Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

Recommended Posts

Hi to everyone, I used to do some astrophotography in the past with a Celestron AVX and DSLR but after few month had to give up for several reasons, including light pollution (I'm living in zone 3 east London), and also working shifts. Now I want to start again, and this time more serious. I've been searching around for a couple of months to choose all the gear and I'm quite happy with the list so far although it's a bit over the price I planned at first.

 I will get an William optics Z73 with his 50mm guide scope, a flattener/reducer 0.8, light pollution filter IDAS D2 and as camera I will use a Canon 600D modded and I will buy a ZWO 183MC Pro, after so much research, I'm very happy with the scale and framing I will get with this combo, but I'm starting to get confused with the mount.

My first idea was to go for an HEQ5 Pro, as my previous experience with the AVX has been awful, then I realized that the FLO, sells that mount with belt modification and also some cleaning and tuning if required, I heard that it's a big improvement over the stock one and the price it's ok, but another important factor for me it's portability. Unfortunately, my garden doesn't allow me to do much so I will need to carry around on trolley, for a km walk, I'm a strong person and been doing plenty of time with the AVX, so my confusion came recently when the iOptron mounts entered my radar. I start comparing the heq5 pro with belt, with the iOptron cem25EC and the CEM40 without encoders, and I'm so unsure of which to buy, the cem25 seem to be the equivalent of heq5 at least speaking of payload, but in some threads I read people saying it's a bit fragile so kind of remove it from the equation although the weight it's interesting for my situation, then the cem40, seem to be quite similar on weight to the heq5 but with higher payload and that's interesting too as I will buy a C11 at some point.

Now it will all come down to the accuracy of tracking I guess, how the heq5 and cem40 would compare on tracking and guiding? If the cem40 it's better, I would probably go with that since it holds more and would last longer as I don't plan to get anything bigger than a C11, but if the skywatcher it's better, I could decide to go for that, and when I move to a place with better garden then get a second mount with higher payload.

Apologise for the long post and my english.

Kind Regards,

Giovanni. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giovanni,

Sorry can't really help much with the question about the mount, I have a HEq5 Pro and am very happy with it but I have no experience with the IOptron mounts. However, am following the thread to see what advice you get as I am looking at an upgrade and had always looked at upgrading to a EQ6 Pro but now wondering id one of the iOptrons would be better. One thing that really improved my 2nd hand HEQ5 was the Rowan belt mod which I did myself. I also replaced all the bearings but to be honest the original ones were fine. So I if you go for the HEQ5 I would definitely get it with the mod. Not much more expensive than doing it yourself.

And no reason to apologize about the  post or the English (the English is perfect) 🙂

Steve

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no experience with the HEQ5, but I do have the iOptron CEM40EC and 2" tripod. I know it's not the same as the non-EC version and there will be variations in the tracking abilities between the two, but it's a very solidly built mount in general. It offers a lot of capability in a small package. I'm currently just running a WO RedCat and an ASI183MM with filter wheel, but I'm looking at expanding to something bigger like an RC. The mount can handle quite a bit of weight for how little it weighs. Benefit of the center balanced mounts. The inclusion of the polar finder scope makes polar alignment a piece of cake and it's extremely accurate. In the end, that polar alignment accuracy is going to help with reducing the tracking error. You could easily get that with a Polemaster or another polar alignment scope though, so it's nothing special to an iOptron. It does mean that you require a laptop to do your polar alignment using the polar scope though. Since I do all my AP with a laptop anyway, it's not a problem as I always have it with me. If I were just doing visual though, I could do a rough alignment and probably be satisfied.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Giovanni,

Sorry can't really help much with the question about the mount, I have a HEq5 Pro and am very happy with it but I have no experience with the IOptron mounts. However, am following the thread to see what advice you get as I am looking at an upgrade and had always looked at upgrading to a EQ6 Pro but now wondering id one of the iOptrons would be better. One thing that really improved my 2nd hand HEQ5 was the Rowan belt mod which I did myself. I also replaced all the bearings but to be honest the original ones were fine. So I if you go for the HEQ5 I would definitely get it with the mod. Not much more expensive than doing it yourself.

And no reason to apologize about the  post or the English (the English is perfect) 🙂

Steve

Hi Steve,

I see that you have quite a few gear similar or the same as the one I will get, the WO Z73 and the canon 600D and of course the mount as you mentioned. What type of guiding error do you get on average when guiding with that combo? And how long you have to go before seeing elongated stars? Did you ever reach that point? I know that it depends on seeing and polar alignment, but it can start giving me an idea.

Giovanni.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In higher light pollution environments there's no advantage in long exposures as multiple shorter exposures produce the same results (in signal/noise), potentially allowing a lower spec mount to be used.

With the scope/camera you mention in a high light pollution environment, there may be no advantage in exposures longer than, for example, 30 seconds.  On the limit perhaps for a Star Adventurer but an HEQ5 could be overkill if you are looking for a portable mount.

Guiding is typically not necessary for short exposure times, helping to simplify the setup.

The IDAS D2 filter will help to some degree, though I don't know how much. Perhaps someone else has experience of this.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bobro said:

In higher light pollution environments there's no advantage in long exposures as multiple shorter exposures produce the same results (in signal/noise), potentially allowing a lower spec mount to be used.

With the scope/camera you mention in a high light pollution environment, there may be no advantage in exposures longer than, for example, 30 seconds.  On the limit perhaps for a Star Adventurer but an HEQ5 could be overkill if you are looking for a portable mount.

Guiding is typically not necessary for short exposure times, helping to simplify the setup.

The IDAS D2 filter will help to some degree, though I don't know how much. Perhaps someone else has experience of this.

Thanks for the input, I saw with my eyes the D2 in action here in my area and of course it's not perfect or a good option to dark sky but he was shooting at iso 1600 120s while me without filter and same aperture, iso 800 60s, that's actually 2 stop and gives me feeling that I could shoot 3 or 4 minutes with a low gain quite easily.

I've seen a talk from Robin Glover from Sharpcap, and he explained that shorter or longer subs with the same total acquisition, will give you same results but still, I prefer not to go too short as I don't want to end up with dozen of hard drive, I'm a fashion photographer and it's already hard to manage space, depending on the object, I would rather stay between 2 as very  minimum and 3 or 4m as average, and in January I will go for an ZWO1600 and narrowband. I'm not trying do it long just for the sake of doing it, I'm more interested on finding a balance between managing space and problem of too long exposures such as oversaturation or tracking. As for the weight that's ok for me, I can manage that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GiovanniF said:

I see that you have quite a few gear similar or the same as the one I will get, the WO Z73 and the canon 600D and of course the mount as you mentioned. What type of guiding error do you get on average when guiding with that combo? And how long you have to go before seeing elongated stars? Did you ever reach that point? I know that it depends on seeing and polar alignment, but it can start giving me an idea.

Hi, Yes I noticed the similarity in equipment as well. Regarding the guiding I have had lots of issues with guiding BUT ALL DOWN TO ME NOT THE EQUIPMENT.

I am pretty new to Astronomy and even newer to AP so still learning, hence my issues with guiding. I just had issues with setting PHD2 up properly. So really most of my images up till now were unguided and so long as I was polar aligned well had exposures of 3 mins without too much noticeable elongation (although I am sure some of the guys on SGL that take these fantastic images would have noticed and not been happy with them themselves). Just recently I took what I consider to be my first real image I was happy to let others view (still a long way to go but I personally was happy that I was progressing and learning). This was also my first NB image with Badder Ultra Narrow Band filters so exposures really needed to be longer anyway. I still have not set up PHD fully but did the minimum needed in that I took Darks, set all figures correctly in PHD2 and then let it calibrate itself. So no fine tuning or running Guiding Assistant to get it better. And I then took 400 sec subs with Ha, OIII and SII, so over 6 mins and I do not think there is too much distortion of the stars. I am confident if I tune PHD2 in with guiding assistant I should be easily able to achieve 10 min subs, maybe longer. I do not have a graph to hand what I did achieve and as I am going away with work probably will not get another chance to image nti the SGL star party in November (clouds permitting of course). 

large.1816717491_Image02swithSignature.jpg.81986933c126063c9045d2dc19cabd1a.jpg 

Edited by teoria_del_big_bang
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Hi, Yes I noticed the similarity in equipment as well. Regarding the guiding I have had lots of issues with guiding BUT ALL DOWN TO ME NOT THE EQUIPMENT.

I am pretty new to Astronomy and even newer to AP so still learning, hence my issues with guiding. I just had issues with setting PHD2 up properly. So really most of my images up till now were unguided and so long as I was polar aligned well had exposures of 3 mins without too much noticeable elongation (although I am sure some of the guys on SGL that take these fantastic images would have noticed and not been happy with them themselves). Just recently I took what I consider to be my first real image I was happy to let others view (still a long way to go but I personally was happy that I was progressing and learning). This was also my first NB image with Badder Ultra Narrow Band filters so exposures really needed to be longer anyway. I still have not set up PHD fully but did the minimum needed in that I took Darks, set all figures correctly in PHD2 and then let it calibrate itself. So no fine tuning or running Guiding Assistant to get it better. And I then took 400 sec subs with Ha, OIII and SII, so over 6 mins and I do not think there is too much distortion of the stars. I am confident if I tune PHD2 in with guiding assistant I should be easily able to achieve 10 min subs, maybe longer. I do not have a graph to hand what I did achieve and as I am going away with work probably will not get another chance to image nti the SGL star party in November (clouds permitting of course). 

large.1816717491_Image02swithSignature.jpg.81986933c126063c9045d2dc19cabd1a.jpg 

Thank you very much Steve,

That, actually answer my question, and very nice photo. That's more than enough for me, and the cem40 would have been a bit of a stretch for my budget. Knowing that you can achieve decent 3 minutes unguided, and as far as I can tell by the size of this photo, good 5+ minutes without tweaking PHD make me feel more than happy on buying it. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Spider-Man
      Hi everyone,
      I'm looking to get a reasonably portable astrophotography set-up, using a 60-100mm refractor, with a suitable goto mount.  I spotted the Explore Scientifice exos2-gt with pmc-eight goto system, which looks like quite an elegant solution, and wondered if anybody in the forum owns this mount, and what they think of it's performance & usability?
    • By Spider-Man
      Hi, I'm keen to buy a small good quality refractor primarily for astrophotography of galaxies and nebulae.   I'd like to use my Pentax K1 full frame DSLR with the telescope.
      Reviewing YouTube & Google the; Altair Astro 72 EDF deluxe & William Optics 71GT look like they might be good models to go for.  I'd welcome the community's views on both, and any other alternatives people recommend.
    • By Glambert
      Hi All, i am looking for my first astrophotography rig and i have limited it down to the two trackers. I know these can only take a limited payload and are there not good value for money in terms of upgrading to a bigger telescope later. But, i really want something portable, quick, and easy to get started. I currently have a 12 inch dob so i really want at least something other than my binoculars that is much easier to get outside quickly when the clouds break. 
       
      I will also be buying the z61 william optics telescope (yet to buy) as i feel this is a good scope for these type of mounts from what i have read. 
      Therefore, here is my question. Which moint should i get? I know they essentially do the same thing but there is some differences including price. I believe the skyguider pro is much more exspensive given from what i hear the vixen wedge would also be needes at a much greater cost that what is provided. Also, the star adventurer does not have a built in battery but instead uses AA's or i hear sometimes people use a power pack. As a result, it appears that the sky guider pro works out much more exspensive when all is said and done. However, is the skyguider pro worth the extra money with the wedge or is the star adventurer the better option? Any tips, advice, or first hand experience welcome kind Regards Gary
    • By MalVeauX
      Hey all,
      I made an acquisition and processing tutorial a while back (3 years ago? Yikes!) and it is fairly dated in terms of what I'm doing these days. I've been asked for a long time to make a new one showing what I'm doing these days. Specifically how I'm processing a single shot image for both the surface and prominences and how to process them together to show prominences and the surface at once. I've abandoned doing split images and composites and strictly work from one image using layers. Acquisition does not use gamma at all anymore. Nothing terribly fancy, but it's not exactly intuitive so hopefully this new video will illustrate most of the fundamentals to get you started. Instead of an hour, this time it's only 18 minutes. It's real time from start to finish. I'm sorry for the long "waiting periods" where I'm just waiting for the software to finish its routine, it lasts 1.5 minutes and 30 seconds tops typically at first. The first 4 minutes is literally just stacking & alignment in AS!3. I typically will go faster than this, but wanted to slow down enough to try to talk through what I'm doing as I do it. Hopefully you can see each action on the screen. I may have made a few mistakes or said a few incorrect things or terms, forgive me for that, this is not my day job. I really hope it helps folk get more into processing as its not difficult or intimidating when you see a simple process with only a few things that are used. The key is good data to begin with and a good exposure value. Today's data came from a 100mm F10 achromatic refractor and an ASI290MM camera with an HA filter. I used FireCapture to acquire the data with a defocused flat frame. No gamma is used. I target anywhere from 65% to 72% histogram fill. That's it! The processing is fast and simple. I have a few presets that I use, but they are all defaults in Photoshop. A lot of the numbers I use for parameters are based on image scale, so keep that in mind, experiment with your own values. The only preset I use that is not a default is my coloring scheme. I color with levels in Photoshop, and my values are Red: 1.6, Green 0.8, Blue 0.2 (these are mid-point values).
      Processing Tutorial Video (18 minutes):
      https://youtu.be/RJvJEoVS0oU
      RAW (.TIF) files available here to practice on (the same images you will see below as RAW TIFs):
      https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zjeoux7YPZpGjlRGtX6fH7CH2PhB-dzv
      Video for Acquisition, Focus, Flat Calibration and Exposure (20 minutes):
      (Please let me know if any links do not work)
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Results from today using this work flow method.
      Colored:




      B&W:




      SSM data (sampled during 1.5~2 arc-second seeing conditions):

      Equipment for today:
      100mm F10 Frac (Omni XLT 120mm F8.3 masked to 4")
      Baader Red CCD-IR Block Filter (ERF)
      PST etalon + BF10mm
      ASI290MM
      SSM (for fun, no automation)


      Very best,
       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.