teoria_del_big_bang

4 minutes ago, Spongey said:

I will detail it for sure, though I will most likely start a new thread dedicated to the 268M as this one has wandered very far from it's original intent.

Ha Ha , don't they all.

Yes good idea.

If somebody with the ZWO, when it comes, starts a thread then it would be good to see how they do compare. Although I suspect there will be many threads appearing with one or other of these cameras.
But with all of these being delivered to UK when can we expect a clear night ?

Steve

Hope we get some pics of it for those of us who have to wait for next batch 🙂

Steve

1 minute ago, newbie alert said:

Best thing is to remove that thought from your mind and use what you have...

It's like wanting a Ferrari to get you to work, where a mini Cooper will do much the same job

Ha Ha yes perfectly true. 

Only the Ferrari is now not needed in this "Work from Home" era 🙂 

Steve

FYI

Just received the following info from Rupert at Astrograph about the QHY268M cameras:

I have just opened up one of the 268M's we just had in to confirm what is supplied.

The camera provides 12.5mm BF from the back of the filter wheel.
It also  includes;

- a threaded M54 adapter of 4mm length giving you 16.5mm BF
- a threaded M48 adapter of 5mm length giving you 17.5mm BF
- 1 pc 1mm M54 spacer
- 3 pc 3mm M54 spacer
- 1 pc 10mm M54 spacer
- 1 pc M54 to 2" nose

So if you are using the SW flattener, this should have an 8mm spacer to M48 on the back of it which is 8mm thick. That is supposed to leave 55mm back focus.
The adapters supplied with the 268M, assuming the camera is bolted to the QHY CWF3-M-US will provide 44.5mm (1xM48 5mm, 1x1mm, 3x3mm, 1x10mm). This allows you to add a QHY OAG if need as that is 10mm and takes you up to 55mm. (Note the BF tolerance on the camera is +/- 0.5mm)
I also keep various adapter sets for the cameras, one of which includes 0.5mm, 1mm, 2mm, 3mm and 7mm. This would give you the 10mm otherwise needed. 

Just thought this might be useful for some to now up front  

Steve

FYI

Just received the following info from Rupert at Astrograph about the QHY268M cameras:

I have just opened up one of the 268M's we just had in to confirm what is supplied.

The camera provides 12.5mm BF from the back of the filter wheel.
It also  includes;

- a threaded M54 adapter of 4mm length giving you 16.5mm BF
- a threaded M48 adapter of 5mm length giving you 17.5mm BF
- 1 pc 1mm M54 spacer
- 3 pc 3mm M54 spacer
- 1 pc 10mm M54 spacer
- 1 pc M54 to 2" nose

So if you are using the SW flattener, this should have an 8mm spacer to M48 on the back of it which is 8mm thick. That is supposed to leave 55mm back focus.
The adapters supplied with the 268M, assuming the camera is bolted to the QHY CWF3-M-US will provide 44.5mm (1xM48 5mm, 1x1mm, 3x3mm, 1x10mm). This allows you to add a QHY OAG if need as that is 10mm and takes you up to 55mm. (Note the BF tolerance on the camera is +/- 0.5mm)
I also keep various adapter sets for the cameras, one of which includes 0.5mm, 1mm, 2mm, 3mm and 7mm. This would give you the 10mm otherwise needed. 

Just thought this might be useful for some to now up front 🙂 

Steve

11 minutes ago, Spongey said:

My God how many did you buy 🙂 

No wonder the rest of us cant get one

Steve

10 minutes ago, kirkster501 said:

Baaders are excellent.  I will tell you right now, in my experienced opinion, save your cash and stick with the Baaders and sew-up that hole in your pocket wanting to burn the money.  I also have Baaders and Astrodon.  Yes of course the Astrodon NB are a bit better.  But are they worth the difference in price, per cost of use in our country?  Absolutely not. If you were using them night after night then maybe I might give you a slightly different answer, although even then the Baaders are super.   I think Baader LRGB are just as good as the Astrodons, indeed, slightly better.  The Astrodon Blue and Lum filters are very permissive of IR whereas the Baaders block it.

Thanks for that, makes me feel a lot better.
As I say I have gradually built up the kit over last couple of years, knowing retirement was approaching and money would be less available then so went for Baaders thinking they were a good choice at the time. Unfortunately not had the use they should have mainly due to weather and heavy work commitments in my push towards retirement (not even managed that now as I retired for a couple of months but now back working for same company, albeit only part time for a while longer).

Then I read quire a few bad threads on various forums about issues with Baaders and so much about how good Astrodons were I must admit it did worry me a bit I had scrimped and done the wrong thing.
I guess proof of it is to get some data and see for myself.
Also maybe I am hoping for too much to overcome LP and perhaps the best thing I can add to my setup are dark skies and travel a bit now I can have a lie in the next day 🙂 

Steve

3 minutes ago, obs30 said:

I am not sure how one can access the OS (Linux) and install drivers on the ASIAIR.

Ah well that maybe an issue, sorry but sort of assumed it could be done.

Steve

I was just hoping to get some other peoples thoughts on LRGB and NB filter, and in particular the Ultra NB filters.

Over the last 2 to 3 years I have built up a reasonable imaging setup and having just upgraded my camera then next upgrade probably would be my filters.
And if money was freely available to me then I am sure I would not be posting this thread and I would have a full set of Astrodons already.
But, that is not the case and when I bought my current set of 36mm filters I had other eqipment to buy as well so certainly then Astrodons were out of the question (although the price of them now I wish I had just bit the bullet 🙂 ) so I went middle of the road and bought all Baader and have these in LRGB and Ha 3.5Nm, OIII & SII 4.5 Nm.
And I am not saying I am not happy with them, but also not had too much imaging time over last year to really test them out, something I hope changes with semi-retirement and more time to dedicate to my imaging.
But also I have nothing to compare to, hence the thread.

So after all the rambling what would I gain spending a little over £3000 on new filters over the Baaders.
I know many have had bad experiences with halos on Baaders, mostly on the standard OIII 8.5 Nm but with the 4.5 Nm version seems okay to me.
Does anyone have images from same targets on similar conditions for both manufacturers ?

I can only assume Astrodons are worth the extra cash because as soon as they come into stock they are gone.

Also I hear about various Chinese NB filters coming onto the market also around the 3Nm bandwidth, are these better than the Baaders and are they anywhere near the Astrodons, Does anyone actually know ?

Knowing what I do now maybe 2 years or so ago, when I bought the Baader Ultra NB (which are not exacly cheap), I would have bought the Astrodons as they were a bit cheaper than they are now, even if I had to get on credit, but being fairly new I hated paying that sort of money for a piece of coloured glass.
But that bit of coloured glass is just as important as the camera or scope, probably more in the  case of NB with lots of LP.

Steve
 

Yes that nearly threw me off it as well but I am pretty sure that was just the earlybird version.

This is the drawing that is on the websites selling the current model is a maximum of 110.8 mm.
Strangely it shows the same drawing on some sites for colour and mono but the mono version, as far as I am aware) does not have that 10 mm dovetail for the rotator but not sure if that means it is 102.8 mm or it has something else that replaces that dovetail that will also be 10 mm long.

All the videos on youtube I have seen about the colour version they certainly weren't 180mm long.

If anyone finds a proper drawing of the Mono version please post it on this thread 🙂 

The slightly shorter length and reduced weight was what really made me want the ZWO version but so long as that drawing is correct then the extra length is only about 14mm, so I can live with that and the weight, well we will see 🙂 

Steve

1 minute ago, Jammy said:

Just had a quick check,  it's about 14mm.

So we are alright then ?

Should be fine. On short side of ASAir I am only masking less than 5mm. The long sides a bit more but probably only 7 mm at most.

The TP-Link I also think is okay but maybe double check.  I am masking about 11.5 mm of both long and short sides which is only just over the size of the radii so should be fine.
I guess you just need to check where the plugs on your cables are positioned as these could be a bit wider than the actual sockets in the ASAir or TP link.

Steve

QHY 268M ordered together with a QHY filter wheel 7 x 36mm (basically a freebie with the introductory offer ).

I am sure it is not but somehow choosing which camera to get seemed like the hardest decision I ever made.

Steve

I am assuming so as it is RPi based but cannot say for sure as I do not have one.

It has installation files for Windows, Mac and linux so as long as you can install 3rd part software I would thing it would work.

Steve

I think it should still allow access to all the plugs sockets switches etc. We might have to try it and see, postage cost for a second version will not be much if needed but I measures things from scaled photos as well as your drawings so should be okey 🙂 

Steve

Yes hopefully will be strong enough but left holes for screws if needed.

The first design did work but not totally happy as the way the top clicked into the bottom section was a bit weak and not too difficult to pull apart.

Re-designed and beefed it up a bit. Sods law it will be too strong and hard to click together but its being printed so we will see 🙂 

                                                         Original Design                                                                                            New Design

Steve

I now use one of these on my RPi4 with Stellarmate and works really well.

BrosTrend 650Mbps Linux WiFi Dongle  

This was recommended to me by @Stuart1971
Before this always used a 100M Ethernet cable back to network in house due to reliability issues with RPi WiFi and was sceptical this would work.
But it does and not had an issue yet,although on tried it a handful of times, but seems to work at least up to 50 M and trough an outside wall, also worked when in garage so through an outside wall and 2 inside brick walls.

It is rather big and I did find that if left dangling in the RPi it was in danger of damaging the usb port in the RPi due to its weight but it works just as well on the end of a short usb extension lead, mine is 0.3M.
Also forcing it to use the 5 GHz WiFi not the 2.4 as this gets interference from the USB (or so I am told) makes it work better.

I get good speed.

Obviously faster on Ethernet but it works good enough to do what I need and easier than rolling out the cable each time.

Steve

14 minutes ago, JamesF said:

Possibly when a frame is saved as RGB from the colour version of the camera?  With 26 megapixels and a sixteen bit (two byte) ADC, the actual amount of data coming off the sensor can't be more than 52MB though, can it?

Ah yes I think it was a review on the colour version I read that. I think I just thought that mono would be the same having same number of pixels but I think you are right and we generally agree for DSO use the extra memory is not really an advantage.

Steve

25 minutes ago, JamesF said:

I have wondered in the past whether that's because having four times more memory is useful, or if there's negligible cost difference between the two and having the larger amount is just another bragging point.
If each frame is about 50MB, what are you going to be doing that requires 2GB of buffer to store the data during transmission to the host system?  50MB doesn't take a huge amount of time to transfer over a USB3 link (less than half a second?), especially compared to the lengths of exposure used in deep sky imaging, and if your frame rate is so fast that you're creating a backlog of frames to be transmitted on the camera then a 2GB buffer is hardly buying you lots of breathing space.

Some of this is a bit over my head but I think these cameras each frame is about 120Mb, however, still for normal exposure times still doesn't really require that memory so I guess only an advantage to taking lots of short frames such as planetary imaging, but I am thinking the main buyers of these cameras will be using far longer exposure times.

4 minutes ago, Dinglem said:

Also doesn't the QHY have 4 times more buffer memory?

I think that's correct and it is how I read it. I was more looking at advantages the ZWO had and why I should pay £300 more and wait longer but yes should also be looking at advantages of the QHY.

11 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

If the ZWO had been available when I ordered the QHY and was the same price as the QHY then I may would have chosen the ZWO.  

I am very much the same, not yet ordered but hovering over the buttons.
I have had no issues at all with my ZWO ASI1600MM, but there again mine is only a couple of years old so not an earlybird and I guess any issues will be the early buyers. So very much wanted a 2600 and would pay the extra £300.

Any particular specification reason you would have bought the ZWO all other things being equal ?

Only issues I have is I want to buy a new FW to go with it as using my SX will add to the spacing between the 36mm filters and image plane, also worried about the extra weight on the fairly flimsy outside cover of the SX, and I am liking the QHY wheel over the ZWO and I would think best to get both camera and wheel from same company.

And when it comes down to it I cannot see any advantage of the ZWO over the QHY apart from the USB2 hub and the weight reduction (the latter probably more use.
So I am really edging towards the QHY.

I would love to see some pics of the dual rig and some of the images 🙂 

Steve

There seems to be a lot of talk about these two new mono cameras.
I just wondered which camera people have chosen and maybe a post to say why.
The QHY is quite a bit cheaper, the ZWO is a little lighter but apart from that cannot see much to choose between them.
The poll is really only for those who are serious about getting one of these and have looked into buying both (i.e. not just gone for ZWO because they always use ZWO etc).

A post also to say why you made that decision (i.e. ordered to take advantage f introductory offer, or will get one but waiting to see if any issues and so on).

7 minutes ago, smr said:

Maybe there isn't because I'm just overthinking things and imagining it's more complicated than it is.

It'd just be nice to see someone showing the process I guess, with an electronic filter wheel and the process of how it's all connected up, taking flats, imaging, how the filter wheel and imaging plan works between hardware and software etc.

Its all in the book "Every Photon Counts" , land I really think everybody should read this front to back before any imaging. It is pretty basic information but really does tie everything in that is required and how things work.

I think maybe you are thinking it to an extent. Generally both LRGB and NB imaging with a mono is pretty much same as OSC but you need to take more images using  different filters.
I found the actual putting all the images together, the processing, far more difficult and in fact whilst I can produce a reasonable image I think there is far more to pull out of some of my data and for sure I cannot do everything start to finish without looking at some reference video or book for some of the steps.

Probably because of that there are loads of tutorials and videos of different methods of processing and less on the actual imaging side although stuff is out there and on this forum.
This site has some really good and straightforward advice about setups and what to do.

AstroBackyard

What imaging or sequencing software are you intending to use ?
You will probably find better advice looking for tutorials on your particular software.

Or start a thread in the "Getting Started with Imaging" section asking what to do and stating your equipment and sequencing software and you will get some good advvice

Steve

Made a start printing.

I made some replicas of the ASAir and TP Link so I can check the design works. The first print of the lower part seems to work in principle but I think the bottom struts between the uprights need beefing up as they are quite weak.
But if that is the only issue then its going well.

Redesigned lower part:-

Steve