Poll: autoguiding

[GuLinux]

Hi there!

As I already mentioned somewhere else, I'm working on a new imaging software, (https://github.com/GuLinux/StarQuew in case you want to be an early tester) which is web based, and therefore ideal for lightweight setups (Star Adventurer + Raspberry Pi, for instance).

At the moment there's no autoguiding capability, and I'd like to add that in the future, but this raised a question: how important is considered autoguiding nowadays, and how many astrophotographers actually use it?

Traditionally I've been taught it's quite important, almost indispensable, but nowadays the advent of these lightweight mounts, and more importantly the new CMOS cameras which perform quite well stacking lots of relatively short exposures might render autoguiding less important.

 

What do you think?

 

[JohnSadlerAstro]

Well, the answer to the first is yes.

The second question is a bit more difficult. I'd almost like to go between the options: I'd like to go without, but that would mean lots of £££ burned. And without a permanent obsy, AG saves the day when it comes to not requiring PA to within seconds. 

It isn't indispensable, lets face it you can get good images without AG. But not using autoguiding is like shooting yourself in the foot just before a long walk. You can hop all the way, and youll still get there, but it will be a lot more slow and painful! Its possible to get autoguiding working for the price of a starter scope OTA--definitely worth it imo.

John

[DaveS]

I answered No, and No Thanks, but that's because my DDM60 mount guides on its encoders and both a whole-sky model and a local run-specific model. Guiding errors typically 0.1" over a 2 hour run.

[AngryDonkey]

Apart from focal length, mount and camera used will have a big bearing on answers. In contrast to Dave's DDM mount I have an Avalon Linear which (by design) absolutely needs guiding. I also have a traditional CCD which again needs guiding for the sub length I am after but as you've already mentioned above the newer CMOS cameras are a different kettle of fish.

Given the right setup you can definitely get away without but it really depends on who your target audience is going to be.

[Stub Mandrel]

Guiding is a bit scary, but once you have it working the difference it make is huge. More usable subs, longer subs.

[wimvb]

On 08/06/2018 at 14:14, AngryDonkey said:

newer CMOS cameras are a different kettle of fish.

Given the right setup you can definitely get away without but it really depends on who your target audience is going to be.

wholeheartedly agree. I have one of those "Newer CMOS cameras". I do prefer to guide and go for long exposures. But when guiding fails for whatever reason, I can use short exposures at high gain without it. This means that I don't have to lose an imaging night due to guiding issues.

On 08/06/2018 at 11:56, DaveS said:

I answered No, and No Thanks, but that's because my DDM60 mount guides on its encoders and both a whole-sky model and a local run-specific model. Guiding errors typically 0.1" over a 2 hour run.

A dream ... But with the price for an ASA or 10 Micron, it will probably stay there. Btw, does the sky model correct for drift due to imperfect polar alignment?

[DaveS]

Yes, the sky model corrects for all repeatable errors, and the local model refines that for the specific imaging run. Also, because the encoders resolve 0.02" and update at 100Hz wind gusts can be corrected much faster than an autoguider.

Pity ASA discontinued the "budget" (6500€ ) DDM 60. Now the cheapest is the DDM85 Basic at double that .