Skywatcher AZ GTI mount owners thread

[bomberbaz]

1 hour ago, bomberbaz said:

I have around 1 mm of free play in RA axis, I am going to pull my mount apart and see if there is anything I can do to take this up.

I did this a few years back but one of the adjustment screws broke so stuck a spring in to take up the slack, I don't think it is cutting it. 

Further to this I have had it apart and back together, I have also retightened every single clamp bolt etc to take any other flexture out of the system.

Now it does seem a little tighter but not significantly so. Looking at it most of the movement is coming from the RA/AZ axis of the mount with a smaller movement coming through the tripod and wedge.

I know there is a mod to take that mount movement out but as mentioned the one of the screws broke so I cannot do this, so there is a spring inserted between the house and RA/AZ motor to try to take some of it up.

Think I need to test it again to see if the slight elongation of the stars has been improved upon. To see what I am referring to you can zoom in on this picture below, not massive but there.

[AstroNebulee]

3 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

I have around 1 mm of free play in RA axis, I am going to pull my mount apart and see if there is anything I can do to take this up.

I did this a few years back but one of the adjustment screws broke so stuck a spring in to take up the slack, I don't think it is cutting it. 

I had a little bit of backlash on my RA motors so I meshed them tight together and solved any backlash and movement in RA. Could be worth a shot, I'll try to find the post on here for it. 

Cheers 

Lee 

 

MODS... Double post can be removed, cheers 

Edited June 24, 2022 by AstroNebulee

[AstroNebulee]

3 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

I have around 1 mm of free play in RA axis, I am going to pull my mount apart and see if there is anything I can do to take this up.

I did this a few years back but one of the adjustment screws broke so stuck a spring in to take up the slack, I don't think it is cutting it. 

I had some backlash in my RA so I meshed the two brass gears together on the RA motor and solved the backlash and may help your issue too. 

I followed Cuivs video, my post is on page 38 on this thread. 

Also this on cloudy nights helped me to https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/668785-adjusting-backlash-on-skywatcher-az-gti-mount/

Cheers 

Lee 

[knobby]

Amazing thread ... very long but very useful.

Can I ask what the heaviest scope you've used on your AZ-Gti ?

Thinking of trying some planetary with mine @elp perked my interest in another thread 🙂

I'm in EQ mode with counterweights.

[AstroNebulee]

41 minutes ago, knobby said:

Amazing thread ... very long but very useful.

Can I ask what the heaviest scope you've used on your AZ-Gti ?

Thinking of trying some planetary with mine @elp perked my interest in another thread 🙂

I'm in EQ mode with counterweights.

Thank you, yes it is long and I will try to compile page numbers with most useful bits on eg servicing, solved issues. 

If you are going for planetary in EQ mode, personally I wouldn't go much above a 102 maksutov. I know the Skymax 127 at 3kg can be used in az mode easily (though quite a bit of vibration to settle down. I used to have this combo). It should cope ok in EQ mode too, though I never tried it. 

I do say that my sw 72ed deepsky setup comes in at 5.9kg with everything attached (about 3.7kg without counterweights) 

The rated max weight capacity of the az gti is said to be 5kg. But most of us eq mode users push to this or  beyond. 

Cheers 

Lee 

Edited June 24, 2022 by AstroNebulee
addition

[bomberbaz]

1 hour ago, AstroNebulee said:

I had some backlash in my RA so I meshed the two brass gears together on the RA motor and solved the backlash and may help your issue too. 

I followed Cuivs video, my post is on page 38 on this thread. 

Also this on cloudy nights helped me to https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/668785-adjusting-backlash-on-skywatcher-az-gti-mount/

Cheers 

Lee 

Can't do this Lee, I have already seen this but when I tried to undo the screw marked 2, the screw head sheared off.

I am going to see how I get on with things as they are but if the star shapes are unfixable I have to decide do I put up with it or buy a new mount and use the existing one for solar.

Edited June 24, 2022 by bomberbaz

[knobby]

17 minutes ago, AstroNebulee said:

Thank you, yes it is long and I will try to compile page numbers with most useful bits on eg servicing, solved issues. 

If you are going for planetary in EQ mode, personally I wouldn't go much above a 102 maksutov. I know the Skymax 127 at 3kg can be used in az mode easily (though quite a bit of vibration to settle down. I used to have this combo). It should cope ok in EQ mode too, though I never tried it. 

I do say that my sw 72ed deepsky setup comes in at 5.9kg with everything attached (about 3.7kg without counterweights) 

The rated max weight capacity of the az gti is said to be 5kg. But most of us eq mode users push to this or  beyond. 

Cheers 

Lee 

Cheers Lee, I must get round to weighing my current kit (similar to yours) ... I've posted on here before but never thought of trying planetary with it.

[knobby]

7 minutes ago, bomberbaz said:

Can't do this Lee, I have already seen this but when I tried to undo the screw marked 2, the screw head sheared off.

I am going to see how I get on with things as they are but if the star shapes are unfixable I have to decide do I put up with it or buy a new mount and use the existing one for solar.

Have you read down to tis post https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/668785-adjusting-backlash-on-skywatcher-az-gti-mount/?p=10388057

Talks about removing the screw if it breaks ... 

[AstroNebulee]

25 minutes ago, bomberbaz said:

Can't do this Lee, I have already seen this but when I tried to undo the screw marked 2, the screw head sheared off.

I am going to see how I get on with things as they are but if the star shapes are unfixable I have to decide do I put up with it or buy a new mount and use the existing one for solar.

Ahh I see Steve, I wasn't quite sure which bolt was sheered off or broken. Could you fashion one with a bolt, cut the head off it and and put a saw cut in the top of it to diy one. Or undo it with some needle nose pliers perhaps. Just coming up with suggestions to get around it for you 

Just seen @knobby reply and seems a really good solution. 

Cheers

Lee 

Edited June 24, 2022 by AstroNebulee

[AstroNebulee]

3 hours ago, knobby said:

Cheers Lee, I must get round to weighing my current kit (similar to yours) ... I've posted on here before but never thought of trying planetary with it.

I did planetary and lunar with my AzGti in az mode with my previous 127 and a zwo asi120mc-s and got some good results with it. 

Thank you for your previous post in the broken bolt head, I couldn't requote it I'm my reply to Steve. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by AstroNebulee
Spelling

[herne]

1 hour ago, knobby said:

Amazing thread ... very long but very useful.

Can I ask what the heaviest scope you've used on your AZ-Gti ?

Thinking of trying some planetary with mine @elp perked my interest in another thread 🙂

I'm in EQ mode with counterweights.

I’m at about 5½kg including counter weight of c.1.7kg.  That includes scope, camera, guide scope, guide camera, asi air, field flattener and cables.  The scope on it’s own weighs 2.2kg (William Optics Z61II).

I’ve never done any planetary though.

[herne]

3 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

Further to this I have had it apart and back together, I have also retightened every single clamp bolt etc to take any other flexture out of the system.

Now it does seem a little tighter but not significantly so. Looking at it most of the movement is coming from the RA/AZ axis of the mount with a smaller movement coming through the tripod and wedge.

I know there is a mod to take that mount movement out but as mentioned the one of the screws broke so I cannot do this, so there is a spring inserted between the house and RA/AZ motor to try to take some of it up.

Think I need to test it again to see if the slight elongation of the stars has been improved upon. To see what I am referring to you can zoom in on this picture below, not massive but there.

To my eye there seems to be more of an issue with star colour (aberration) rather than shape.  That colour issue may make things look like stars are slightly mis-shaped. 

Take a look at the screen grab below of a zoomed in portion of your picture.  I've circled a few to demonstrate - they start dark going into red at the top, leading into an aqua to yellow at the bottom.  That gives them a slightly flattened look (elongated?) although I think the overall star shape is still pretty round.  I get a similar issue which I process out in Photoshop.  If you use PS flick to minute 41 of this YouTube video to get an idea of how to correct (the whole video is worth watching tbh).

[herne]

Further to my 10min sub experiment of the Sadr region (here a few pages back) I was out again photographing Sadr the other night, but this time using 2 min subs (about 3 hours worth).  See below - it's a quick and dirty stretch in Photoshop, nothing more.

This is without calibration frames or any sort of noise reduction in post processing, unless Deep Sky Stacker did something during stacking.  I like both images and am really impressed at how clean they look given the lack of calibration frames, although I prefer this one with the 2 min subs as I think the stars seem less bloated.  It's been an interesting experiment and am super happy with how the new camera (ASI 533MC Pro) and AZ GTi have performed.

I will spend some time properly processing the image at some point.

[bomberbaz]

15 minutes ago, herne said:

Further to my 10min sub experiment of the Sadr region (here a few pages back) I was out again photographing Sadr the other night, but this time using 2 min subs (about 3 hours worth).  See below - it's a quick and dirty stretch in Photoshop, nothing more.

This is without calibration frames or any sort of noise reduction in post processing, unless Deep Sky Stacker did something during stacking.  I like both images and am really impressed at how clean they look given the lack of calibration frames, although I prefer this one with the 2 min subs as I think the stars seem less bloated.  It's been an interesting experiment and am super happy with how the new camera (ASI 533MC Pro) and AZ GTi have performed.

I will spend some time properly processing the image at some point.

corking effort that to say it's largely unprocessed

[bomberbaz]

37 minutes ago, herne said:

To my eye there seems to be more of an issue with star colour (aberration) rather than shape.  That colour issue may make things look like stars are slightly mis-shaped. 

Take a look at the screen grab below of a zoomed in portion of your picture.  I've circled a few to demonstrate - they start dark going into red at the top, leading into an aqua to yellow at the bottom.  That gives them a slightly flattened look (elongated?) although I think the overall star shape is still pretty round.  I get a similar issue which I process out in Photoshop.  If you use PS flick to minute 41 of this YouTube video to get an idea of how to correct (the whole video is worth watching tbh).

I get what your saying but it the mis-shape seems to follow the RA axis and given the slight movement in that axis it gives me that hunch.

The last readings were in DEC around 0.8 but RA 2.5, this after spending a long time sitting and staring into my phone at the tracking error and tweaking away.

Thanks for the advice though. I will bear this in mind after my next data grab, hoping to get another hour or so data again on the crescent and will see how that data looks.

 

 

[LaurenceT]

30 minutes ago, herne said:

Further to my 10min sub experiment of the Sadr region (here a few pages back) I was out again photographing Sadr the other night, but this time using 2 min subs (about 3 hours worth).  See below - it's a quick and dirty stretch in Photoshop, nothing more.

This is without calibration frames or any sort of noise reduction in post processing, unless Deep Sky Stacker did something during stacking.  I like both images and am really impressed at how clean they look given the lack of calibration frames, although I prefer this one with the 2 min subs as I think the stars seem less bloated.  It's been an interesting experiment and am super happy with how the new camera (ASI 533MC Pro) and AZ GTi have performed.

I will spend some time properly processing the image at some point.

Excellent image, what scope are you using?

Edited June 24, 2022 by LaurenceT

[herne]

7 minutes ago, bomberbaz said:

I get what your saying but it the mis-shape seems to follow the RA axis and given the slight movement in that axis it gives me that hunch.

The last readings were in DEC around 0.8 but RA 2.5, this after spending a long time sitting and staring into my phone at the tracking error and tweaking away.

Thanks for the advice though. I will bear this in mind after my next data grab, hoping to get another hour or so data again on the crescent and will see how that data looks.

 

 

I'm by no means an expert but if it helps upload your stacked data and I'll have a quick play?   You may be right of course and it won't do anything but sometimes a fresh pair of eyes can help?

[herne]

3 minutes ago, LaurenceT said:

Excellent image, what scope are you using?

William Optics Z61II with WO field flattener.  I also used an Optolong L-Enhance filter.

[AstroNebulee]

2 hours ago, herne said:

Further to my 10min sub experiment of the Sadr region (here a few pages back) I was out again photographing Sadr the other night, but this time using 2 min subs (about 3 hours worth).  See below - it's a quick and dirty stretch in Photoshop, nothing more.

This is without calibration frames or any sort of noise reduction in post processing, unless Deep Sky Stacker did something during stacking.  I like both images and am really impressed at how clean they look given the lack of calibration frames, although I prefer this one with the 2 min subs as I think the stars seem less bloated.  It's been an interesting experiment and am super happy with how the new camera (ASI 533MC Pro) and AZ GTi have performed.

I will spend some time properly processing the image at some point.

Really nice image that and as Steve says without any calibration it's great, lovely job 👍

[bomberbaz]

3 hours ago, herne said:

I'm by no means an expert but if it helps upload your stacked data and I'll have a quick play?   You may be right of course and it won't do anything but sometimes a fresh pair of eyes can help?

Be my guest, I take it you meant the autosave from DSS which includes the calibration files. If not I will attach a copy without calibration files. Also it is actually 60mins data, not 40 as I first thought. (I was very tired)

Autosave.tif

 

[AstroNebulee]

1 hour ago, bomberbaz said:

Be my guest, I take it you meant the autosave from DSS which includes the calibration files. If not I will attach a copy without calibration files. Also it is actually 60mins data, not 40 as I first thought. (I was very tired)

Autosave.tif 158.51 MB · 1 download

 

I hope you don't mind @herne I couldn't resist having a quick go whilst the laptop was on.

The stars don't look to bad on my quick and dirty process (yes it a bad process on my part haha) yep a bit of elongation there but the left side isn't looking to bad. 

I would say if you could mod the sheered bolt to work again using the link provided by knobby you could cure it. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by AstroNebulee

[herne]

2 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

Be my guest, I take it you meant the autosave from DSS which includes the calibration files. If not I will attach a copy without calibration files. Also it is actually 60mins data, not 40 as I first thought. (I was very tired)

Autosave.tif 158.51 MB · 2 downloads

 

I had a quick play.  There's some decent data in there, not only of the Crescent Nebula but also of other surrounding nebulosity 👍.

Below are two pictures.  The first is a simple process of your raw tiff file using Siril only.  The second is taking that file processed in Siril and running it through Photoshop with some basic curves and a little gausian blur to help with some of the aberration.  It's still a bit noisy which with some extra time I could reduce and perhaps make some other improvements too, but hopefully you get the idea.

Some stars do still seem to be a little misshapen, although only really noticeable if you zoom right in.  But overall you've got some good data in there, perhaps more than you may realise 🙂.

[bomberbaz]

12 minutes ago, herne said:

I had a quick play.  There's some decent data in there, not only of the Crescent Nebula but also of other surrounding nebulosity 👍.

Below are two pictures.  The first is a simple process of your raw tiff file using Siril only.  The second is taking that file processed in Siril and running it through Photoshop with some basic curves and a little gausian blur to help with some of the aberration.  It's still a bit noisy which with some extra time I could reduce and perhaps make some other improvements too, but hopefully you get the idea.

Some stars do still seem to be a little misshapen, although only really noticeable if you zoom right in.  But overall you've got some good data in there, perhaps more than you may realise 🙂.

 

 

I think that maybe I need more processing assistance if I am honest. And I also think your right in that perhaps my data is better than I am thinking it it. (I do tend to be too personal critical)

For sure there is room for improvement, as there always is, but maybe not to the level I am thinking. 

thanks all

Steve

[herne]

24 minutes ago, bomberbaz said:

I think that maybe I need more processing assistance if I am honest. And I also think your right in that perhaps my data is better than I am thinking it it. (I do tend to be too personal critical)

For sure there is room for improvement, as there always is, but maybe not to the level I am thinking. 

thanks all

Steve

We're probably all our own worse critics.  I know I am 🙂.  That's something great about this hobby, there's always something new to learn or improve on.  Stick at it, you're definitely on the right track 👍.

[AstroNebulee]

10 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

I think that maybe I need more processing assistance if I am honest. And I also think your right in that perhaps my data is better than I am thinking it it. (I do tend to be too personal critical)

For sure there is room for improvement, as there always is, but maybe not to the level I am thinking. 

thanks all

Steve

Definitely some good data in there Steve, like herne said you got the surrounding nebulousity too. Processing is a funny old thing, something I never think you stop building on there's always something new to learn and tweak. Your doing a great job, just keep practicing, I still haven't mastered any of it yet. 👍

One thing, we're all your subs showing elongation in your stars? I know if I miss and put an oval star sub in, it will throw it off. 

Cheers 

Lee 

Edited June 25, 2022 by AstroNebulee