Seleckta

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Rob, the mod is to the mount, not the camera. However, it seems that a Canon 200D in a 130P would be imaging at 1.17 arcsecs per pixel if I have that right. This would require a periodic error of 0.6 arcseconds over the duration of the sub. Is there is any experienced imager on this forum who would believe that? Such a claim is absurd. This mount modifier should stop talking about this scope or that and simply state the periodic error in arcseconds which he is prepared to guarantee. Bear in mind, Lucas Mesu claims 4 arcseconds peak to peak for his stunning 200 Mount. And let's have no talk of round stars! You'll get round stars as long as your tracking errors in RA and Dec are about the same but you'll still have lost resolution.

On another matter, if we look at the OP's very promising M42 we see that it is heavily black clipped:

The histogram pedestal is jammed up against the left hand edge of the frame meaning that all the faint signal to its left has been discarded. Don't throw away what you catch while out under the stars! A healthy histogram looks like this:

Be careful not to bring in the black point too far. Make sure you leave a bit of flat line to the left before the histogram peak begins to rise.

Olly

Edit: a standalone guider can be had but, honestly, even a tiny laptop is a great help when imaging.

Don't think about the largest scope you can get away with. Think first about the tracking accuracy you can achieve. Guided this might be between 0.5 and 1." Double that and that is your finest possible imaging resolution.  There is nothing to be gained from a longer focal length and all you will do is lose field of view.

 

Thanks Olly, 

After digesting all the various points of view I'm now thinking of just getting a proper tripod and guide set up for my Star Adventurer / WO 61 and see how far I can take it from there!

38 minutes ago, SamAndrew said:

Personally think the money would be much better spent on a guide camera than on getting the mount tuned. A guided untuned mount will outperform a tuned mount by a long way.

You can also use a guide camera to polar align in 2 minutes. Will save you so much time, especially if you're only going to be out for a few hours.

Another option is the AZEQ5, I know it's more than the HEQ5, but it's more portable. I had no problem keeping it setup with the counter weight attached, and taking it in and out of the house in one piece.

Hi Sam,

My reason for avoiding guiding was, if I was to take the set-up out and about I didn't want to be messing about with a laptop etc. Is there a guiding solution that would negate the need for all too much extra kit?

I want to enjoy imaging in a fairly basic way and all the extra set-up would, I think, get in the way of that.

24 minutes ago, SamAndrew said:

Personally think the money would be much better spent on a guide camera than on getting the mount tuned. A guided untuned mount will outperform a tuned mount by a long way.

You can also use a guide camera to polar align in 2 minutes. Will save you so much time, especially if you're only going to be out for a few hours.

Another option is the AZEQ5, I know it's more than the HEQ5, but it's more portable. I had no problem keeping it setup with the counter weight attached, and taking it in and out of the house in one piece.

1 hour ago, david_taurus83 said:

I've yet to see good reviews about DFO.. Mainly complaints about people not getting their mount back for months.

Anyway, I can vouch for the CEM25. Cracking little mount. I can pick mount and tripod (no counterweight or scope obviously) up with one hand. Very accurate gotos and the guiding is as good as it was with my heavy duty AZEQ6. Fragile? I wouldn't say so. Mine actually fell off the tripod when I undone the locking clamp and it's fine despite damaging the GPS module! I would say that if you were to lock down the RA axis and pick the mount up and ram the counterweight bar into a doorway then yeah, you might damage the worm gear. Its spring loaded and designed to slip up the main gear if theres excessive load so if you locked it down with no play in the spring it may cause damage to the brass worm. I usually leave my scope attached and transport the rig to and from the garden carefully but I ALWAYS remove the counterweight and bar before doing so and always have one hand under the mount.

It would also manage your 130PDS BTW.

Thanks Dave, interesting advice....I think I'm edging away from DFO if I'm honest...following a telecon early last week I emailed them and still no reply so perhaps that is a sign of things to come!

The CEM25 is now in the running...what is the largest scope I could get on that? (weight wise I guess).

1 hour ago, Uranium235 said:

Hang on.... stop right there...lol.

No camera modification on Earth (apart from increasing the pixel size) can influence the maxiumum length of an unguided sub... that is determined by both the mount and the focal length of the optics. With a 130pds, you would be lucky to get 30s unguided without trailing (@ 1x1bin). You might be able to get longer unguided @650mm, but that takes a lot of fiddling.

Just wanted to clear up that bit of mis-information 

Hi, DFO do mount mods, not camera mods....or am I missing something?

46 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

You might want to read this thread: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/350628-dark-frame-experience/  

I would use the WO since nothing is more portable than a small refractor and it will travel well without costing you time collimating in the field.

An alternative line of attack would be to keep the Star Adventurer and buy a cooled OSC CMOS camera for use with a fast camera lens like the Samyang 135. You'd need to be sure an adapter was available but FLO will sort you out there. The key advantage would be speed. You'd have fast optics and a fast camera with low read noise, so it will work well with short sub exposures. This makes tracking less of an issue, as does the short focal length.

There are lots of great widefield targets out there...

Olly

 

Hi Olly, thanks for the reply.

I read the post re: Dark Frame Optics and whilst agreeing that their experience was pretty awful, I've also read some great reviews about the service they offer elsewhere on the web. and no other posts about them here on SGL...though that might also be something to set alarm bells ringing!

So confused.

7 hours ago, uhb1966 said:

Difficult to improve on Thalestris' answer. I'm carrying an EQ6 around every imaging night and i understand your preference for a light mount...

That being said, a good mount is, ahem, paramount for imaging (pardon the pun). But i must say your first picture is very impressive!

I think you might even squeeze your existing rig further? Best, U.

Cheers U. Much appreciated.

7 hours ago, tomato said:

You might find a lot of imagers recommend the HEQ5 pro simply because they have found it to be a good mount for imaging! 
 

I’m afraid I can’t give you a crystal clear answer on your choice of kit, (crystal clear answers, like skies, are hard to come by in this game) but you have done your homework and It looks to me like a combination that will deliver the results you are after.

That’s a nice M42👍

Thanks Tonato.

I'm sure the HEQ5 is a great mount but it seems like it"s the ONLY mount worth considering. Down the line, you never know but for now portability and cost are overriding factors.

1 hour ago, SimM said:

You mentioned a few things: no car, portable, In the garden, SW 130pds etc. Have you thought about either building a pier in the garden (two dense hollow concrete blocks) so that you don’t have to lug a tripod outside. Only carry the mount outside? Cover it over and leave mount attached outside? Keep stuff in a shed? Give up on going somewhere else? Anything if it gets you using it more often... I would agree that weight and size is a problem. What’s too cumbersome won’t get used after awhile.

Simon

Hi SimM,

No chance of a pier in le jardin at this stage. My kitchen is big enough to leave a mount/scope set up ready to take outside when the skies are clear. 

31 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

I hope you didn't feel I did that, it wasn't my intention. 

Your refractor and camera lens are good to play as is, the 130pds does also crack out some great images there's a long running thread on it here though being a reflector would need periodic collimation checking.

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/210593-imaging-with-the-130pds

Sorry I can't offer anything directly useful.

 

Not at all...sorry, perhaps my original post could have been more detailed, your response was fab because it confirmed the 130pds was a good scope.

I'm happy to collimate a scope and don't need a 80ed as I already have the WO61. 

This is just going to be an occasional hobby and so not worth the investment of an HEQ5 pro / cooled ccd / guide scopes etc.

If I go for a Dark Frame Optics mod on a mount and they are as good as they say they are then I should get near HEQ5 pro performance without the added complications.

I'd be taking the mount and WO around the UK to the Peak district and Kielder on occasion but not anything too serious...like I said, just an occasional hobby.

3 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Sounds like you already have a great imaging starting base. Have you exhausted using it. What are you hoping to achieve that you think your are not currently. 

Hi Happy-kat...

I've not even started using it really and have not even had the WO61 on the Star Adventurer yet!

I've managed to save £1500 and am really not interested in cooled cameras etc. I spoke to the chap at Dark Frame Optics who said, with their modifications, I could expect 5 minute + unguided with either my WO61 or a SW130pds. 

At present I don't have the time nor patience to submit to the full requirements/dark arts of AP but want to be able to take some half decent shots without too much hassle and, more importantly, without going over budget....I wouldn't know a dark frame if it punched me in the face!

I have to be honest when I say that a lot of responses to questions on this site fail to answer the questions asked and just make newbies like me even more confused. I know everyone has an opinion but...

19 hours ago, Thalestris24 said:

Hi

I agree, the Heq5 Pro is the better mount but is still rather heavy. How about an EQ3 Pro - fairly light with the supplied Al tripod. It can go on an eq5/heq5 tripod but then gets quite heavy (at least, it does for me!). I'd go for an 80mm ED scope just because they are virtually hassle and maintenance free, easy to use and easy to balance. Whatever you get, you will still need to guide. So budget for a guide scope and guide camera, as well as a field flattener. Put the rest towards a cooled astro camera.

Louise

Hi Louise, but what about the EQM35 pro (with modifications) which is what I was asking about?

Just now, Seleckta said:

Hi, Canon 200d...as compact a DSLR as you could hope for. Not the best but it will suffice for now. Ioptron CEM25...all reviews point to them being somewhat delicate.

Sorry, yes a mount mainly but will get the 130pds just because.

29 minutes ago, Alien 13 said:

I might be getting old but see no mention of the camera you are using, can make a difference.

Alan

Canon 200D....for now.

26 minutes ago, knobby said:

Are you just after a mount as the scope you have is a good one already ? What camera are you going to be using ? Check on first light optics fov calculator to see what objects will look like size wise before you go any further.

If you feel an H#*5 pr0 is too heavy how about the ioptron CEM25 ?

Good luck choosing 😃

Hi, Canon 200d...as compact a DSLR as you could hope for. Not the best but it will suffice for now. Ioptron CEM25...all reviews point to them being somewhat delicate.

I bow deepy to the experience and knowledge on this forum....

Hi, I am looking for crystal clear answers to a cloudy question.

Almost total Noob to AP but I am lucky enough to have a budget of £1500 for a basic AP set up. I already have a WO61 and a SW Star Adventurer and use a Canon 200d.

I have done so much research on this that I am almost tempted to give up because....questions around mounts asked on this forum are often (always) answered with 'get an HEQ5 Pro' and, in this case I am not after that model.

I live in London, do not have a car and am likely to be found turning the light out around 10! 

My set up needs to be portable otherwise I will just get bored of lugging it about.

I'll take my Star adventurer and WO61 (on a weighted camera tripod) with me on hols etc. With the proper mount and 130pds more for back garden use.

I have been looking at an EQM 35 Pro (with mods done by Dark Frame Optics) and a SW 130pds.

I may or may not get a guide scope (apparently no need at the level I want to be at and after modding by DFO).

Looking at larger scopes and working on the 50% AP weight limit to go up to any decent sized scope beyond the 130pds would realistically need an 5Pro or EQ6 which is about as grab and go as a herd of excited elephants.

At present I am exceedingly unlikely to be out with whatever set-up I have more than 10-15 times a year and even then for no more than a couple of hours per session.

So my questions:

1. EQM35 Pro (DFO modded) / 130pds / WO61...good combo? 
2. Could I attach my Star Adventurer to the tripod of the EQM35?
3. Is the 130pds the biggest OTA I could get on a modded EQM35 pro?

It would be great if HEQ5 Pro was not any part of an answer!

Image attached is from my third (out of 5) outing with the SW Star Adventurer...not world beating but (so far) the best photograph I have ever taken.

Hi MarkAR, thanks for the reply.

I thought about that and it would be fine with just my camera and a lens but I am planning on getting hold of something like the Williams Optics Zenithstar 61 APO and don't think, at that point, the ballhead would be sufficient.

Johnny

Hi, I think I may have figured it out bu releasing the dovetail clutch and turning and then releasing the central wheel on the camera mount and turning that...but would I be right in thinking that by and large the camera will be in portrait mode. (This is using the L bracket with no ball head)?

Apologies, I totally missed your replies and thank you so much for taking the time. I've figured out the ball head / direction thing and all things considered am pretty pleased with my first foray into imaging the Orion Nebula.

My next question is the same but for when a scope / camera is attached to the L bracket with the weight. How do you get the camera in any direction...again, all images just show the camera pointing in the direction of polar alignment!

Cheers

Hi all, total newbie and slightly petrified at what I've got myself into...

Just got a Skywatcher Star Adventurer and having trawled the 'how to' videos I can't seem to find anything that tells you what to do after the alignment has been done in terms of pointing the camera.

Everything shows the camera and unit pointing in the direction of alignment which clearly is not going to allow you to choose your subject if it is in the opposite direction.

Is is simply a case of, with the camera mounted on the ball joint fitting) just pointing it wherever you like and the unit will take care of the rest?