StuartT

19 hours ago, Gfamily said:

I get a redirect to a security enrolment page. 

I'm not going to follow it. 

apologies. Not sure how that happened, the link works now. 

In case it's of interest

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/courses-and-students/NHM_Masterclass/exploring_the_solar_system.html

11 hours ago, neil phillips said:

From your stats you should be trying F18 F20. If you want high FL captures. On the 9th it was showing in the high 50s (57 degrees) elevation. So with IR685 At native F10. even under disturbed seeing I would imagine the captures being somewhat sharper. They look good. And you're now avoiding over sharpening which is an improvement from what I saw before. But a little soft. Have you tried a touch stronger sharpening?

I'm def going to use the Barlow next time to get up to f/20 and see how I get on.

In Autostakkert!3 I am selecting only the frames with quality of 90 or over. This means I generally only get around 30 or 40 frames to stack out of a video of 3000. Am I being too picky? Would it be better to lower my quality threshold a little and stack more frames? 

As for sharpening, I have taken your previous advice and been a little less aggressive than I used to be, but perhaps they are now too soft! I'll tweak my Registax settings.

20 minutes ago, neil phillips said:

Hi Stuart, yes, the pitfalls of obscured views. And yes aim for 5x your pixel size should put you where you want to be. Good luck

Thanks. So this may explain why my images are not very sharp. I've been imaging at about double this image scale.

Still trying to perfect my technique. These were taken with my Edge HD 9.25" at native f/10 on an Apollo M mini (4.5um pixels). Baader IR pass 685nm filter. Exposure time 2ms, gain 150, 67 fps, image scale 0.37 "/px.
Best 50 frames of 3000. Moon altitude 58°

Advice welcome!

15 hours ago, neil phillips said:

Cheers Stuart did you try when it was this high ? if not i would say try again when its very high. So even if seeing isn't the best. You can still get some detail coming through. Also try high power crater shots two or three. then refocus two or three. Refocus again. Do this until you find your feet. By doing this you hope to get a couple of shots close to good focus. Once you get some sharp shots under your belt. Your confidence will grow. I took a chance with these. Only focused once on both colour and mono (took ages being certain though) Putting all my eggs in one basket is a bit risky even with experience. But i was running out of time. Luckily i nailed focus both attempts. But sometimes I can be ever so slightly not optimal. It's the difference sometimes from a good shot. to a great one. Assuming reasonable seeing of course. 

yes, it was pretty high. Up at 60 deg or so. Problem is, my view is limited to the region NE round to S, so I can't image at first quarter and imaging at last quarter means being up in the small hours, so I am tired all day at work! Imaging at full moon is a) not high enough and b) full moon is rather boring from a light/shadow point of view

By the way, what is a good image scale for the moon? I mostly shoot DSOs and there an image scale of about 0.8-2 arcsec/px is best (depending on seeing). But what about lunar? I read somewhere that your focal ratio for lunar should be 5x pixel size. I am using 4.5um pixels in my camera which suggests that my f/10 (native Edge HD) is significantly undersampling. Should I be using a Barlow then?

Outstanding work Neil, as always. I'm trying to put your tips into practice but so far can't get near this quality.

update to this. Askar has now launched an equivalent filter which passes Oiii and Sii at 6nm bandpass width.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/narrowband/askar-colour-magic-2-6nm-oiiisii-duo-band-d2-filter.html

I've ordered one, so I'll report back!

oh no! That's alarming. I have a Telegizmo on my rig all the time. Over a year now. But it's relatively close to the house, so maybe a bit more protected from wind. 

I must admit I have never even thought of the possibility of wind blowing it off!

I hope it all dries out ok

This is all interesting. I have been toying with upgrading my L Extreme to the L Ultimate. The former has given me some very nice results, but the halos are annoying. It would be nice to have a tighter bandpass.

BUT I had exactly the same thoughts as @Adam J - we know Optolong don't have the best quality control there is, but with a 7nm filter you can afford more margin for error. But at 3nm, I'd be very concerned that my filter might miss one (or heaven forbid both) centre lines completely! It would be great to seem some spectroscopy tests, I guess, before parting with this much cash

1 hour ago, Alex Mac said:

I keep ordering these boxes of lucky polystyrene peanuts from FLO and finding all sorts of random goodies at the bottom. 
 

I hope they remembered the clouds

Ok, I am embarrassed to admit that updating to ASCOM 6.6SP1 and the latest ZWO drivers seems to have fixed the problem! Both cameras are now showing up correctly named in both NINA and PHD2 and they don't seem to mind how they are connected up!

I am amazed that having drivers a few months old could possibly cause this problem. But it seems to have been the culprit. 

Thanks everyone!

2 minutes ago, Dr_Ju_ju said:

If you connect all devices to PHD2 (camera (174) & mount) & then try & connect camera (2600) to Nina ??   

Also do have all the latest updates, updated drivers installed (there was an ASI update last week) 

So I just tried connecting the 174 separately (i.e. not connecting to the 2600) and now PHD2 sees two 2600s!!

I'll try updating the drivers. But surely if Windows device manager can see them both, there shouldn't be a problem should there? This is really driving me crazy!

I tried connecting with the ASCOM driver in NINA, but ASCOM also seems to think I have two 174s!!

I have the 2600 plugged in and the 174 plugged into the USB out on the 2600. 

But only the 174 is showing in NINA and PHD2 sees two 174s !!

21 minutes ago, Dr_Ju_ju said:

does W$ see them as two separate devices ?? (device manager) 

yes, it looks like it

1 minute ago, Dr_Ju_ju said:

What software ??  I mainly use SGPro, and always connect my 1600 & 120 with no issues... 

NINA and PHD2

I have a ASI2600MC as my main imaging camera and I have a ASI174MM mini attached to the OAG.

But they always seem to clash. I can connect the imaging camera when the guidecam is not plugged in, and vice versa. But whenever I try to connect them both it won't work. Either the software won't see the second camera or it connects it and disconnects the other one.

This seems to happen whether I connect the guidecam direct to the imaging cam (via a short lead) or whether I connect them both separately to my Pegasus UPBv2.

Does anyone else have this problem? Maybe it's not possible to use two cameras of the same make at the same time as they are both trying to use the same driver?

14 hours ago, gorann said:

Why do you think you need a focuser on the back of the Edge HD? 

Because I need a motor focuser to be able to do astrophotography. That connects to the shaft of the Steeltrack's focuser.

13 hours ago, gorann said:

PS. I see on FLO's site that it says about the Steetrack that it is "Suitable for Celestron C14/C11/C9.25/C8/C6/C5.  Also suitable for Meade SCT/ACF telescopes with standard 2" SCT thread. " I think that may mean that is should not be used for the Edge series due to the short fixed back focus.

I'm not sure I understand this point. The Edge manual says the backfocus is 146mm. The Steeltrack is about 110mm long (I forgot I added the Baader clicklock in this photo which adds another 20mm or so. I shall remove that). So surely the focus will still be about 36mm behind (i.e. outside) the end of the focuser?

46 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

You have your focuser extended by about 20mm according to the scale. Is this 20mm extension intentional?

Olly

 

I generally try to put focusers at about half way when I have a motor focuser attached to give it leeway either side. You don't want a focuser trying to push up against a limit

(Sometimes in this hobby I feel such a dunce)

According to the manual, the Edge HD 9.25" needs 146mm of back focus. I have a Diamond Steeltrack focuser attached to mine and that measures 130mm. My ASI2600MC has a sensor 17.5mm behind the front plate, and my OAG is 37mm thick so is this going to work?

(I find backfocus very confusing for some reason)

Ok, problem solved! It turns out that the hub on the mount works just fine!

On 18/10/2022 at 17:28, Budgie1 said:

I never had any issues using USB3 from PPBA connected to a 15m active USB3 extension cable. It was very fast with image downloads from the mount to the laptop. It was powered by the PPBA at one end and the laptop at the other but worked just fine.

I agree. I have never had data issues with my long, 15m powered USB cable. My problem is snagging.

On 22/10/2022 at 11:08, Stuart1971 said:

I don’t understand why you would have trailing and snagging issues when using the UPB, the only cable you should have going to ground is the power cable, all the other will move with the mount, as they all go from devices on the scope to the UPB which moves with is all….🤔🤔

There are two cables going from the ground to the UPBv2 - a power cable to my PSU and a USB cable. Those tend to get snagged when the scope slews. But in addition to that, I have a USB connection from the UPBv2 to the mount and also one to the camera (which is a long way back). Although the camera one obviously moves in tandem with the scope (and thus UPBv2), the mount one doesn't (because the scope moves relative to the mount base where the USB input is). So I have to have that long enough to give the scope freedom to move. 

On 22/10/2022 at 14:31, teoria_del_big_bang said:

I hope the mount hub route helps then.

Initial indications are that the mount hub can indeed manage a USB3 connection. My ASI2600MC is managing to send images to the laptop. I had to buy some additional cables to go from the mount power output (which is a DC5525 plug to an XT60 plug on the UPBv2 - not easy to find!). So I am optimistic that I may be able to manage the mount hub solution after all. 

On 22/10/2022 at 19:18, ollypenrice said:

The owners in the robotic shed I host have all gravitated towards a system as shown above. Cables from front and rear converge near the middle of the saddle plate and then head down towards the upper end of the C/W bar. From there the cables drop to the floor and head for the PC.

At the point of convergence they can be attached close to the dovetail. They can also be attached to relieve stress much closer to their points of origin.

The use of 'office' cables, sockets and plugs in an astro environment remains a perennial problem. However, the top of the C/W bar is the point of least movement as cables leave the rig. Highly recommended.

Olly

 

Thanks Olly. I'd not thought of this Y-shaped configuration, but I can see that might help

Thanks everyone. I have bought a bunch of Lindy cables and today, I am going to re-cable everything. I think I'm also going to try out the through hub on the mount. I've not heard good reports, so I've never actually tried to use it. But I'm going to see if it might actually work ok after all (because that would reduce my trailing and snagging possibilities)

I ordered the IDAS NB3 filter to supplement the data I get on emission nebulae with my L Extreme (which doesn't pass Sii). But I've just been informed that IDAS have discontinued this filter.

If anyone has one to sell, let me know. Or if there is another Sii/Oiii filter perhaps you could suggest one?

Thanks