![Curio definition](https://loka.nahovitsyn.com/174.jpg)
![800 pixels by 200 pixels islide usa 800 pixels by 200 pixels islide usa](http://www.all-flags-world.com/usa-states/Colorado/Flag-of-Colorado-L.jpg)
800 PIXELS BY 200 PIXELS ISLIDE USA UPDATE
Please give us an update on your progress so we can get this undercontrol. Note: If your mount is not up to the task, even and OAG will not help much. I see slight elongation by eye when my subexposure times go above 4 minutes. Tweak until you can get the stars round in the 60 second sub and then try a 90 second sub. Try to start out with short subs, maybe 60 seconds and see if you can get close to round stars in your image. Now only USB3 and 12V cable are leaving the scope, everthing else is thight on the scope. What are you doing regarding any type of cable management? Tried to improve that last month, when I got the Pegasus Astro Powerbox Advance. What is the payload of your mount? 6,35 kg (C8 Edge HD) + 1.1kg( Evoguide) + 0.5 kg ( ASI 071) + (0.1 kg ASI 120) + 0.3 kg (Dew heater) + 0.4 kg Dovetail (Selfprinted) + 0.25 kg (Pegasus Astro Advance Powerbox) + 0.42 kg ( Autofocuser) = 9.42kg maybe a bit more. Is your guidescope aligned with your c8? Not Perfectly, but when I image an object it is visible in both scopes, I guess I could look into that. Is the mount leveled? I have, but would it matter as long as you are perfectly polar aligned?Īre you polar aligned with sharpcap? Not with sharpcap but my PA error is normally below 10' and most of the time below 5'. My Setup is: C8 Edge HD + Asi071 MC Pro, Evoguide 50 ED + ASI 120MM-S, HEQ 5 Pro. Have worked with this setup for a bit more than a year. But how can I find out how big the flexure error is in comparison to the other errors? seeing is very very bad, the total impact of the flexure error onto the fwhm values would be in comparison to the seeing only minimal. As this flexure error mixes up with seeing and mount errors, thus the final FWHM in my images is a mixture of all of them. Did someone have the same idea and was able to measure an improvement after mounting the guidescope in a more rigid way?ģ. (Total XY movement is a diagonal, which does not represent the curve, but the error would only be bigger)Ģ. Nonetheless is my assumption right that with an OAG I would have almost no movement at all of my stars over multiple hours?Īdded are some images to maybe better understand what I did. (Maybe also a bit due to mirrorflop of SCT mirror?). My whole idea is on the basis, that the star movement over the total integration time is due to the flexure difference of the image scope and guiding scope. I got quite high results ~ 0.8"/minute +- 0.3 "/min. Use pixelscale, total integration time and total distance moved to calculate movment of star in arcseconds/minute.Ĥ. Measure in pixels how far a star moved over the whole imaging session.ģ. Stack images from a whole imaging session. Here my procedure to find out how big the impact of flexure onto my images is:ġ. So for now I want to find out how much I should prioritize an OAG or at least try to minimize flexure with an investment into a better mounting system for my guidescope. Right now I don't have the financial ressources to buy the Celestron OAG and a good guiding camera with a big enough sensor. But as I was buying this setup, I was not informed enough how important good guiding for long exposure images at long FL is.
![800 pixels by 200 pixels islide usa 800 pixels by 200 pixels islide usa](https://images.wallpapersden.com/image/download/los-angeles-starry-night_a21ra2iUmZqaraWkpJRtZWWtZ2Vl.jpg)
This setup is less than optimal, at least so I have read. For guiding I slide the Evoguide 50 ED onto my little shoe,which is mounted on my C8 Edge HD.
![Curio definition](https://loka.nahovitsyn.com/174.jpg)