开云体育

The Astro-Physics mounts use servo motors which have 0.05 arc second steps, the G11 and G8 use stepper motors which have 0.5 arc second steps. The new Losmandy goto system replaces the stepper motors

Sorry, I did misread the original message. Old eyes! <g> Paul Sterngold --- Ray Porter <ray_porter@...> wrote:

You are correct, sorry for the confusion! I am simply asking (after ranting) how long of an exposure, UNGUIDED, can I expect with the GM- 8 with say a TV101 @ f4.5 with an ST-7 1x1 binned? I am

David, I have the 150 and EQ4(CG5) just for the portability issue. All I did was to replace the aluminum tripod legs with homemade wooden legs and the scope is just fine. With the lower prices I

Paul, I think Chris's question is why his cheap CG-5 seems to perform so much better than his new GM-8. Actually, he has a very specific question. For those who have used the GM-8 for unguided CCD

I'm not seeing anything here involving Losmandy. Am I missing something? If not, you might want to post this on one of the CCD lists on eGroups. Paul Sterngold --- ccwoodruff@... wrote:

Actually the CG-5 is okay if you disassemble and re-grease the mount and replace the silly aluminum legs with wooden ones. A thump to the OTA will dampen out in a second or so (as opposed to 6

I keep hearing this. I already have a G11. Use it with my C11 SCT. I was thinking about picking up the CR150 mounted on a CG5 hoping for a more portable scope. The consensus, however seems to be

Hi Ray Edward at Lumicon once suggested a quick process to resolve this kind of issue. Move one axis 360 degrees and watch the encoder position numbers on the DSC. When the encoder resolution is off,

I am looking to put a pier in my yard and I have ordered the Losmandy MA adapter to adapt my GM8 head to the pier. Is there anybody out there that has done this. What size pier did you use and how

I have a friend in my astronomy club who has a CR150 and and AP130 f8, which he mounts on his GM8. The scopes are OK for visual usage. I would prefer the G11 myself for any scope that size., The

Hello, This is my first post here so please be patient! I have been imaging with a CG-5 and a Vixen GP using a C8 @ fl 630 and a TV 101 @ fl 400. Using an ST-7 UNGUIDED I have achieve 1x1 binning

I'm not sure what "torque and swing" means. The stepper motor rotates a worm, which in turn rotates a worm gear, which in turn rotates the polar shaft. I believe this is how all quality mounts drive

Paul, They are not based on powers of 2. It's just a matter of how many lines are on the codewheel. US Digital has a 540 count encoder. That is the encoder Mark has that gives him the 2160 count. It

I looked through all previous EGroup posts and sci.astro.ccd-imaging, but was unable to find "final" details about this potential problem. My GM-8 has been a flawless performer, and I am anticipating

--- midniterider@... wrote: I think they're all powers of 2, as is everything in the computer world: 256 = 2^8 (one byte) 1024 = 2^10 2048 = 2^11 4096 = 2^12 Paul

Bruce, Forget about binary when talking about optical encoders. The counts per revolution are a physical characteristic determined by the amount of lines on the codewheel. Check out this page for a

How does the G-9 compare to the current Losmandy products? I am looking for a mount to use for astrophotography with a C8 for now and possibly the 9.25 in the future... BTW, I was quoted $895