Lodestar 2 and OAG

[RayD]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

Maybe....I would bet against it though.  Its brand new, and looks ok....pretty simple thing).  Besides, Broken or "wrong" parts are not usually the cause of my troubles (which are at times numerous).  For example, I have sent my SBIG camera back 3 times because the filter wheel jams.  It has always been diagnosed in perfect health (another long and sickening story--hence the ASI 1600).

Rodd

Maybe Rodd, but you're then arguing against your own queries.  

As you well know, providing the distance of the sensors of your imaging camera and your OAG camera are in the same place in relation to the focal point, then they MUST both be in or near focus as this is how it works.  With the Lodestar I can understand the issue as the sensor is 12.5mm back from the barrel, so you may not achieve it unless your turret can protrude inside the chamber as it can on the SX one.  If you have now used a ASI 174, which I and you assume is fully 'compatible' as far as sensor distance goes, then short of an obstruction or other physical issue (presumably you have checked that the Lodestar actually works and can focus by other means) then there aren't that many other things it can be.

Edited March 17, 2018 by RayD

[Rodd]

1 minute ago, RayD said:

Maybe Rodd, but you're then arguing against your own queries.  

As you well know, providing the distance of the sensors of your imaging camera and your OAG camera are in the same place in relation to the focal point, then in MUST both be in or near focus at this is how it works.  With the Lodestar I can understand the issue as the sensor is 12.5mm back from the barrel, so you may not achieve it unless your turret can protrude inside the chamber as it can on the SX one.  If you have now used a ASI 174, which I and you assume is fully 'compatible' as far as sensor distance goes, then short of an obstruction or other physical issue (presumably you have checked that the Lodestar actually works and can focus by other means) then there aren't that many other things it can be.

Nice video by the way.  I have not checked the lodestar by itself.  Not sure how.  You know, I chose commonly available and popular  items to put together and asked repeatedly if they were compatible and the answer was always yes--emphatically yes.  I have not the impetuous to prove my next statement, but I make it with conviction....the Lodestar is used with the ASI 1600 and the ZWO OAG successfully by others (at least 1 that I personally know--the hentleman who answered my question regarding Maxim DL and the lodestar.  Fortunately that problem has been solved).

I am sorry to be arguing against my own....ahhh, I finally understand where the word query comes from...form the word Inquiry (I was looking for another word for question to be clever)...I have family in Australia and my wife and children are citizens and I have always wondered about that...like jumpers for sweaters..etc.  Anyway, I am sorry to be arguing against my own 'queries, but it would be a very bad thing if my vendor had it so wrong.  I am looking into that.

Rodd

[RayD]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

Nice video by the way.  I have not checked the lodestar by itself.  Not sure how.  You know, I chose commonly available and popular  items to put together and asked repeatedly if they were compatible and the answer was always yes--emphatically yes.  I have not the impetuous to prove my next statement, but I make it with conviction....the Lodestar is used with the ASI 1600 and the ZWO OAG successfully by others (at least 1 that I personally know--the hentleman who answered my question regarding Maxim DL and the lodestar.  Fortunately that problem has been solved).

I am sorry to be arguing against my own....ahhh, I finally understand where the word query comes from...form the word Inquiry (I was looking for another word for question to be clever)...I have family in Australia and my wife and children are citizens and I have always wondered about that...like jumpers for sweaters..etc.  Anyway, I am sorry to be arguing against my own 'queries, but it would be a very bad thing if my vendor had it so wrong.  I am looking into that.

Rodd

No problem at all, my statement wasn't meant to be antagonistic, just stating that however unlikely, once all the obvious has been eliminated, what is left must be the answer.

Great if the Lodestar works with the ZWO kit as it is a great camera, I use 2 of them myself.  I just wouldn't surprise me if it needed a bit of encouragement to work.

I'm out of ideas I'm afraid as I have to admit, getting the OAG's I use actually working (I have 3 of them) I found pretty easy.  Getting them to perform well at what they do is another thing entirely of course 

Hope you get it sorted though as it must be more than a little frustrating, but certainly don't think that because it's new it can't be broke.  Especially if it has had a journey from China to endure.

Edited March 17, 2018 by RayD

[Rodd]

1 minute ago, RayD said:

No problem at all, my statement wasn't meant to be antagonistic, just stating that however unlikely, once all the obvious has been eliminated, what is left must be the answer.

Great if the Lodestar works with the ZWO kit as it is a great camera, I use 2 of them myself.  I just wouldn't surprise me if it needed a bit of encouragement to work.

I'm out of ideas I'm afraid as I have to admit, getting the OAG's I use actually working (I have 3 of them) I found pretty easy.  Getting them to perform well at what they do is another thing entirely of course 

Hope you get it sorted though as it must be more than a little frustrating, but certainly don't think that because it's new it can't be broke.  Especially if it has had a journey from Chine to endure.

I am tempted to send it all back (Tak FSQ 106, Camera, OAG, Lodestar, .6x reducer).  It was part of a package.  Since I can't use the .6x reducer with my other camera--why keep any of it?  I wanted F3--I already have F4.3 and 5 so no need for the F5.  Thanks for your help.

Rodd

[RayD]

8 minutes ago, Rodd said:

I am tempted to send it all back (Tak FSQ 106, Camera, OAG, Lodestar, .6x reducer).  It was part of a package.  Since I can't use the .6x reducer with my other camera--why keep any of it?  I wanted F3--I already have F4.3 and 5 so no need for the F5.  Thanks for your help.

Rodd

I don't think you would need to do that, it's all good kit.  I just think the Lodestar was designed to work primarily with SX cameras, which typically have 17.5mm back focus.  The ZWO has 6.5mm, so there will be a bit of fiddling to do to get them to work together.  This of course is even more difficult with a reducer as the focal point behind the reducer is fixed which it would not normally be on the FSQ 106 if using it without it.  

I would give it a go without the reducer as this will give you more leeway given that you have no fixed point other than when it is in focus and see how you get on with that.  But to start you will need to work out a way to to get the Lodestar sensor as close as you can to the prism, as the camera sensor is pretty close, and the pair need to match.

Edited March 17, 2018 by RayD

[Rodd]

6 minutes ago, RayD said:

I don't think you would need to do that, it's all good kit.  I just think the Lodestar was designed to work primarily with SX cameras, which typically have 17.5mm back focus.  The ZWO has 6.5mm, so there will be a bit of fiddling to do to get them to work together.  This of course is even more difficult with a reducer as the focal point behind the reducer is fixed which it would not normally be on the FSQ 106 if using it without it.  

I would give it a go without the reducer as this will give you more leeway given that you have no fixed point other than when it is in focus and see how you get on with that.  But to start you will need to work out a way to to get the Lodestar sensor as close as you can to the prism, as the camera sensor is pretty close, and the pair need to match.

The whole reason I bought all this stuff was to image at F3 (I am tired of 20 hour images taking months to finish due to clouds).  It sound like my best option is to return the loadstar and get an ASI 120--its cheaper and it WILL WORK   no?

[RayD]

9 minutes ago, Rodd said:

The whole reason I bought all this stuff was to image at F3 (I am tired of 20 hour images taking months to finish due to clouds).  It sound like my best option is to return the loadstar and get an ASI 120--its cheaper and it WILL WORK   no?

Well, I would say the ASI 120MM will definitely work, assuming there isn't an issue with the OAG of course, and I have/do use one and it works great.  However, I didn't mean to ditch the FR completely, I meant just to see if you can get the Lodestar working in conjunction with the ASI 1600, then put it on.

The problem as I see it with trying to set this up with the FR on, is that you need to get the distance from the FR to the ASI and the Lodestar spot on before you can start to focus.  By ditching it for now, you can get the 2 aligned just by having both in focus, and then put you FR on and set the distance just to the ASI sensor as the Lodestar will just follow suit.

If you have a ASI 120MM the first part may be easier, but if as you say others have used the Lodestar with the ASI 1600 and the ZWO OAG, then it must be achievable, but perhaps just needs a little more fettling and thinking?

I really do hope you get it sorted Rodd as all that kit is great stuff, so once resolved I'm sure we'll see more of your great images taken with it.

Edited March 17, 2018 by RayD

[Rodd]

2 minutes ago, RayD said:

Well, I would say the ASI 120MM will definitely work, assuming there isn't an issue with the OAG of course, and I have/do use one and it works great.  However, I didn't mean to ditch the FR completely, I meant just to see if you can get the Lodestar working in conjunction with the ASI 1600, then put it on.

The problem as I see it with trying to set this up with the FR on, is that you need to get the distance from the FR to the ASI and the Lodestar spot on before you can start to focus.  By ditching it for now, you can get the 2 aligned just by having both in focus, and then put you FR on and set the distance just to the ASI sensor as the Lodestar will just follow suit.

If you have a ASI 120MM the first part may be easier, but if as you say others have used the Lodestar with the ASI 1600 and the ZWO OAG, then it must be achievable, but perhaps just needs a little more fettling and thinking?

I really do hope you get it sorted Rodd as all that kit is great stuff, so once resolved I'm sure we'll see more of your great images taken with it.

Thanks for the input.  I will look into the flatner (its one or the other with the TOA 130).  But the connections to the asi 1600 are different.  I will see if I can do that now, or need to get a different connector.  The problem is hard because the only reason I want the FSQ is for F imaging and the only way that can be done is with a separate guide scope or an OAG.  I don't want a separate guide scope because I want to use the camera with the C11 Edge as well and don't want the flexure.  The ASI 1600 is affordable--the 16200 would be sweet, but lets be real.  

[Freddie]

Is the prism in the correct way? ie not back to front

[Uplooker]

Rodd,

Have you read this thread, may help:-

 

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, Freddie said:

Is the prism in the correct way? ie not back to front

Yes--I tried it both ways anyway.

Rodd

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, Uplooker said:

Rodd,

Have you read this thread, may help:-

 

Interesting--different cameras though.  I would have to know what size spacers to get, which would mean I need to contact the people who I buy this stuff from and tell them what they should be telling me.  I don't trust myself to do that......I thought that was the reason I use reputable dealers.  To give me this setup and indicate it should work out of the box now seems irresponsible.  I told them the scope, camera, etc I use (I bought everything from them anyway) and said--what camera, OAG, FW etc should I get.  This is the result.

Rodd

[RayD]

34 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Interesting--different cameras though.  I would have to know what size spacers to get, which would mean I need to contact the people who I buy this stuff from and tell them what they should be telling me.  I don't trust myself to do that......I thought that was the reason I use reputable dealers.  To give me this setup and indicate it should work out of the box now seems irresponsible.  I told them the scope, camera, etc I use (I bought everything from them anyway) and said--what camera, OAG, FW etc should I get.  This is the result.

Rodd

That's a good thread actually as it shows how close the guide camera needs to be to the OAG.  It may work but I think you need to measure or work out how far the ASI sensor is from the centre of the prism, and see if you can get the Lodestar sensor exactly the same distance away.  I think it will hard, but if others have done it, then it must be doable.

The Lodestar is C mount, and it looks like the ZWO OAG (I've not seen one in person but that's what it looks like on the images) is T2, which means you will need some sort of adaptor, and even then it will only be able to go down as far at the top plate of the OAG.  The Lodestar sensor is then 12.5mm back from that point, so it should be pretty easy to work out with a set of vernier gauges to see if it will fit.  I can't see your supplier giving you duff information, so it must be something we're missing or something wrong with the OAG/prism.

 

[RayD]

Give me half hour and I'll try to find out some dimensions from factory drawings and should be able to tell you whether it will be possible to get it to work.  Do you know the type of FF you have, or better still what the recommended spacing is for your FR?

[Rodd]

9 minutes ago, RayD said:

Give me half hour and I'll try to find out some dimensions from factory drawings and should be able to tell you whether it will be possible to get it to work.  Do you know the type of FF you have, or better still what the recommended spacing is for your FR?

No--but I use the Takahashi .7x reducer on the TOA 130.  Its the big one not the smaller ones.  The TAK charts are very confusing.  The smaller FR uses vari rings to alter the reduction power.  the big (and much more expensive naturally) .7x reducer has a fixed reduction.  But that is what the vendor did when I told him what I wanted.  he went through all the backfocus requirements for both cameras and we had a couple precision parts made, and a special TAK connector.  It sure seemed like he knew what he was talking about.

[RayD]

Ok there's a thread on CN here which may help.  The GPCAM 2 has the same 12.5mm back focus and is the same dimensions as the Lodestar, so this my well be applicable to you, in that you will probably need to add spacers between the OAG and the camera, otherwise you won't be able to get the OAG camera sensor in enough.  Otherwise I think you are looking at the 120MM as a guide camera.

[Rodd]

Just now, RayD said:

Ok there's a thread on CN here which may help.  The GPCAM 2 has the same 12.5mm back focus and is the same dimensions as the Lodestar, so this my well be applicable to you, in that you will probably need to add spacers between the OAG and the camera, otherwise you won't be able to get the OAG camera sensor in enough.  Otherwise I think you are looking at the 120MM as a guide camera.

But that means the calculations he made to determine the type of connections to the focal reducer were wrong and I need to change them.  Since I am not using an extension tube at all--I am connected directly to the reducer, I don't think adding distance between the OAG and camera will work, because it will pusg the imaging sensor farther from the reducer as the OAG is between the filter wheel and reducer.   Unless it works the other way and I will need an extension tube between the OAG and reducer--but that seems wrong.

[RayD]

20 minutes ago, Rodd said:

But that means the calculations he made to determine the type of connections to the focal reducer were wrong and I need to change them.  Since I am not using an extension tube at all--I am connected directly to the reducer, I don't think adding distance between the OAG and camera will work, because it will pusg the imaging sensor farther from the reducer as the OAG is between the filter wheel and reducer.   Unless it works the other way and I will need an extension tube between the OAG and reducer--but that seems wrong.

Hmmmm.  What spacers/adaptors has he given you?  I wonder if he has planned for it to be fitted as the CN thread, as I can't see how it can work with this combination otherwise as the 12.5mm needed by the Lodestar just makes things all very challenging.

[Rodd]

2 minutes ago, RayD said:

Hmmmm.  What spacers/adaptors has he given you?  I wonder if he has planned for it to be fitted as the CN thread, as I can't see how it can work with this combination otherwise as the 12.5mm needed by the Lodestar just makes things all very challenging.

There were 3 parts that he sent me to connect the OAG to reducer.  They are quite small--only about an inch for all 3.  The last one is a TAK made part that threads onto the reducer.One threads onto the OAG, the other connects the TAK part to the one that threads onto the OAG.

Maybe I should just use a guidescope and forget about using the 1600 with the C11Edge.  I'd have to bin it anyway.  My camera with 5.4um pixels works well on the C11Edge.  that would make things much easier for my refractors

[RayD]

This thread may also help Rodd, it has some critical dimensions to help work out how much spacing will be needed.

[Rodd]

12 minutes ago, RayD said:

This thread may also help Rodd, it has some critical dimensions to help work out how much spacing will be needed.

It looks right--I tried with a 16mm and a 21mm spacer between the OAG and filter wheel.  No go.  They say in the thread that the only reason he used it was to orient the 2 chips in a known way--which I found to be true--without a spacer the shoulder of the loadstar receptacle impinges on the edge of the filter wheel.  I got it fairly close--but no matter what spacers I used or what position I had the main focuser or the prism arm, nothing worked (with either the ASI 174 or the Lodestar).  I am really thinking about a guide scope at this point.  I am  missing 5 consecutive nights of clear sky during a new moon.  I am about to burst.

[RayD]

5 minutes ago, Rodd said:

It looks right--I tried with a 16mm and a 21mm spacer between the OAG and filter wheel.  No go.  They say in the thread that the only reason he used it was to orient the 2 chips in a known way--which I found to be true--without a spacer the shoulder of the loadstar receptacle impinges on the edge of the filter wheel.  I got it fairly close--but no matter what spacers I used or what position I had the main focuser or the prism arm, nothing worked (with either the ASI 174 or the Lodestar).  I am really thinking about a guide scope at this point.  I am  missing 5 consecutive nights of clear sky during a new moon.  I am about to burst.

Ah, sorry I can't be of any more help Rodd.  It just seems the spacing isn't going to let you get the guide camera close enough.  I use a guide scope on my Esprit 100 for this exact reason, as the space needed for the SW FF (55mm) means I can't fit a OAG in with my 16200.  I use OAG on the FSQ 106 as I don't use a FR so the spacing isn't an issue.

OAG's eh, who'd have 'em!!!!

[Rodd]

1 minute ago, RayD said:

Ah, sorry I can't be of any more help Rodd.  It just seems the spacing isn't going to let you get the guide camera close enough.  I use a guide scope on my Esprit 100 for this exact reason, as the space needed for the SW FF (55mm) means I can't fit a OAG in with my 16200.  I use OAG on the FSQ 106 as I don't use a FR so the spacing isn't an issue.

OAG's eh, who'd have 'em!!!!

Will I be able to guide as well with a guide scope?  I will be shooting at focal lengths between 318 and 700mm.  If I take the reducer off the TOA 130 I will shoot at 1,000mm.  But I like the reducer as it increases FOV and keeps exposures shorter--and with the 1600s small pixels it yields an image scale the same as the unreduced scope and the STT-8300.  So I don't need 1,000mm

[RayD]

11 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Will I be able to guide as well with a guide scope?  I will be shooting at focal lengths between 318 and 700mm.  If I take the reducer off the TOA 130 I will shoot at 1,000mm.  But I like the reducer as it increases FOV and keeps exposures shorter--and with the 1600s small pixels it yields an image scale the same as the unreduced scope and the STT-8300.  So I don't need 1,000mm

Absolutely.  There are many expert imagers, including @ollypenrice who image superbly at longer focal lengths without OAG.  I certainly can't see 1000mm being a huge issue.  I would think it is only when you get to pretty long focal lengths (1300 - 1500mm+) that you really need to look at the possibility of going down the OAG route. 

You have one of the best guide cameras out there, so coupled to a decent FL scope this should work great.

Edited March 17, 2018 by RayD

[Rodd]

17 minutes ago, RayD said:

Absolutely.  There are many expert imagers, including @ollypenrice who image superbly at longer focal lengths without OAG.  I certainly can't see 1000mm being a huge issue.  I would think it is only when you get to pretty long focal lengths (1300 - 1500mm+) that you really need to look at the possibility of going down the OAG route. 

You have one of the best guide cameras out there, so coupled to a decent FL scope this should work great.

Will using the lodestar 2 with a scope be easy?  Or will there be compatibility issues.  Maybe a camera scope combo would be better--like the vario guider from Gaacder--or something similar--comes all set up