david_taurus83

50 minutes ago, astro mick said:

Yes i did.

Cheers.

Mick.

Can you post up a sub and I can try and solve it on my laptop? And your focal lengyh as well.

Did you follow the tutorial on here? Sometime you need to change a few settings in PS2.

If you can shoot 3 minutes then your LP can't be that bad? Why do you think you would benefit from a filter?

Will you be using a telescope or camera lens? The IDAS filters are very good and give a good colour balance but they are the most expensive. The D2 version is supposed to block out some LED light pollution so might be worth looking at that if you have LED street lights in the area. You could use narrowband filters like an Ha but it would mean longer exposures. The more popular choice these days is to use a duo band or tri band filter that pass mainly the traditional narrowband wavelengths of Ha and OIII. This will give you a colour image of emission nebula with the added benefit of blocking out light pollution. Again, it does mean longer exposures. Your chosen focal length will determine how long you can do on your Star Adventurer.

5 minutes ago, Lupris said:

My polar alignment was 4 secs off, according to sharpcap, "excellent"

OK. I dont understand what you say "but if i polar align with sharpcap, it says i have to move it up to around 51.3." Sharpcap doesn't use any latitude info?

2 hours ago, Lupris said:

I'll try again as soon as the eqdir cable arrives.

A point to mention is, my LAT is 50.06, its set on the mount itself, but if i polar align with sharpcap, it says i have to move it up to around 51.3. Is that normal, because the guide scope is higher than the polar scope in the HEQ5, right?

Sharpcap has no need for your latitude. Are you sure it wasn't tell you to move the mounts latitude adjustment up by 51 minutes or seconds? BTW, if you can get the result to under 1 minute then thats good enough. Sharpcap is very accurate and is the best digital method available imo.

That's some setup! Do you ever get alignment or flexure issues?

Nice! What exposure length and aperture did you use?

You tried heating the drawtube only and not the ring? Might need a bit more than a hairdryer.

6 hours ago, lasvideo said:

WRONG!!  

ASIAIR allows the calibration of your Live Stack with Flat, Dark, and BIAS masters. ... The Live Stacking Mode of ASIAIR captures and stacks calibration frames into a single saved Master, per type.

Was that the case back in April? How's autofocus going BTW..

You should be able to get more than 8s exposures as yout focal length is forgiving. Are you definitely on sidereal tracking? How are you taking the exposures? Do you have a remote shutter release?

50 minutes ago, ndabunka said:

Perhaps I am resurrecting an old thread but could someone help clarify the term "on-camera guiding" for a newbie?  I have a similar scope/mount combo arriving in a few weeks.  I am planning on using a relatively inexpensive camera (like the ASI385MC, ASI178MC or Altair GPCAM3 290M) for imaging and had thought that I also would need a separate camera and scope for autoguiding like the  ~$300 Altair combo here. 
https://www.altairastro.com/starwave-50mm-guide-scope--gpcam-mono-guide-camera-combo-91-p.asp

If "on-camera" guiding ACTUALLY means being able to guide on THE camera I am also using for imaging, then perhaps I don't need the separate guidescope?

PS - I work for British Telecom but live in the USA so please excuse the use of USD...LOL

Hi. 'On camera' guiding is the term used by PHD guiding when it uses an ST4 cable that connects from the guide camera to the mount. Ie your laptop or PC is only connected to the camera and guide commands are sent via the camera directly to the mount. The more popular way nowadays is pulse guiding where the laptop or PC is connected to the mount and guide commands are sent this way via EQMod. Either way is fine with the ST4 way being the simplist to set up.

FYI, you can't guide and image from the same camera at the same time. Guiding does require a separate camera.

48 minutes ago, Samibotss said:

I did not know about that. Is it accurate enough for AP?

Depends on focal length and exposure time. Even with perfect polar alignment, which is very hard to achieve btw, you will get some drift from periodic error and imperfections in the mounts running gear.  The DARV method may be better but longer to set up. If it was me, I would select a spot in the garden and aim to setup in the exact same place each session. For example, I have drilled 3 small dents in the slabs in my back garden where the tripod sits. Each time I setup its just a case of setting the mount and tripod back out in the exact same spot by placing the tripod 'spikes' on the 3 dents. This gets me very close each time with little effort. Only small tweaks needed after though I can see Polaris.

If you could setup in a fixed spot, you could try the handset method to get you close and give imaging a go. If you still get star trails you could fine tune with the DARV method. But if you could mark the position where you were set up it would make future sessions much easier as you'd be very closely aligned to begin with.

How were you trying to focus? Any chance of a picture of your setup?

If you screw off the bottom of the flattener does it not reveal a 2" filter thread? Also, shouldn't the locking ring sit flush against the bottom section after you adjust the distance?

Give it a go at least.

10 hours ago, Pixies said:

Get some chickens and a cockerel!

Get some quail! The males are terrible! All bloody day they crow!

55 minutes ago, Samibotss said:

Yes

In that case, the handset should have a polar align routine. I think its in utilities. You setup the mount and do a star alignment as normal. Then select the Polar Align function in the handset. The mount slews to a star of your choice. It prompts you to centre the star in an eyepiece with the controller. Once centred, it moves the star off centre and then prompts you to recentre by using the altitude and azimth knobs on the mount. Follow the handset prompts and it doesnt take long at all.

1 hour ago, Samibotss said:

I haven't seen anything of the sort, but then again, I don't exactly know what "handset polar align" refers to

Do you have a Synscan handset?

I think you need to also move the scope. Another option is the handset polar align if your mount has that function.

2 hours ago, Davey-T said:

Have you tried DARV ?

Dave

https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/articles/darv-drift-alignment-by-robert-vice-r2760

^^^This!

2 minutes ago, andrew s said:

@david_taurus83 I don't  doubt you experimental results.

If you change the distance from the objective to the reducer then you will change its performance. If a filter is thin enough not to add aberration then it will just push out the focus. I don't think optical v physical distance is the issue it is the simultaneous move ment of focuser and back distance change due to the filter that confuses the situation.

If you have a built in corrector (I.e. before the focuser) then I belive you would have to push our the camera to obtain focus with a filter compared to without.

However, I would always recommend experimenting to find what works with your particular set up. Without detailed ray tracing of the entire system it is impossible to predict exactly what will happen. 

Regards Andrew 

Perhaps I came across as too staunch. I can only comment on my own findings, rightly or wrongly. I see often that it is suggested you should always add spacers to account for filter thickness but i would always advocate experimenting either side of the proposed optimum spacing. A frustrating endurance anyway. I think I will always stick to Petzvals in future!

52 minutes ago, andrew s said:

I don't  agree as per my diagram in the linked thread you need to increase  the back focus distance by 1mm.

Regards Andrew 

If the optical distance is increased, by say 1mm, in the case of Astrodon filters, the optical distance between flattener and sensor becomes too far. So is my own experience..

Ive had better results by reducing the distance.

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/340444-flattener-spacing-does-it-work/?tab=comments#comment-3707128

Theres physical distance and there's optical distance. If you add a filter, you increase the optical distance. If you follow that train of thought, you would reduce your spacers. I think its a case of trial and error tbf...

Dylan O'Donnell has reviewed it. Looks like the WiF app can also control the camera exposure and has intervalometer functionality as well. I can see these flying off the shelves when they land!