Gerry Doyle

A factor to bear in mind is I believe that the primary mirror in the C9.25 is figured at f/2.5, as opposed to f/2 for all the other Celestron SCTs (8, 11, 14). Don't know why they did that, but it makes the mirror figure just that little bit more forgiving/easier to make and consequently yielding better images. That assumes that you don't ever truly reach 'diffraction limited' seeing conditions. In that case, aperture wins - not just for light gathering power but in this case because the resolving power of the bigger aperture at Dawes limit is better.

It's that, or see what they go for and put the funds into an ASI of some kind... But I do kind of hanker after keeping at least one of them - probably keep the 2-1 and sell the 2-0. Sensitivity a plus at that pixel size... GD

And SharpCap worked - thanks for the suggestion. Considering their fate now that I know they work. G

Thanks - I'll try SharpCap - at least it would let me power up and try out again.

Hello all... I'm looking at two Lumenera cameras that I've had for at least 10 years. I got really good use out of them as planetary cameras a while back, but planetary imaging had to take a back seat for a few years, and now trying to get back into it. But the Lumeneras best days may be behind them - apart from their basic spec, it seems Lucam Recorder is obsolete and other capture software (I've got FireCapture) don't seem to support them. I think they are probably destined for sale, but before I list them, is anyone still using these, and if so, how/with what? Their near relatives still seem to be used for microscopy, so I'm wondering what I should do with them. Any suggestions? Gerry

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter imaged the various Apollo sites and artifacts (including an impact site from one of the Saturn 5 third stages impacted onto the Moon as a seismic experiment). Apollo 11: 'A Stark Beauty All Its Own' | NASA But that, of course was at a couple of hundred miles or less, not 250 000...