Maideneer

My Travelscope 70 on an AZ-GTi mount was 12 pounds...10 seconds to get outdoors.  My new setup is going to be 110 pounds, oh dear...

I haven't really tried it yet because I'm waiting for my new scope pieces to arrive but I'm sitting here wondering if you go beyond the useful magnification guideline of your scope, does that mean you'll start to see 'nothing'?  What exactly will you see once you blow past that line?

I have crazy ideas I like to try, like using a 3x barlow with a 2.3mm EP on a 9.25HD to see a crater on the moon...not saying that'll work of course but these are things I wonder about.

Thanks so much!  Hey, one more thing...if I add a Barlow or ADC to my image train, does that increase the spacing or is that not taken into account?

37 minutes ago, jacko61 said:

I can measure mine in the morning but be aware that the zwo 16.5mm extension is M42 male - M48 female.  I don't think they do an M42 - M42.  This is causing me a headache this weekend trying to figure the 105mm backspacing on my C8 / meade reducer.

Graeme

 

The 16.5mm will be the last piece on the chain. The M42 portion fits to another spacer and the M48 portion will fit to the T-Adapter.

A little birdie told me the measurement was 4mm, hopefully you can confirm!

I have a huge longshot favor to ask someone.  I found a 5mm spacer tube but there is a little twist with it where the female thread is 3.5mm and the corresponding male thread MUST be 3.5mm to match it otherwise it will not screw in fully and the total extension provided will be greater than 5mm.

If there is ANYONE out there with these ZWO 21mm and/or 16.5mm spacer tubes out there, could you possibly measure the male thread portion and tell me if either of those equal 3.5mm in length?  Cannot find any info here on the interwebs.

34 minutes ago, CraigT82 said:

Yes 12.5mm including the flange. You can buy any T2 extension tubes, you don't need to stick to ZWO (unless you really want to)

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/astro-essentials-t2-m42-extension-tube-set-4mm-5mm-6mm-7mm-8mm-9mm.html

Ah, that's sort of what I was getting at.  It's just a piece of metal so I'm not a ZWO adherent in that sense lol...I just didn't know how to search for these things. Cheers sir!

Just received my brand new scope and can't even use it yet!  The forgetful folks at Celestron forgot to pack my counterweight bar in the mount box so I'm waiting for them to send me the piece as I wait in (im)patience.  However, this does allow me the time to make sure I have everything I need for imaging.  Correct back focus distance for this model is 146.05mm and I need some assistance getting to that point, as I will be using my ZWO ASI224MC (non-cooled).

Assuming I pick up the T-Adapter which I don't have yet, that's 91.05mm.  Now then, the focus distance to sensor here is 12.5mm which means I need 42.5mm to reach the goal.

Here is what I can't figure out:
If you look at the attached diagram, is it telling me the 12.5mm distance is including the ring?  If it is, then I am then trying to figure out how best to get the needed 42.5mm through various extenders.  ZWO makes 21 and 16.5mm extenders but I don't believe make a 5mm one.

So assistance from the more experienced folks here is needed from my end. As always, thanks for your help!

14 hours ago, Maideneer said:

Well this is devastating. My CGEM mount came but they forgot to pack the counterweight bar🙁 now what?

I'm contacting Agena Astro today to try and resolve it.  My heart sank as I was building my new rig and came to the point where I realized there was no bar.  I checked each shipping box 6 times, looked in my couch cushions, you name it...it's just not there.  I worry that they just don't have something like that laying around, but maybe I'm wrong.  Hoping for good news, but I'll probably have to wait another week now to start using the thing.

Well this is devastating. My CGEM mount came but they forgot to pack the counterweight bar🙁 now what?

3 minutes ago, John said:

I think that is pretty much the reaction that is had from many that are new to decent aperture telescopes

I hope you really enjoy using it !

I’m going from a Travelscope 70 to this. Holy baloney! Forget the gym membership, this is weightlifting enough!

5 hours ago, Highburymark said:

Fantastic - congratulations. 
Jupiter, Saturn and the Moon are all rising, awaiting your first light….

Just got home and opened everything. I…didn’t expect everything would be THIS big lol👀

Talk about overwhelmed😂

After months and months and months of impatient waiting, checking stock every single day at all outlets, today is finally the day it all arrives.  The Dew Shield and Starsense are at the front door, now just awaiting the rest.

I never imagined when I got into this hobby late last year that it would have taken this long to get a scope, but I guess that's what pandemic supply chains will do to things.  Now then, I don't know if I can swing it, but if I can get home early enough and set it all up, my hope is that it stays clear enough overnight tonight to get some kind of viewing in.

I'm beyond excited.

13 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Please don't be offended (because I've done this once! 🙄). In the Synscan app - settings - location, is the location sensor button switched on and if yes, is the location correct?

 

Always🙂 - all fixed now though, problem solved as discussed above!

8 hours ago, badhex said:

Was just wondering (and might benefit others with the same issue) what the end result was after each installation? Did the upgraded firmware not install correctly (i.e. firmware version still showing the same in the app) , or did it install but not fix the issue? And what was the difference in outcome between the left/right hand versions? Presumably there must have been some difference between the two if the scope was mounted on the same side for both versions? 

During installation, I did encounter error messages which prevented me from completing the install, so I tried again, and again.  It seems to work whenever it wants to work.

When I installed the Alt-AZ version, like I mentioned, the mount was almost disoriented so it though north was south and slewed to the ground during alignment.  I would have had to switch orientation of my scope if I wanted to continue using it.  The opposite was true with the EQ mode installation, the orientation of my scope didn't need to change.

That's the main thing I could understand from both installations - orientations are flipped depending on which on is installed.  Not sure why they would do that really or if someone failed some sort of QC check to make sure of this aspect.

27 minutes ago, Shimrod said:

I was one of those birdies! And this was in a conversation about guiding - with the suggestion that the ASI224 was retained for guiding duties. If you want to do DSO you are still going to need something for guiding, so from my perspective it would make more sense to get an imaging camera with a larger sensor if you can afford it. With a small sensor you will face challenges getting the target on sensor, although you may be planning on using plate solving software to deal with that.

I feel like I talk to so many people I don't remember who said what anymore!  That's what dad brain does to someone I guess.  So I think what I'm going to do here is get my new scope setup, learn the thing first visually and then see what is and isn't possible on the 224 and then make a determination on guiding and imaging cam.

And I have to learn what plate solving is haha and how software can accomplish that.

38 minutes ago, Ags said:

Maybe the update flipped sides. There are two version 3.30s - which one did you download?

Doesn't support EQ mode (left arm):

Does support EQ mode (right arm):

Five times.  I tried re-installing the thing five times.  Twice with the first version you posted here and thrice with the second version you posted. It finally worked as advertised...I don't even know why the heck I tried that many times - probably because I'm stubborn lol.

So yes, it's now back to "normal" but holy moly why was that so difficult?

Oh and thanks, you inspired me to keep trying

23 minutes ago, Ags said:

Is the telescope on the "correct" side of the mount? Try mounting the scope on the opposite side and see if it improves.

lol yep it is.  I already "fixed" that problem months ago.  And then after the update it all of a sudden kept happening again.  I'm gonna let it go for now tbh.  My brand new CGEM 9.25HD is coming on Wednesday (finally), so I think it's time to give the Skywatcher some rest for a while.

Updated firmware yesterday and taking the scope out for a spin tonight.  What's happening now is the exact same frustrating thing that is happening when I first bought the mount.  Trying to do north-level alignment and as soon as I input a couple stars and set it north to begin, the thing thinks I'm pointing south or something and starts slewing towards the ground.  Even tried installing the update again and same thing.  So I guess I'll just manually observe tonight.  Oh also, before the update installed it used to ask me every time I connected if I wanted Alt-Az or EQ mode...that seems to have completely gone away and it automatically connects me to Alt-Az mode?  Not even sure how to change that if I wanted to.

Have to be honest and say that this mount has been very hit or miss with me...it's not that great quite frankly.

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

Camera that you have - ASI224 is one of the best planetary cameras out there.

Planetary imaging is very different to regular imaging as it consists of taking video with very short exposure - like 5-6ms exposures at high gain and then processing that video in special way.

ASI224 has 3.75µm and that means that you want around F/15. You'll need x1.5 barlow with your scope (as it is F/10) for best resolution.

There is actual equation that gives you optimum F/ratio for given pixel size as far as planetary imaging goes.

For long exposure imaging, well, yes, since you are using long FL instrument - you'll probably need to bin your pixels. To answer original question, with 9.25 EdgeHD scope, if money was not issue, I would choose ASI6200 mono with filters. I would not use reducer with this combination.

Can you suggest a 1.5x barlow for this scope model?  Not sure if those are so common as the other ones.

4 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Camera that you have - ASI224 is one of the best planetary cameras out there.

Planetary imaging is very different to regular imaging as it consists of taking video with very short exposure - like 5-6ms exposures at high gain and then processing that video in special way.

ASI224 has 3.75µm and that means that you want around F/15. You'll need x1.5 barlow with your scope (as it is F/10) for best resolution.

There is actual equation that gives you optimum F/ratio for given pixel size as far as planetary imaging goes.

For long exposure imaging, well, yes, since you are using long FL instrument - you'll probably need to bin your pixels. To answer original question, with 9.25 EdgeHD scope, if money was not issue, I would choose ASI6200 mono with filters. I would not use reducer with this combination.

I have a 3x Barlow but more than happy to pick up a 1.5 if that would suit it best.  lol at the ZWO price - it's the same amount the Edge cost haha.  Maybe in future years when I get good at what I am doing!

3 minutes ago, The Lazy Astronomer said:

To help point you in the right direction: the atmosphere will limit the resolution it's possible to obtain with long-exposure DSO imaging. It's generally accepted that the resolution limit for most people is 1"/px (in reality, it's likely to be quite a bit higher, but let's take the best case of 1"/px for now).  To achieve 1"/px with your scope at its native focal length you'd want pixels of ~11um. If you used the 0.7x reducer, then you'd want pixels of ~8um. Smaller pixels than that will just lead to oversampling - that is, you won't be capturing any finer detail (because your resolution is limited by the atmosphere), rather, you'll just be spreading the detail out over more pixels. Also, attempting deep sky imaging as a beginner* with such a long focal length will be PAINFUL.

However, all that sampling nonsense above goes out of the window for very short exposure planetary imaging. You are no longer as limited by the atmosphere as you're using exposures of tens of milliseconds rather than several minutes. A general rule of thumb for a decent sampling rate for planetary is to take your focal ratio and divide by between 5 and 7 - this will give you an ideal pixel size in um. Note that high resolution planetary imaging is usually done at very long focal lengths, so ditch the reducer and go for a 2x or 3x Barlow instead. If you used a 2x Barlow, this would give you an f ratio of 20, divide that by 7, and you'd be looking at wanting pixels of ~2.9um. Note also that cooled cameras are not needed for planetary.

*I assume you're new to this, apologies if not. 

Def new to the explanation you provided lol, cheers!

14 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

This from Astronomy tools, using .63 reducer and binning gets somewhere near a good sampling rate but as above given the FOV of your scope your current camera is fine.

Dave

I have the Edge HD (or will)...does that make a difference over the regular SCT?  Also, I'll be using the .7 reducer

7 minutes ago, AstroMuni said:

Then the FOV of the ASI224mc with your scope should be sufficient. And its brilliant at DSOs as well (esp the types you are looking for). I use the same camera so can vouch for it with DSOs. See the link in my signature of my journey. I dont have a lovely scope like yours but still managed to get decent images. As mentioned above use the FOV calculator and be the judge

13 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

You need something with decent sized pixels to achieve a reasonable image scale, images can be binned although it works better with mono cameras.

I use an Atik 314L that has 6.4um pixels and bin those with 10"SCT.

At the top of this page under resources there is a calculator where you can enter your scope and camera to see what image scale it will give, to see if it's under / over sampled.

Dave

And that's my trouble, when someone says 'decent sized pixels'...I have trouble processing what that means because it's a relative term.  I'll try the calculator, thank you!

5 minutes ago, AstroMuni said:

What are you proposing to use the C9.25 HD for - planets or DSO?

Sorry I always forget that teensie little detail when asking questions!  For now, mainly planets but I really would like to shoot the odd DSO target every now and again and by that I mean nothing complex.  I don't wanna spend 4 days capturing data if you get my drift.  I just eventually want the usuals - M31 (I know my scope will be too much FL), M16, M45 you get the idea.