New mount suggestions

[Jkulin]

11 minutes ago, cotak said:

What sort of guiding  values did you get with that beast?

Our pooch or the scope??

About 0.4-0.5RMS error as a total of both axis.

Now upgraded to the 120EC

[souls33k3r]

Anyone tried the polar alignment routine on these CEM60's and see how accurate they are? 

[Starflyer]

On 29/04/2019 at 12:21, david_taurus83 said:

I'm going to fly the Skywatcher flag here! My AZEQ6 recent guiding averages over a session have been in the 0.5" mark with peaks around 1.35". That's with a tripod setup and Sharpcap polar align each time. During the session I have seen guiding go into the high 0.3" bracket.

 

No doubt the iOptron is the better more consistent mount but it's quite the price difference for that extra 0.2"/0.3" benefit. If your using long focal lengths then maybe..

 

@souls33k3r Could you not belt mod your current mount if it's already a good one?

I really like my AZ EQ6, it does reasonably well at 1200mm FL, but I want more and I'm one of the people contemplating a CEM60 as a replacement.

This is about the best it does, at lower altitudes it's up at 0.7" ish. This is with it pier mounted and I'm pretty certain the CEM60 would take that to 0.4" or better at lower altitudes.

 

[Hicks]

9 hours ago, souls33k3r said:

Anyone tried the polar alignment routine on these CEM60's and see how accurate they are? 

I was wondering this too.

Although I'm thinking I'd want to run a few more cables and that'd prob mean taking out the polar scope to run them through there. So if I did get this mount, it'd either be the iterative align or I'd make use of phd2's or ekos's polar align routines, failing that darv or the old faithful drift align.

Would like to know how close the polar scope can get you though. Since it seems to be a quick setup.

[pete_l]

8 hours ago, Starflyer said:

This is about the best it does, at lower altitudes it's up at 0.7" ish. This is with it pier mounted and I'm pretty certain the CEM60 would take that to 0.4" or better at lower altitudes.

Is your sky steady enough, often enough, for your imaging to actually attain the theoretical tracking accuracy that either of these mounts say they can give?

[souls33k3r]

12 hours ago, Hicks said:

I was wondering this too.

Although I'm thinking I'd want to run a few more cables and that'd prob mean taking out the polar scope to run them through there. So if I did get this mount, it'd either be the iterative align or I'd make use of phd2's or ekos's polar align routines, failing that darv or the old faithful drift align.

Would like to know how close the polar scope can get you though. Since it seems to be a quick setup.

I've spoken to someone about this and they said that it's all software based and brings you very close. I'm not sure how it does it but i'm thinking that maybe it does it with platesolving technique. I could be very wrong here but would love to hear from the horses mouth. 

[RolandKol]

1 hour ago, souls33k3r said:

I've spoken to someone about this and they said that it's all software based and brings you very close. I'm not sure how it does it but i'm thinking that maybe it does it with platesolving technique. I could be very wrong here but would love to hear from the horses mouth. 

With SharpCapr PA as initial, following with PHD2  Drift you can get perfect PA without a Polar Scope.
ScharpCap use PlateSolving, but I find it a bit unreliable in my Bright Skies, so I use it just as initial step.

P.S. never used Polar Scope so far.... And PHD2 Guiding Assistant always shows a very small PA error, less than 1 or even less than 0.5 sometimes. I am sure the same routine will work on CEM

Edited May 1, 2019 by RolandKol

[souls33k3r]

11 minutes ago, RolandKol said:

With SharpCapr PA as initial, following with PHD2  Drift you can get perfect PA without a Polar Scope.
ScharpCap use PlateSolving, but I find it a bit unreliable in my Bright Skies, so I use it just as initial step.

P.S. never used Polar Scope so far.... And PHD2 Guiding Assistant always shows a very PA small error, less than 1 or even less than 0.5 sometimes. I am sure the same routine will work on CEM

Sounds very similar mate. I'd be interested in knowing it from anyone who owns an iOptron which has this feature on how good it works. 

[Starflyer]

14 hours ago, pete_l said:

Is your sky steady enough, often enough, for your imaging to actually attain the theoretical tracking accuracy that either of these mounts say they can give?

Theoretically not.

I image at 0.79"/px most of the time.  I know my RA guiding is not as tight as my DEC guiding and because of this I get noticeable, (to me anyway) oval stars with a guide RMS of 0.4 or more.

[Hicks]

2 hours ago, souls33k3r said:

Sounds very similar mate. I'd be interested in knowing it from anyone who owns an iOptron which has this feature on how good it works. 

Are you on about the polar scope where you eyeball Polaris through it? Or are you asking about the handset based mode which you can use when you don't have a view of Polaris and you can use "Polar iterate align" ?

I'd be interested in knowing how close people get with the eyeball method and how much closer iterative gets you vs the time both take.

[cotak]

The iOptron version of the Celestron polar routine is in honestly crap. I used it for a bit and it gave different value each time you try it in the final polar alignment error. And in the end I just stopped using it and got myself a polemaster and moved myself further into the yard where I can see polaris.

The new ipolar appears to support alignment without sign of polaris. So you can look into that if you want to align but can't see polaris. That or the drift solution works too.

[Davey-T]

It can't be that difficult to implement something like the 10Micron method, no view of Polaris needed, 3 star align then pick a star from drop down list and GoTo , get crosshairs on screen and centre it using the alt / az adjustment bolts, redo 3 star alignment and check reported polar error usually a few arc secs, another go for the OCD can get it down to reported 0 error.

If you're really bored and you have means to adjust it you can do the same for orthogonal error.

Dave

Edited May 1, 2019 by Davey-T

[souls33k3r]

3 hours ago, Hicks said:

Are you on about the polar scope where you eyeball Polaris through it? Or are you asking about the handset based mode which you can use when you don't have a view of Polaris and you can use "Polar iterate align" ?

I'd be interested in knowing how close people get with the eyeball method and how much closer iterative gets you vs the time both take.

Sorry not the polar scope but the handset/software mode one. iOptron sort of talk about it like it's the next best thing. 

1 hour ago, cotak said:

The iOptron version of the Celestron polar routine is in honestly crap. I used it for a bit and it gave different value each time you try it in the final polar alignment error. And in the end I just stopped using it and got myself a polemaster and moved myself further into the yard where I can see polaris.

The new ipolar appears to support alignment without sign of polaris. So you can look into that if you want to align but can't see polaris. That or the drift solution works too.

Yeah i've got the polemaster but was interested in seeing how good it was. The iPolar looks great but having the Polemaster already doesn't make sense. Not sure if i should put the Polemaster up for sale and buy the iPolar instead. But i have to see how accurate that thing is before i do that. Also does the iPolar work for other mounts? I'll find out.

43 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

It can't be that difficult to implement something like the 10Micron method, no view of Polaris needed, 3 star align then pick a star from drop down list and GoTo , get crosshairs on screen and centre it using the alt / az adjustment bolts, redo 3 star alignment and check reported polar error usually a few arc secs, another go for the OCD can get it down to reported 0 error.

If you're really bored and you have means to adjust it you can do the same for orthogonal error.

Dave

That seems like a neat trick but i did wonder if the iOptron software version of it was any better. From what i heard from AA, they said it's pretty darn accurate.

[BillyBoy]

On 29/04/2019 at 14:51, FLO said:

Not where FLO is concerned ? 

FLO sources iOptron direct from iOptron. It leaves the iOptron factory, is put on a ship (or plane if we are in a hurry) and is sent direct to our warehouse here in the UK. No distributor. 

FLO is entirely responsible for her iOptron stock, sales and support. There is no connection between FLO and Altair Astro. 

Sorry if I sound pedantic but details like this matter, at least to us. 

HTH, 

Steve 

Hello Steve,

i have not read the whole thread, so forgive me if it’s been said already, but I have been told that the CEM60 are out of stock by another dealer as they are awaiting parts to build more, i was going to put one on back order, so am I correct in thinking that you don’t have any stock of theses either....?

sorry to take off topic slightly ..

[FLO]

22 minutes ago, BillyBoy said:

Hello Steve,

i have not read the whole thread, so forgive me if it’s been said already, but I have been told that the CEM60 are out of stock by another dealer as they are awaiting parts to build more, i was going to put one on back order, so am I correct in thinking that you don’t have any stock of theses either....?

Unfortunately we don't ?

Because so many people are waiting we started a discussion thread here.

This post specifically addresses the CEM60 shortage. 

We are keeping people updated via that discussion so if you Follow it you will receive news and updates as soon as we do. Promise. 

HTH, 

Steve 

[souls33k3r]

6 minutes ago, FLO said:

Unfortunately we don't ?

Because so many people are waiting we started a discussion thread here.

We are keeping people updated via that thread so if you Follow it you will receive news and updates as soon as we do. 

HTH, 

Steve 

Now following the thread Steve. Cheers for the link. We've already exchanged emails about this mount so will keep an eye out for your email and the thread

My only grip with (not only iOptron) the new mounts is that they're not implementing USB 3.0. Yes some devices still run a USB 2.0 but at least 3.0 is backward compatible. Not sure when will these manufactures realise that things have moved so much from USB 2.0 days.

[Jkulin]

Quick question Ahmed, why do you need USB3.0 when USB2.0 work absolutely perfectly?

[Hicks]

2 hours ago, souls33k3r said:

Now following the thread Steve. Cheers for the link. We've already exchanged emails about this mount so will keep an eye out for your email and the thread

My only grip with (not only iOptron) the new mounts is that they're not implementing USB 3.0. Yes some devices still run a USB 2.0 but at least 3.0 is backward compatible. Not sure when will these manufactures realise that things have moved so much from USB 2.0 days.

I wonder if they've considered designing and selling a new top panel (and input panel depending on where the hub is) to provide a 3.0 and powered hub. It'd save bringing out a whole new model of mounts and provide options for all those who already own the CEM60 to get powered USB allowing them to drop their usage of an external hub and cable run.

[cotak]

20 minutes ago, Hicks said:

I wonder if they've considered designing and selling a new top panel (and input panel depending on where the hub is) to provide a 3.0 and powered hub. It'd save bringing out a whole new model of mounts and provide options for all those who already own the CEM60 to get powered USB allowing them to drop their usage of an external hub and cable run.

Their user's manual says you can remove the polar scope and run your own cables up to the panel and solder new connectors. It seems a bit vague what that means but just running cables up to the dovetail and the out through the gap when using losmandy plates has been done by a number of people.

[Hicks]

53 minutes ago, cotak said:

Their user's manual says you can remove the polar scope and run your own cables up to the panel and solder new connectors. It seems a bit vague what that means but just running cables up to the dovetail and the out through the gap when using losmandy plates has been done by a number of people.

Yes, I was thinking of doing that as I need a few more connections than are exposed. I was thinking more though of a replacement front panel and input panel that means you'd now have USB3.0 exposed rather than USB2 and a powered hub rather than unpowered.

It seems a waste that some people are not using the usb ports as they're unpowered, an upgrade kit would resolve. I'd have to have a look at how it's all hooked up but I'd be tempted to make my own replacement.

[souls33k3r]

14 hours ago, Jkulin said:

Quick question Ahmed, why do you need USB3.0 when USB2.0 work absolutely perfectly?

There's nothing wrong with USB 2.0. ASI1600 (and many other main imaging cameras these days) has a USB 3 connection and also the newer planetary cameras for faster download rates of the files to the machine.

Edited May 2, 2019 by souls33k3r

[Jkulin]

Ok, so you intend on using the built in mount? If so I can understand, but with both my IOptrons I don't touch the built in hubs as I use the Pegasus UPB which I believe you use as well.

[RolandKol]

Thats sad, but actually even Paramount Mounts are on USB2!!!!!
all are stuck in the XX century....

I hope, someday we will have mounts with internal OS, with personal Wifi Field, SSD card slots and proper up to date connectors

 

Edited May 2, 2019 by RolandKol

[souls33k3r]

5 minutes ago, Jkulin said:

Ok, so you intend on using the built in mount? If so I can understand, but with both my IOptrons I don't touch the built in hubs as I use the Pegasus UPB which I believe you use as well.

I would've ditched the Pegasus UPB USB hub for the built in USB 3.0 if i had the choice but since it doesn't then i'll be keeping Pegasus but would be good to see if the built in hub in the mount and whatever else ports it's got has got any uses. 

[souls33k3r]

17 minutes ago, RolandKol said:

Thats sad, bad actually even Paramount Mounts are on USB2!!!!!
all are stuck in the XX century....

I hope, someday we will have mounts with internal OS, with personal Wifi Field, SSD card slots and proper up to date connectors

 

Yeah when hair grows on my teeth