just over 2 kg so well within Skyguider Pro spec (5kg). Home made 12volt 6.6 amp hr LiPo power box which doubles as a counterbalance weight. Red Dot Finder for initial target alignment. Data: 24 x 240s subs 1600ISO tracked but not guided. ipolar align accuracy really helps here. Flats/Bias/Darks to suit Misc: Capture through NINA and processed in PS. This has been very slightly cropped to remove sub overlap issues as I shot this over two nights. Stars were good to the very corners so the in flattener works with a crop sensor. I had blue fringing on the brightest white stars. I chose to process it out but this could have been left not distracting at all in my judgement. Your preferences may vary. I'm chuffed with the results especially for only 1.6hrs integration. Hope this helps y'all. Below is cropped, the second is uncropped but as you'll see the star shape doesn't change.

Don’t get me wrong guys. I’m not getting at any particular brands. Without them we’d have no hobby. They were just examples of what is out there for us to choose from. AdamJ’s points above are sound but if you find you exclusively love TS, APM, WO whoever, then that’s great if you are getting what you want. We are all different, we buy different makes of car, white goods etc, but they are all bound to a number of common supply chains. Mass produced Optics are the same and as AdamJ point out they are all individually different. When someone quotes, and ive seen this in articles and adds that they had their scope hand picked by (insert head of x brand) how can that be construed as anything other than what is being said here. There are great and poorer copies out there. What makes brands different is the consumer, your preferences for a colour, bias towards your first scope supplier perhaps, price point, pick a metric. Doesn’t make you right or wrong. Just don’t expect everyone is having your experience with their copy of X 107/700 or X 100 or whatever it happens to be. What counts is how brands react once you say you are unhappy. In this dept FLO as a supplier seem to stand out from the crowd. That’s priceless.

And I think that’s the point AdamJ is reasonably pointing out here. There is lots of ‘branding’ laid over the same fundamental supply chain TS, APM, Sharpstar the list goes on because most of the many brands out there do not make their own glass and cells so no matter what they claim it’s a lottery whether you get a good one or a poor one from the Far East. The only thing that really counts in my experience is post sales customer care; If it’s not up to scratch what are the brands prepared to do about it? That’s all you are paying more for. On ‘top quality glass’ I’ve recently seen a pretty poorly ground LZOS lens optical report so even the Russians push out iffy stuff. Retailers will claim all sorts of things and sometimes back it up with a published optical report. The point is you cannot be sure you’ll be buying a scope with that advertised optical spec and thats because brands don’t optically bench test (interferometer) all of their glass before selling it to you. At best they rely on a specification placed with their supplier, which if that isn’t met, no one will be any the wiser cos no one can afford to check how well your glass is ground and configured in its cell, so buyer beware. An optical report as a sales pitch is just that ... it’s also the report they decided to share with us. Don’t get sucked into the hype around premium branding alone. There are good scopes and poor scopes and price doesn’t always count. This site is full of evidence on that point. Finally, before the re-attack starts beware brand snobbery as some of the best astroshots I have ever had the pleasure of seeing have come out of AdamJ’s 130PDS. It’s all about how you use and tune it as a photon gathering instrument and then how well the data is processed. Just saying....

Thanks everyone for chipping in and for the humour. 6/32 it is and hot of the press Pegasus are mailing me what they think are the correct bolts having accepted that M4 on an FT focuser won’t work. Good on them.

John Thanks for that link. I’m guessing the thread is 6/32 then?

Thanks Adam. If I don’t get a definitive answer I’ll have to take you up on that. I asked Starlite but they haven’t replied.

I have a Feathertouch 3” focuser that I am trying to fit a Pegasus Focus Cube 2 onto. The Cube comes with M4 bolts which Pegasus say fit the focus locking thumb screw and associated grub screw so that you can mount the cube. I have found that these ‘M4’ bolts don’t screw all the way in only about 2 turns before binding. I have physically compared the two threads side by side and the Feathertouch thread is not M4. Pegasus say they are M4 on their 3.5” but I don’t have one of those so that’s not really helpful. So What? Has anyone fitted a Auto focuser to a FTF3035b 3” focuser and can tell me what thread size bolt I need? I’m guessing it’s imperial.

AdamJ Post stacking: I’d: 1. Remove the stars in Straton ( zipproth.com/Straton/ ) in all three layers. 2. As you go through Save and Label the associated filter on the three ‘star only’ images and the 3 ‘starless’ images from Straton. 4. Load up (in PS) and work on / stretch each ‘starless’ image as required. 5. Once happy with your Ha, OIII, and SII nebulosity work, load up the 3x ‘stars only’ images into PS, convert to R, G, B as is your palette preference. 6. Convert the 3x ‘starless’ images to R, G, B iaw your chosen palette. 7. Recombine the ‘star only’ images to make one star layer. If you have any unsightly halos due to different star sizes in overlap there is a good adjustment technique using PS ‘Channels’ below which will help you control and resize stars for each filter so they match up better. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=My+most+powerful+astrophotography+processing+secrets&docid=608050129387850451&mid=BDE02CD6764A7FB8D2B5BDE02CD6764A7FB8D2B5&view=detail&FORM=VIRE 8. Layer up all 3 ‘starless’ images together with the combined stars image for final none distructive tweaking as necessary. Flatten, Job done... Straton is/was A one off of £10 if Starnet++ is not your thing.

IMG_2064.MOV

David I would suggest that making yourself a thread spokesman by “representing what some others where thinking but did not state” to justify your own bias is perhaps a little rude and helps no body. When I posted this thread I needed help and not attitude. Perhaps if you think I “should employ another technician” you would be so kind as to suggest one? That would help us all I’m sure. Once again I offer my thanks to those that offered help and to SGL for giving us all a valuable forum where that can happen. That way we all win.

If it helps anyone Rob does this in his spare time as a hobby along side his own astronomy. He can get the parts or will be happy for you to do that and will always discuss those costs with his customer first before any cash is spent. He makes no profit from the parts. He pays what you pay. In my case I decided to source the parts myself as he had lots of other draws on his time at that point and I wanted to move the process on as quickly as possible. His hour rates are better than fair and I’d go as far as to say surprising. If my board had not been fixed I’d have owed him his postal costs only. If anyone wishes to know how he operates they only have to contact him. He’s a true gentlemen so please don’t get the wrong impression from his FB page. He’s one of us and happy to help fellow gazers when things go wrong because he has the skills and believes it’s the right thing to do. As a final thought, if anyone is ripping off customers its the chip suppliers who will not split their minimum retail packs up and over charge on post and ‘handling’ charges (whatever that markup is for). So chips do actually cost pence but you cannot get them individually. This is why not many bother with repair these days. It’s such a perverse thing that we trash our gear for the sake of guys like Rob and a small chip (or ten). just saying.....

As a final update, for anyone following this thread I am pleased to report that the board has been fixed and is now fully functioning. This required the replacement of the switching regulator and the two voltage regulators highlighted in the picture below. Big thanks to all of those who shared their advice and experience and helped me get this board back up and running. The biggest thanks go to Rob Miller (FB linked below) who helped diagnose the issues and toiled over a hot soldering iron to bring this motherboard back to life. He carries out this kind of work for the Astro community as a hobby and will only charge his time if he fixes the item. That’s hard to beat. https://m.facebook.com/groups/1849691625242921?view=permalink&id=2575157922696284 Hopefully this thread will help someone else down the line. 1. Diodes Inc, 3.3 V Linear Voltage Regulator, 1A, 1-Channel 3+Tab-Pin, SOT-223 AP1117E33G-13 2. Diodes Inc, 5 V Linear Voltage Regulator, 1A, 1-Channel 3+Tab-Pin, SOT-223 AP1117E50G-13 3. Microchip MIC2171WU-TR PWM Switching Regulator, 2.5 A, 115 kHz, Adjustable, 65 V, 5-Pin, TO-263 Clear skies to you all.

Cost would be best assessed by anyone who wishes to know Googling the parts and seeing what comes up for them. I only say this as they can vary both in cost and availability which is why this has taken so long to sort out. Suffice to say it was sufficiently cheaper to fix than to buy a new one. Also note that some popular retailers don’t do the old non-USB board anymore and were only selling the new MB without the metal face plate (despite picturing the metal plate in their add) which is an additional cost if they can order one in. Each must look at this set in their own context as the variables are many and we all have a different appetite for theses kind of things I guess.