Looking for a better mount

[myk68]

Hi all. 

I currently have a heq5 pro mount with a newly fitted rowan belt system. 

I've got myself an edge hd 8 but the tracking/guiding is well above 0.4 with all the training and testing I can do. 

Is there a better mount that wouldn't break the wife? 

Mike

[Sarek]

I have the same mount as you, also Rowan belt modded. I'd be very happy with 0.4 guiding accuracy. I'm normally around 0.5 to 0.8.  

 

[City9Town0]

17 minutes ago, myk68 said:

Hi all. 

I currently have a heq5 pro mount with a newly fitted rowan belt system. 

I've got myself an edge hd 8 but the tracking/guiding is well above 0.4 with all the training and testing I can do. 

Is there a better mount that wouldn't break the wife? 

Mike

If she carries the HEQ5 she's a keeper.

How strong is she?

p.s. I get about 0.5-0.85 with my HEQ5. (and my wife is a keeper even though she won't carry the mount!)

[dunc]

I have an HEQ5 (belt and bearings modded) and it's really smooth. I don't have any guiding figures but 0.5-0.8 rms sounds about right depending on seeing. It is better with my LX90 8" than my NEQ6 in the observatory and is my choice for planets or planetary nebulae.

For me that real game changer has been BlurExterminator as it fixes the slight blurring caused by bit of guiding wobble without much influence on the wife who's always monitoring the bank statement. Coupled with lots of 60s exposures (was using 300s for years) and my images have got so much better in a really short time with around the same total integration times. There was less objection to upgrading the old PC to cope as she uses it as well .

 

 

[vlaiv]

In the same boat as you at the moment, and I don't think that there is a solution.

All the offerings up to Mesu200 and similar mounts simply suffer from same mechanical drawbacks - too low reduction to iron out stepper issues.

They only offer greater payload but none of them will really get you guiding below ~0.5RMS

 

[Tony Acorn]

How easy is the conversion to Rowan Belt Drive to do? I have the HEQ5-Pro but it is geared rather than belt-driven. I amm rteasionably handy and have a wide assortment of hand tools.

Tony

[vlaiv]

1 minute ago, Tony Acorn said:

How easy is the conversion to Rowan Belt Drive to do? I have the HEQ5-Pro but it is geared rather than belt-driven. I amm rteasionably handy and have a wide assortment of hand tools.

Tony

Not very hard - about 1-2 hours to re-grease / change all the bearings for high quality ones and to fit belt mod.

[Elp]

0.4 in my experience is very good guiding. Does it affect your images?

[AstroDad74]

Hi all 👋 I currently use a Move shoot Move Nomad star tracker mount this works well with my cannon 6d Dslr camera and can take a payload of 3.5kg But if I wanted something bigger that can take a bit more payload I would want to invest in a sky watcher star adventurer Gti or even the new sky watcher wave 150i tracking mount that has just recently been released.

Regards Roger 

[myk68]

4 hours ago, Sarek said:

I have the same mount as you, also Rowan belt modded. I'd be very happy with 0.4 guiding accuracy. I'm normally around 0.5 to 0.8.  

 

Hi sarek.

Yeah,  with my askar acl200 and 80ed skywatcher this is fine.   But I need a good 0.4 average for the edge 8 with asi533 at prime focus. I'm not getting good stars with oag guiding. 

Should have mentioned that in my opening.  Sorry all

[myk68]

3 hours ago, Tony Acorn said:

How easy is the conversion to Rowan Belt Drive to do? I have the HEQ5-Pro but it is geared rather than belt-driven. I amm rteasionably handy and have a wide assortment of hand tools.

Tony

Really easy. Just watch that the belt is level between the gears and the idler. 

[myk68]

3 hours ago, Elp said:

0.4 in my experience is very good guiding. Does it affect your images?

Seems to have being affecting them. The stars are odd shapes where is chasing the star. I've lowered the guide time. Calibrated the guiding. 

[vlaiv]

Just now, myk68 said:

Seems to have being affecting them. The stars are odd shapes where is chasing the star. I've lowered the guide time. Calibrated the guiding. 

What does your PHD2 target diagram look like?

A good HEQ5 (meaning nothing seriously wrong with mount or guiding) will have random error. In all likelihood RA error will be larger than DEC (I often have DEC RMS down to 0.2 or lower on my heq5) and this will result in oval stars (target diagram will reflect this). One way of "dealing" with this would be to align RA axis to horizontal axis of the sensor.

People are much less likely to notice star elongation if it is aligned with horizontal - because of wide screens and the way our brain works.

If your error is not random - then you should look what might be causing it.

What is your peak error in a guide session?

[Elp]

Have you adjusted the guide rate? I've found when imaging 1000mm altering this setting can help fine tune.

[vlaiv]

5 minutes ago, Elp said:

Have you adjusted the guide rate? I've found when imaging 1000mm altering this setting can help fine tune.

Why does focal length of the telescope have anything to do with guide performance?

[Elp]

10 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Why does focal length of the telescope have anything to do with guide performance?

If settings are kept the same and optics change don't you see more/less movement (or guiding error) regardless of calibration and further fine tuning is needed in the settings? By simply changing from a guidescope to an OAG you'll see a difference.

Edited Thursday at 13:33 by Elp

[vlaiv]

Just now, Elp said:

If settings are kept the same and optics change don't you see more movement (or guiding error) regardless of calibration and further fine tuning is needed in the settings?

Error might be connected to amount of weight or arm moment that scope produces - but in arc seconds / absolute units - it should not change. Even when using OAG - you can only get more precise star position reading with longer focal length, but with multi star guiding that largely becomes moot point as multiple stars give quite a bit more precision (and guard against seeing).

0.4" RMS is actually a good value for HEQ5 mount - even for EdgeHD 8".

3.76um pixel size of ASI533 will hugely over sample at 2000mm of FL (by at least factor of x3) - but that can be addressed with binning.