teoria_del_big_bang

9 minutes ago, LukeSkywatcher said:

Time to dust down the Quark and Bresser 102. Its solar season soon.

Not my bag but still would love to see some sun 🙂 

Steve

3 minutes ago, Skipper Billy said:

I installed NINA when SGP changed its subscription model with the intention of running them side by side as an experiment.

I had no intention whatsoever of jumping ship full time to NINA.

Within a month I had deleted SGP.

I too have downloaded NINA (been on EKOS / KStars for a while) and have played about with it a bit when skies were cloudy (obviously couldn't platesolve) just to try to get used to it and yest it seems good.

First clear night was Tuesday this week so tried to give it a go but struggled with a few things and as it was a pretty clear night which are few and far between up North I reverted back to EKOS to get some images done.

So I still want to give it a go, only reason for not sticking with it was that I just struggled with some aspects but I am sure it it just I was not familiar with the layout and need a bt more play time with it.
I just find EKOS so simple and straight forward but just wish it worked with Windows and I would not think of changing.
 

Steve

2 hours ago, CraigT82 said:

B seems to have a little more contrast in the nebulosity, but stars seem to be a little tighter in A.

I am probably in agreement with @CraigT82

So if really pushed I would say I prefer B but really I put them both on a level score.
If you ran both trough Starnet then B would win no argument (although I am not a fan of starless images), but as they are I like the way the stars in A are not so prominent which is how I prefer nebula images.

Can we have an easier question next time ?

Steve 

Thanks for the info so far and it does seem as I thought that it struggles with anything that is out of focus by more than a little but if just tuning the focus in then works okay.
So I feel a bit more at ease allowing it to automatically refocus during a session to account for thermal changes.

Steve

16 minutes ago, Richie092 said:

From what I understand that is a very good focuser so shouldn't have issues there.

It is and think it is doing exactly what it is told to I assume the software just cant cope with the halos you tend to get when out of focus

1 hour ago, Richie092 said:

Keep guiding enabled

longer exposures so seeing evens out

getting as close to focus as possible before starting the auto routine.

Yes I agree, pretty much my findings last night

Steve

1 hour ago, Richie092 said:

What focuser are you using?

Primulace Sesto Senso V1

Last night started off so clear (an unexpected according to CO) so managed to drag the rig out onto the patio. 
Nebula targets that are above houses and trees are few and far between at moment for me but ad a go at Horsehead initially then Heart.
But I was not happy with the images I was getting and a close look showed the focus was not precise, in fact far from it.
So using the auto focuser in EKOS I tried tuning it in.

But each time I tried it failed.

I did look on line for suggested parameters and that was not too useful as  there were suggestions to use just about every combination possible.
Now, maybe there is a wide range of parameters being used and which you find best may depend on camera and FL of the scope setup, I think I do not understand the mechanism of auto focusing enough, I sort of assumed it just moved the focusser in and out to get  the star it had chosen as small as it would go.

One thing I did find is that even after trying many different parameters already suggested as the best on-line if the stars had halos due to being a fair way out of focus it never achieved focus at all and basically I ended up manually focusing inwards for a while to see if the image got better, then if not move it outwards, until the stars were pretty much in focus and then an auto focus did pretty well and got the stars pin point.

So is that what other people find ?
Is that pretty normal for most auto focus algorithms ?

Also I thought this might be a good place for people to maybe say what  parameters they use in EKOS and mention the scope and camera if that is relevant ?
If there is somewhere with this info I apologize profusely 🙂 

Steve

15 minutes ago, spillage said:

NINA is a great bit of kit. I have not used my gear for at least the last 6 months and within minutes I was up an running. NINA is very much like sgpro but in my opinion has some better options.

I just use stellerium to find a target and then use the search in NINA to get there. I also use cdc and connect this to my mount so I can see what is doable in my location.

I have just downloaded NINA and had a play but no stars about so I could not platesolve but could just play at selecting targets and slewing to them.
I too used Stellarium as that is by far my preferred planetarium and you can click on the target in Stellarium and then tell NINA to get coordinates from Stellarium directly, no need to do a search in NINA. Basically like you can do in APT.
Like I say only just started using it so this maybe quite a new feature ???

Steve

20 minutes ago, Newforestgimp said:

Ok understood, I think the current supply for the mount should be enough for current set up, I'm pretty sure the DSLR will use next to nothing and similar for the USB hub. But I'm still a little confused with regard to cabling, Am i wrong to think of taking power to the distribution box and from the dist box to the Mount ? If im understanding it would appear the suggestion is to split the power prior to the Dist box one leg to the mount the other leg to the power box.
I assumed that the mount and all other ancillaries would be supplied via the distribution box?

The suggestion of splitting it at ground level, for want of a better description, is just what I would do.

I am assuming here that you plan to mount the power box on the scope so you can easily connect your equipment on the saddle to the power box.

And my reasoning for that it that the other method means a trailing power cable to the power box that has to have a loop to allow movement of scope and then another trailing power cable following the same route back to the mount (I assume that the power socket on the mount is on the non moving part of the mount and not the saddle that the scope and power box will be mounted on. 

So my method means you have only one trailing cable with the loop whilst powering the box then taking mount power from the box means using 2 cables.

But either method will work. The one trailing cable rather than 2 just seems more logical to me but other opinions may differ 🙂 

Steve
 

Just now, Newforestgimp said:

This will probably be a silly question but ill ask anyway 🙂
If I were to buy say a 10A supply and the mount recommended supply is a 5A, does the Mount draw what it needs (5A) or does the mount accept what its given ?

It will take what it needs and no more.

Generally when tracking most mounts like yours will draw less than 0.5A but that draw will go up to maybe 2A when slewing at maximum speed, so to e safe a supplier will state to use a 3A supply minimum.

In actual use it will rarely use above 2A max, and that only when slewing to target, but we always have to err on the worst case scenario and if the mount stalled then current can peak higher than that 2A.

Steve

Probably for what I see you have in your signature then 12V 5A should be fine, like I say without changing plugs and things yourself it will depend what Pegasus power box you are thinking of getting.
I bought the Pocket Power Box Advance and that uses a 2.1 / 5.5 mm connector which I think will be the same as your mount supply.
Looking on the Pegasus website below shows the 3 plug types and I think the SW supply you have will be a 2.1 / 5.5 mm plug as in the middle picture.

If you want to power the mount and power box from the same supply then you will need a suitable Splitter Cable and then probably an Extension Cable to get power to the box from the splitter.

But if you go this route make sure your total draw is no more than 5A.
Not only is that limit on your supply but the cables are not really recommended for anything above 5A.

Steve

From the mains to the box you need a good reliable 12V supply at least 5A I would say and with the correct plug.

Form my PPBA box its a 2.1 / 5.5 mm plug, but I think the ultimate box has its own connector which is different altogether, and some of the Pegasus boxes use a 2.5 / 5.5 mm plug I think so be careful.
If paying the money for the box, as they are not exactly cheap, maybe best to buy the Pegasus supply as well at same time then the supplier will ensure you have the correct connector on it.

In the field there are a myriad of devices people use that of course all have some form of battery and really depends on how long you want your sessions to be and how much gear you need the 12V for as long sessions with current hungry gear can require pretty big batteries.
The box will come with a lead that has a cigarette lighter plug on the other end so there are many available power sources with batteries that have a suitable socket in them

Steve 

For me the reason would be that if I mount the box on the scope (which then eliminates a lot of cables having to go on loops to allow movement to get them back to power sources) then I would have to run a power cable  back from the power box to scope which means I still have an unnecessary trailing cable that has to have loops to allow movement.
I would prefer just to have a cable direct to mount that does not interfere with the movement of the scope.

There will already be a 12V power source that goes to the power box, that's unavoidable, but to then bring the same power back down in another cable back to mount doesn't make sense to me. The only gain is being able to monitor the current to the mount (maybe).

Perhaps in this day and age of more imagers using a small RPi or similar small PC actually on the mount more manufacturers should have power connectors on the clamp part of the mount as well as the base, similar to IOptron mounts ?

Steve

Can you upload a flat so we can see.

I have a pretty bright flats panel that I have to use a filter for to dim it on Lum flats, and exposure time is still less than 1 second, but with my Ultra NB filters exposure time for flats can be 60 seconds or more, without the filter, so for NB it is not ideal but also not unusual.

Steve

Thats some detail for such a short exposure time 🙂 

I must admit when I took the dog out late last night with everything so wet I was amazed that quite a few stars were visible and was tempted to get the rig out but I thought maybe not a great idea after a bottle and half of red wine and so bed it was. 🙂 

Steve

Sounds easily repairable to me as well, I have had this before and repaired it myself by partially taking it apart and tightening something.

Steve

1 minute ago, adyj1 said:

Brilliant, Loretta!* That should do it 😁 

It's not you at all - it's all those people buying new equipment 😂 

Ady

(* obligatory Monty Python reference) 

Oh no don't say that I have just bought - well what the hell do you do in lockdown with clouds galore 🙂 

Steve

7 minutes ago, adyj1 said:

"So I am a Jonah, no doubt." 

@teoria_del_big_bangdon't be like that - we're all scientists and don't believe in any of that superstitious mumbo-jumbo.

I too am scientific but without getting philosophical there are so many things we cant answer (yet) I hate to discount anything.

But no I don;t really think it is me, maybe that other so called "conspiracy theory" of global warming, or maybe it was just normal seasonal weather changes. 

7 minutes ago, adyj1 said:

But I will try again" - actually, just to disprove the theory, would you mind not? I've got my fingers crossed that the next one goes ahead and I'd rather you didn't jinx it

What about if I change my Profile name and try again 🙂 

Steve

2 hours ago, Clarkey said:

I have not been around long enough to get involved in star camps yet. (Newbie imager). But you have now really sold it too me. I thought it would all dull and talking about astronomy. Gang fights and dob cannons - sounds great. 🤣

I felt a bit intimidated being a relative newbie imager too going to star camps but planned my first one in 2019 but was flooded out, last year covied out and booked another one in March but again Covid put an end to that one.
So I am a Jonah, no doubt.
But I will try again, I think the things you could learn as a newbie being with some of the members on this forum with your own gear there and able to ask questions  would be invaluable, and the fact that people are just so friendly would be an absolute bonus.
So I will try again and urge anyone to do the same. I think this forum is so great that there are people with such knowledge and skill at either visual stuff or imaging yet they do not look down on people with little knowledge and like to help rather than sneer, and none of that my gear is so much better than your gear attitude it is so refreshing.
Not all forums (not necessarily asto related) are like this 🙂 

Steve

It will totally depend on how much current you are drawing.
It looks like the outer casing of that PS is the heatsink so needs some air around it to cool it. But how much will depend on the current.
Its a 25A supply and HEQ5, ASI1600, and dew band say will draw an average of no more than 3 to 4A so probably will not get too hot. Just make sure there is some air around it, i.e. make sure the box is an inch or two bigger than the supply.

Certainly no use adding a fan that totally makes the box a waste of time.

What may worry me more  is that it is just a little potentiometer that can move and the output will be 15V which may be too much for the mount and camera. 

Steve

8 hours ago, TheGlobeTrevor said:

GoTo mounts do track or not? I see contradictory information sometimes. 

I would think all goto mounts will track to some extent, but I should have said to make sure it is an EQ goto not a alt-az goto as mentioned above.
I have no experience as such of those add on motors but looking at the gears on them I suspect only good good visual.

Regarding AP in general it usually is a pretty expensive hobby. I know people have done it on the cheap but with a small mount and large scope would be difficult and probably frustrating.

If your budget is tight and you want photography is your real desire then using a camera direct on the mount is probably the best and least costly route.

Something like these are very popular and produce some great images.

skywatcher-star-adventurer

Steve
 

Hi,

I really don't think any of the options will be good for Astrophotography but fine for observing.

For AP you really need a good sturdy mount and you can get away with a budget scope but the mount really wants to be something like a HEQ5.
I personally do not have any experience of buying a non motorised mount then adding motors in order to use for AP but would think the tracking will not be great and you will be far better off buying a good EQ goto mount that already has tracking capability.

Also although not impossible buying a scope and mount that is good for visual and AP is never a great idea as you will end up with a setup that may do bth but far from ideal for either and personally I think you will regret it.  Getting a setup for AP on a tight budget is difficult as it is without trying to shoehorn a visual setup in it as well.

One way round is to go the route you suggest and forget the added motor and get a couple of decent EP's and concentrate on visual for now whilst you save for a decent mount like the HEQ5 and then look at doing some AP.

That is my opinion as somebody who started out doing visual for a year or so and then switched to AP. Others may give you some other ideas and have a different view.

Steve

Wow, amazing image thanks for sharing 🙂 

Steve

Stunning - nothing else to add it's just stunning 🙂 

Steve