SimonIRE

Again, it feels like looking for things to say. To say that round stars isn’t the point of guiding isn’t right. To say that round stars are easy to achieve (in this case, without active guiding) isn’t true (and feels tone deaf). Look at all the posts here and on CNs by people struggling with trailing stars and having difficulties with guiding. And to have equal guiding errors in both RA and dec such that the stars are basically perfectly round, also seems overblown. The unguided performance of this mount….which I am now using, is phenomenal. My point, relates to this mount and 10 Micron mounts. And, I was merely trying to provide some data.

It was some your posts that helped me make a move from 10 Micron to ASA. That said, the 10 Microns are easier to use (I think…I’m an ASA newbie)

The image is over exposed and I agree the stars are large. The guiding on this mount is the best I’ve seen among the mounts I’ve used. I’m not sure how you attribute the FWHM to guiding issues when other parameters indicate arguably as close to visually perfect star roundness as you could ask for. I can post some other images. The main point I was trying to make was that the 10 Micron mounts, in my experience, guide really well but do need to be guided.

I have a GM4000 and recently have been testing my DDM100 in Spain. The GM4000 guides beautifully with a hybrid guide-model approach. 10-15 sec pulses get it to guide at 0.15-0.20". But the DDM100, with its predictive tracking, truly doesn't need guiding. I have attached a FITs file of M45, 10 minutes unguided at 0.33"/px (QHY600) using an iDK14.5 (AG Optical). The image is nothing much, other than a demonstration of star quality at this FL with small pixels. I was really happy with this; it's an unforgiving imaging train. M45-Ha-0001.fits

This is really interesting, thanks

This isn’t easy to answer. On planets, the LZOS definitely wins both on colour and resolution (obviously) but the TOA is incredibly good. Colour correction to my eye on the TOA is slightly better. As an astrograph with the 67 flattener it produces and perfectly flat field across a IMX455 chip - something you might expect but I have failed to achieve in my FSQ106 for example (I am a pixel peeper to the nth degree). I’m going to change the focuser though - I have a FT arriving next week. My LZOS is now in Spain for imaging only.

Although weight is perhaps a negative, the TOA130 is the best corrected refractor you can buy in my opinion. The only comparable scope that I haven't looked through is the AP130GTX which I expect is very very good too.

Although Talon is expensive, it integrates very well with image capture programmes so if you’re monitoring weather, for example using a Cloudwatcher, you can stop imaging and close the roof if it rains. Integration with ASCOM is the difficulty people have trying to roll their own solution. Talon is also used by several remote hosting observatories such as E-Eye. Like I said, it’s pricey, but it’s allowed me to image with confidence on those nights where the weather is unpredictable.

I've been reading this thread with interest. I recently sold my TSA120mm - awesome scope by any measure. I noticed some of the posters here have got the More Blue rings. There really is (IMHO) a lack of stylish/high quality ring alternatives to the Tak cradles and I too, bought these rings for my TOA. However after experimenting with them I found that they were a source of flexure in my set up. I also have experience with Moonlite Rings (get them from Ron at Moonlite, I also think Rupert sells them at Astrograph) on my FSQ106 and have found them to be really really solid and look great. The FSQ106 version fit the TSA 120mm. I eventually bought some for my TOA and used the More Blue rings to mount accessories on the sides. Now its rock solid. I also had some problems with some More Blue risers that I bought so overall, I think I have had bad luck with this brand. I should add though that I emailed Steve at FLO about it and I seem to be in the minority. Anyway, if you are wondering about really good rings for either an FSQ85, 106, TSA120 or TOA 130, Moonlite do very nice ones. Just FYI. See images below.

Hi Ossi, The ring holes are M6 - I am pretty sure of this. My advise regarding the Imperial plate is based on the reviewers; several have Esprit scopes and following discussion with FLO, were advised to get the Imperial plates. If you have any doubt, just email FLO - they will answer the same day. Simon

Very sad to hear people are threatening court action against HOUK.

Ossi - You need the imperial version of the ADM Losmandy plates. I would suggest avoiding the Skywatcher plates. If you go here, you will see that a number of reviewers pretty much had this exact question. The rings on the Esprit, like pretty much all rings, are M6. When in doubt - go here to get screws. I keep M6 and M8 screws of various lengths because they are always needed. Not to disagree with Carole above - but I would also advise a Losmandy over a Vixen dovetail for the Esprit (assuming weight isn't a major issue) Hope this helps. Best Simon

Stu, Don’t worry, some would consider your purchases relatively restrained. This hobby is dangerously addictive. Your gentle “isn’t it?” at the end of your post is a clear sign that you are beginning the feel the effects. 😄 I spent 25 years doing visual with a single pair of binoculars. I started AP a few years ago. Now I have an observatory at home and another one in Spain…😳

My mount is good - its a 10 Micron 4000 HPSII and can pretty much carry anything. Thank you very much for this practical guidance.

Thanks Steve - It would be great to hear from some of those RC and ODK owners too. Your experience resonates within mine alright! Simon