开云体育

Yes. I guess I am.

Brian, With a side by side setup, I am using two scopes with imaging cameras, then a third scope with the ASI290Mini for guiding. I was just hoping to use one main scope for imaging and the other for

I spent 26 years in Wyoming Sonny. I know of what you preach! --- pedmondsjr@... wrote: From: "Sonny Edmonds" <pedmondsjr@...> To: [email protected] Subject: Re:

Hi Paul i agree DEC looks pretty good. again the amount of backlash will change through the night, primarily due to changes in your scope orientation (i.e., altitude) RA seems to me to show issues

John are you talking about field rotation? -- Brian Brian Valente portfolio brianvalentephotography.com <http://brianvalentephotography.com>

You know I wish I had an image stack I processed when the guide cam was off from the main scope to illustrate how the frames skewed over the course of the night. But it? is lost somewhere in

to you if not I will start it and send it later. if you use PHD the logs are kept automatically. you can find them under the Help menu wrote:

Aubrey if you are going to stick with your current setup, i suggest binning your imaging camera bin 2. that will definitely help wrote:

Thanks for info on OAG. I have tried them on my gear before and it is mostly frustrating. Hard to find star bright enough to use. I also have a STT-8300 with self guilding but The 340 chip is not very

Very good data. I can add a Barlow of 2x on the guide camera and that should drop it to 2.00 /arcseconds. I am not sure I have been keeping the guide log. I see and send the data to you if not I will

I would also consider using an OAG for a focal length like this. It would virtually automatically eliminate the mismatch between image scales and in addition eliminate differential flexure where the

Thanks Ray, That's great info. Actually now that I think about it, I'm not sure if DEC was doing anything different. I was only concerned with RA as I know that is where PEC works. Next time I'm

Jamie, PEC only affects RA, so that you saw large jumps in Dec also indicates that the auto-settings were not optimal. That said, after programming PEC, you should always measure PE again with PEC

Autoguiding was worse. There are so many variables with autoguiding that it's hard to tell what is going wrong, at least to me. So last night I was primarily interested in capturing SII data to

Hi Aubrey based on that information here's some details for you: your image scale for your guidescope is 4.00"/pix or 4 arcseconds per pixel. your image scale for your imaging setup is 0.47"/pix or

OK here we go. Guider: SX Super star guider on 60mm guiding telescope F/4 Pixel 4.65x4.65 1392x1004 V Main camera: SX Trius Pro 814 3.7 x 3.7 3388 x 2712 Telescope AT 10” RC 2000 mm FL F/9 No focal

Hi Jamie, By "worse", what do mean? 1. Autoguiding appeared worse with PEC enabled? 2. Or the measured periodic error with PEC enabled was greater than disabled? 3. Something else? -Ray Gralak Author

I followed the recommended PemPro PEC programming method, and so far have found it to make things worse. I'm assuming that it's operator error, me being the operator. I expect that it will improve

Hi Arun yes, you and I are on the same page. Having done a lot of PHD support over the years, there are many people who only relate to what they see in PHD graphs and statistics, without knowing how

Hi Brian, I was referring to the main image scale, not the guiding image scale. Yes, that is why I pay attention to the arc second number in PHD2, since it the more meaningful number in translating