gilesco

I have a CGX, so can't really give you any real experience on the above. However, I did some browsing for an earlier forum thread that looked at the iOptiron CEM40, and the iOptron range does look very appealing in general so after seeing your thread I looked at your options. If I was in your budget I would probably go for the iOptron CEM25P If you're purchasing from FLO and want to see the mount in action by the end of next week, then the iOptron is probably your only option. Both the Celestron and Skywatcher's have pretty long lead times.

It might be down to: 1. The low number of purchasers who do not request this test, I cemented my reasons on buying from FLO for this service (I personally think, when spending that much on a 120 or 150 it is a no-brainer). 2. FLO's QA process to ensure customer satisfaction. 3. Logistics - sending some to FLO directly, and some to ES Reid, from the UK distributor, overly complicated, easier to get ES Reid to test all.

As they say, the CEM40 should give just as good results for your money (if you're guiding then may as well guide both Dec and RA IMO). I'd spend the money you save on the EC version on the nice iPolar, Tripod and Case! I think 10Micron would be beyond a lot of people's budgets for the same, but better EC feature. Remortgage the house?, anyone: https://www.ikarusimaging.com/10micron-hps-mounts

I'm waiting on an Esprit 120 from FLO and ES Reid, it's posts like this that make the (long) wait slightly less agonising, I'm sure I might have been able to shop around and perhaps find something that is in stock from another supplier, but then run the risk of using some supplier who I have had no experience of, who might not be at all helpful, and may eventually blank and ignore me, and be left with something expensively sub-standard !!

Completely different scopes, completely different optics, cannot compare! If you don't know then just go with the Mak and see how you go, then buy the Evostar as well when your money permits.

To turn the question on it's head, if you came to ask why you had rotation on your stack of frames, I might suggest that perhaps your Polar Alignment wasn't too good, but in itself the reverse is not necessarily true...

If you are following the sharpcap process correctly, then it will give you accurate polar alignment, from what I can see it is essentially the same process as the kstars polar alignment tool and works by platesolving two rotated images. It uses data from your imaging train, so it will be accurate measured against your imaging train. Your polar scope may need calibrating to your imaging train if it is disagreeing with sharpcap's process.

Someone posted this video just today:

To start with I would go for a Refractor, if the budget allows, get an Apochromatic Refractor. No one telescope is right for everything, the Refractor will allow you to see/image Deep Sky Objects. Bear in mind that what you see in the eyepiece is not what the camera can see with a long exposure. In order to take long exposures, then there are many more important pieces of equipment than the OTA itself. Look for equatorial mounts, motorised GOTO and tracking functionality. For even longer exposures you will want guiding, either via a Guide scope and Guide camera, or via an Off-Axis Guider and Guide camera. If you want to view and image planets the you should start looking for a Reflector, perhaps look for an OTA that can share the mount and imaging train with your refractor. I think it would be best to get experience looking at what others see through their equipment, both visually and through imaging. This helps as it is easy to have very high expectations be completely daunted by the reality. So good to have a realistic expectation before parting with your hard earned cash.

I'm in that zone where I wait for it, heavily anticipating its arrival. Hopefully not be dissapointed, come November... 😷

you can also use it via INDI protocol or ssh.

Thanks for letting me know that. F15 (as that is what it is 120mm aperture) seems very slow, but might try it out one day. Sorry for hijacking the thread, move along, nothing to see here.

A bit off topic but I notice the dust cap has some removable caps around 40mm in size. Can someone elaborate in what instance you would use these? Just ask as my achromatic refractor has the same, although a single one in the centre of the dust cap.

30mm sounds a better fit

I wonder whether an OAG would work well with such a small aperture, probably need a very low noise guide camera.

Cool, thought about an OAG?

For guiding you don't need a Colour camera, indeed a colour camera might hinder guiding to some extent. The ASI120MC-S can guide, it's the entry level for that kind of thing, next steps up are the ASI174MM mini and the ASI290MM mini (which I have on order). The guide scope, yeah it is OK, it's not plastic, focusing is a pain, but once you have set a general focus point it is OK. I don't use it for guiding as I have an OAG now. I have the IDAS P2 filter on order, I think it is supposed to be the best for use with a CCD / CMOS camera, at least that's what they seem to be recommending wherever I look.

It might not be them specifically taking astronomy seriously, but light pollution is still pollution and annoying to everyone. Plus showering areas of light where it is not wanted or needed is waste of energy, increases carbon footprint etc... - all things that councils should be legally obliged to act on. Still a good result.

I was thinking that would be the case, but didn't reply as I couldn't categorically say. My reasoning was that as the indi drivers tend to be usable with most Autostar handsets - some drivers just lack the extra features that some of the handsets have. As the handset is essentially sending the same commands to the mount that the indi drivers do I would have thought the only differences might have been pinouts and voltage levels.

Amazing, I love that!

Can't give an opinion on the manufacturer. I think the 76 will give you more light than the 61, the extra 15mm aperture counts for quite a bit, you'll want the flattener too when you start imaging. The 61 flattener is also a 0.8 reducer. Would suggest you go to http://astronomy.tools/ and check what your FOV will be with various set ups.

I was going to say, for compactness a small, perhaps even a 127mm Maksutov might be good for visual compromise. These generally come in some Alt-Az setup - great for kids. So then you would want a Equatorial set of equipment for deep sky imaging - also great for explaining to kids what the differences are and why. To be honest, with Astronomy, you ask ten different people their opinions and you'll get ten different answers!!

Admittedly, you can get some pretty compact autoguiders in a box, like a synguider and either a guide scope or an OAG set up. OAGs can eat into your light on a small scope like the ones you've shown, making it difficult to find a guide star. I think the Star Adventurer will only guide via the ST4 port, and it will only guide Ra, not Dec (so good polar alignment is critical for results). As mentioned by Seelive, it isn't long before the idea of fitting everything into a hand luggage becomes implausible for the quality of images you might get. When I think of portable for my setup I think the size of a car boot and I think about 30mins - 60mins set up time, more for alignment. So much for get up and go portable astrophotography

Sounds like you're onto something and that it will work for you. The way I see it is INDI is the protocol, and indigo and indilib are different implementations of it. Indigosky is a basic interface to Indigo that runs on the Pi. Not had any experience with Indigo / Indigosky.

Sounds Similar to this problem: