scotty38

I've got the same one @tooth_dr linked to, never had any bother with it.

As I am saying that's the difference between the native and ascom driver.

This is what I was trying to say about the driver differences. Swapping between these two won't necessarily keep the same offset settings and also explains why you can see the offset in the fits header of one but not the other. I know this because I've done exactly the same. In the native driver NINA shows you the offset and you can change it there and then but with the ASCOM driver you can only see it and change it in the driver itself which you can do by clicking on the "gears" icon before connecting the camera. I also think one of them defaults to 8 and the other defaults to 30. If you changd one of them to 2 then the other may have been 8 or 30 depending which you changed.......

I'm not in front of it right now but I think it's in Options/Imaging then select the plate solver of choice. There you will have the appropriate options to configure.

Thanks I thought it was a bit of a noisy mess really 🙂 It's roughly a couple of hours per filter but done as HOO so not sure if that counts as round about 4 or 6 in total 🙂

Yes I did mean camera offset so if they're the same that's fine. I looked at the headers and it seems that different drivers were used as the offset only shows up on the lights. I recall this from the NINA native versus ascom drivers when I had my 294mc and it bit me as the defaults for offset were different. EDIT - I'd like to read where you saw offset didn't matter being different as that's a new one on me and from what I've seen it very much matters.

Are you sure they're all using the same offset?

Is it a Win 11 machine by any chance? The reason I ask is I upgraded my imaging machine a while back and when I did I had a bit of a time with the prolific driver and had to search out a specific version to make it work so just a thought now you've changed the method, obviously if it's not win 11....

Ah ok, scrub that off the list then 🙂 Edit, just noticed you did say prolific com 3, apols 🙂

Have you installed the USB/Serial driver most likely the prolific driver?

That's not good but are you sure that swarf's not aluminium?

Basically yes, it's a bit more involved than just a fan but it'll have to work based on ambient temperature and they will only cool so far below ambient anyway. The more you ask it to cool below ambient the harder it'll have to work. Obv over winter for most folk it'll not be an issue anyway.

Do you still take your clothes down to the stream to wash them? I mean you can if you wish but you don't "have" to, same with a beginner scope these days too......

It's not so much the actual temperature that becomes important but the consistency, being able to shoot all your frames at the exact same temperature. The argument now though is with the current crop of low noise cameras and whether cooling is needed at all but that's another story.....

I think mount, tripod and 2 x 5kg weights would be 77 pounds but point taken....

I was in two minds about posting this but thought what the heck, if nothing else it will make others feel good about their images 🙂 🙂 🙂 My setup is a bit in limbo at the minute as I'm doing this, that and the other with it but Sunday felt like it might be clear so I cobbled it all together and managed a few hours of clear sky so why not try for something feint... Another target that's in the "will add more data" pile when I get round to it

If you do some searches you'll find discussions on this that it "maybe" should not be the case but in my brief look around I could not find a conclusion 🙂

Have you read all the posts?

I totally, 100% hear what you are saying but this should absolutely not stop someone doing what they love, well not unless it affects others of course but you know what I mean...

You can point to CdC in NINA by the way if you wish

The filters add a third of their thickness to the backspace consumed so only about 0.7mm in reality so that takes you to about 56mm so I'd just try that.

The starry version for me please 🙂

Polar align one night and then don't physically move it other than slewing? In that case you will still be polar aligned the next night assuming no external forces have moved it like tripod sinking into the ground.... This is no different to a permanent observatory setup where you don't polar align every night either.

That's the actual thickness, not the effect it has on the optical path though.

The Flat 6AIII needs to be adjusted just as WO says it does which is 7.1mm or 7.2mm, I forget which but it's something like that. The backfocus distance of 55mm or whatever it needs to be after slight adjustment for filters etc is measured from the back of the flattener irrespective of what it has been set to (the 7.1/7.2). Well..... That's what mine is set to and regardless of anything else my stars aren't too bad across the entire frame of my 294 🙂 As said above there seems to be more of an issue with your flats causing the problem.