scotty38

I don't know where my EQ6 handset is so I'd say no 🙂

Very nice and been there, done that with the offset 🙂

53 minutes ago, edarter said:

No, that's something I don't do very often to be honest. Will give that a go. Supposed to be clear tomorrow night so fingers crossed the forecast stays like that! 

I am going to suggest that's a possible reason then. I say that as I suffered exactly the same and a new calibration, if PA changed, fixed things for me.

10 minutes ago, edarter said:

yep - I polar align using the guide scope and Sharpcap and always make sure its at 'excellent' before continuing.

Thanks

Ed

ok great and do you recalibrate every time you setup or do a new polar alignment?

10 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Yes, mine is the UPB V2, not sure why the option is not available on the advance, it seems pointless just having the option to turn all 4 on or off, and not individually…🤔🤔

They wouldn't be able to call it an Ultimate if they all did it 🙂

3 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

I had my Flats panel connected to one of the 12v outputs on my Pegasus UPB, and had it turned off by default and just used it at the end of a session, but when the UPB was powered up that port was always off until I manually turned it on…👍🏻

And, of course, you can turn that port on and off in NINA as part of a sequence anyway.

EDIT = If it's one of the four ports on an advance it's all four or nothing.... other than the one Teoria mentions

If you've not purchased yet how about spending less on a mini pc to run everything locally and then use the Ethernet (or even wireless) to remote control the mini pc?

In my limited experience the guider not settling can be down to lack of calibration and/or poor polar alignment but you say you checked those?

I had no issues with EQMod either but I swapped to GSS for its newer (easier to me) interface and easier custom park positions etc. Like @malc-c maybe I've just been lucky too....

7 minutes ago, Elp said:

I think clothes catching fire will be the least of your worries.

What? I'm fully kitted out in Prada....

Clothes would catch on fire within 216KM but trees at 357Km. Pedantic I know given the situation as a whole but I'd have expected the other way round 🙂

Just an observation but I wouldn't rule out the EQ6-R, in fact any mount, just because one person told you they'd had a problem..... I have an AZ-EQ6 and it's been faultless so there you go balance addressed 😃

2 hours ago, Stuart1971 said:

Yes, although I got it to work pretty well with many hours of fiddling, i was just not happy and wanted bigger aperture, so I thought why not just get rid and get something bigger, was going to be the Askar 107PHQ, then the Askar FRA600 108mm, and then after much research, I settled in the old favourite the Esprit 120 with the dedicated flattener and the dedicated reducer…will give me more options…also was buying second hand but that fell through, so gone for a new one with bench check….

Nice one, when you said 120 I figured it may be an Esprit, nice scopes  and I'm sure you'll be happy with it.

Oh btw did I read in another post the Tak has gone? Sounds like you have something new, what is it?

Nope, I'd go same size or bigger, depending on what you buy, for sure

Some of them slot over the front so will need to be the same or larger diameter to do so. As I understand it, even if it's one that just sits flat over the end the area that lights up should still be the same diameter as the opening ie the dew shield.

In other words if your dew shield is 165mm diameter you need a 165mm or bigger flat panel, at least that's how I've always understood it.

Seems to be a spate of building machines, this is mine I built a couple of weeks ago:

Asus X670E-A Motherboard

AMD Ryzen 9 7950x

2 x 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR5 RAM

Samsung 980 Pro 1TB

Seasonic Prime TX-850 Power Supply

Lian Li O11D Evo Case

7 x Lian Li Infinity Fans

Arctic Liquid Freezer 360mm AIO Cooler

AMD Radeon 6750XT GPU - not for PI use 🙂

I am over the moon with the performance of PI and get around 41000 on the Benchmark test. happy, happy days 🙂

15 minutes ago, mrflib said:

I think the main advantage of it is the ability to quicky iterate BXT and NXT incase you were not happy with the settings. This is good because BXT can sometimes affect SPCC's colour and having to re-run selecting Lum mode only can add time.

It should be noted that these can be run on preview boxes much quicker in its dedicated preview mode.

Totally agree.

In my case, though, I've had such a jump in general performance that these tools run quite quickly anyway - I did try the trial for BlurXT

Just with WBPP, loading it with files that would have taken my old machine in excess of 4 or 5 hours is now completing in under 15 minutes so I can now try different WBPP approaches without having to wait days on end 🙂

To be honest the XT processes along with Starnet are about the limit of tools that will use a GPU so I wouldn't fret about it too much. I just built a new machine with a very fast processor and went with a cheaper AMD GPU as it wasn't worth spending double to get the equivalent performing Nvidia GPU just for a couple of PI processes, especially given I don't have Russ's tools.

The thing that really impacted me was the speed of WBPP and that is now blazingly fast as it doesn't need a GPU anyway.

BTW I only bought the GPU to dabble with a few games....

@mightymonoped wicked images!

What might be a dumb response 🙂 is that the higher you are and the further away from the obstruction you are the less it affects your view.... In my experience a metre further back is better than a metre higher. I have not done any maths to verify that, just my own garden scenario 🙂

Ah well I learned not to show my kids (30 and 23) as their response was "All that money, time and effort and you could just look on the Internet...."

4 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

Yes me too, totally agree…👍🏻 .it’s all about the enjoyment of actually capturing the images and watching them pop up on the screen from the camera, the processing, for me, is a bit of a chore, one that I am not that good at, and if someone provides a tool to make that much easier and quicker, then I’m all for it, I never thought for a minute that it was adding anything that was not already there….

Same here, I much prefer the capturing element. I even built a new machine to speed up the processing to see if it would spark more enjoyment but it hasn't much 🙂 🙂

1 minute ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Best attitude to have,  and I guess as a PI user  I am used to the sly comments now and again about its methods, and the almost Marmite sort of following but was still surprised to  see how BXT had the same but to a greater extent with some giving it high praise but others so opposed to it.

It's almost as if it's fashionable to dislike PI...

Just to add when I say I don't care, I don't mean that in a nasty way I mean I'm fine whether it's had BlurXT or not blah blah. If I see a process that works well with or without using these tools I'll maybe do the same, that's what I mean 🙂