Jump to content

stargazine_ep39_banner.thumb.jpg.b87bddaa2aded94d2a3456c0589a82b9.jpg

masjstovel

Members
  • Content Count

    245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

81 Excellent

About masjstovel

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location
    Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

676 profile views
  1. I eventually understood what you meant, my bad:) The attachment holes underneath the supplied dovetail with the 50 ED, i dont know if they fit the "Medium Dovetail 21cm" which is the one supplied with the 150PDS.
  2. Oh, I see. The clamp i have were 3D-printed to fit the existing holes yes. Its an identical dovetail from SW as the one thats on the bottom that was in the 150PDS package.
  3. @Jonny_H I replaced it with a dovetail i had. I dont remember any problems with unscrewing things no! Dont remember if i changed bolts - I think i did! Edit: Yeah as you can see theres 2 different bolts on the dovetail, And i use a 3D-printed clamp for best possible stability. Never really liked those adjustment-screws on the tube-rings (On any products). The clamp is attached by 2 bolts on the dovetail as well
  4. I got the setup you're mentioning. I got the 50ED for better pixel scale (3.2"/pixel). It's fantastic. Built in helical focuser is a dream, even if its a little "steel against steel" feel on it. (A mess with the cables, but its not set up for imaging here. It looks like a mess then too, but still..)
  5. 3 out of 4 captures in 2020. All shot with ASI1600MM in 150 PDS, all ZWO Narrowband 1.25". NGC 281: IC 1396 -Elephants trunk NGC 7635:
  6. Work of 2020. My first full year of astrophotography (and astronomy for that sake). Started March 2019 and its been a steep learning curve. Feel free to comment, and make suggestions! I've learnt everything from you guys in here, so any critics are good critics for me! NGC 7635: ZWO Ha 1.25" 7nm: 15x200" -20C bin 1x1ZWO OIII 1.25" 7nm: 12x200" -20C bin 1x1ZWO SII 1.25" 7 nm: 12x200" -20C bin 1x1 Integration: 2.2 hours NGC 281: ZWO Ha 1.25" 7nm: 58x200" -20C bin 1x1ZWO OIII 1.25" 7nm: 38x200" -20C bin 1x1ZWO SII 1.25" 7 nm: 41x200" -20C bin 1x1 Integration: 7.
  7. I also love the image. Alot of good detail! I am definately no expert, and your Andromeda looks better than mine, but if I got paid to find "problems" I would say: 1. I think i see 3 spots of sensor-dust (?), middle just above Andromeda, over the top right corner of Andromeda, and in the middle in the very bottom. 2. This is only a subjective opinion, but i think it looks a bit flat color-wise. I also think there is a yellow-ish tone over the whole image - like if the white balance is too warm.
  8. I imagine @vlaiv and the other guys have sorted out the problem for you - they usually do. I just wanted to say i love that effect its giving, even if not intended
  9. 3) I bought the EQ5 for a SW 150PDS newtonian when getting in to this, and sold it 6 months or so later to buy an EQ6. EQ5 was just too lightweight for a good enough job. Besides, down the road you will probably wish to do upgrades and add-ons which increases the payload. When starting this hobby, and not knowing how it will be like, and not knowing if you mean business, it can be scary to put in so much money, and tempting to go for the cheapest options, but i would argue hard that the place to leave the money should be on the mount at first. I recieved that tip and didnt listen to it
  10. No, not relative to 0. The clock is just an easy way of orienting since 0 o'clock is up and 6 o'clock is down. The clock should always be oriented 0 up, 6 down if you use the hour angle you get from the app or other. In the pictorial example. Lets say you twist the clock one way or the other. Polaris should not move, only the clock. So if you twist the clock 90deg to the right, then "0" would be 90 degree to the right (where 3 o'clock usually is). Then the correct position of Polaris would be at 10:50. Even if the app says 01:50. The app takes in consideration that 0 is up and 6 is down.
  11. The significant response in frequency at 10.2s, indicates that the RA belt tension needs tightening. I have the NEQ6 beltmodded and SKF bearings myself, and had a oscillating issue in RA that it seems (?) you're having too. Your frequency response graph looks pretty simular to what mine did. I dont know if you did the mod yourself, but i handtightened mine first, but its very tight space between the housing and motor so it made a false impression of how tight it was. Used a flat screwdriver in between and sort of pushed it tighter with a light force. Made a significant improvement in RA.
  12. Might very well be. Shedar is pretty bright i think. Strange it wasnt present on all the frames though, but yes, that might very well be the sollution!
×
×
  • 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.