Date   

Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
 

Did you ever try to use a laser?  

Robert 


On Feb 21, 2020, at 12:22 PM, Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:


Not a fan of chinese RC at all. I have two GSO RCs 12" and 10" and i have spent all my time trying to collimate them. I think i maybe have 20 total hours of imaging time with them, they are both sitting here because I don't have the time/energy to try and collimate again. one is 8 years old, the other 2 years old

on our remote obs we switched to planewave CDK and hoping for the best


Brian


On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:15 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via Groups.Io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.
This tells me that it's not worth bringing a new astrograph to market using US labor?

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Chozick via Groups.Io <rchozick=aol.com@groups.io>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 21, 2020 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Thanks. Your TEC 140 is about the same focal length that I used for the M 81 and 82 combination. 

I really love my CMOS camera. I am in line to get one of the new ASI 2600s. I was worried about that even smaller pixels, but, after this discussion, I now think it might be a good thing. 

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.  The AP CCDT67 pairs nicely with them. The key is getting really good collimation. I bought a focuser collimation ring to add to mine so I can use a laser to collimate it. If you do not have a focuser collimation ring or a collimatable focuser you cannot use a laser to collimate it.  The process works really well and I only had to do a tiny amount of tweaking with defocussing a star and I’m not sure I even had to do that. 

Robert 


On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Calypte <ccroulet@...> wrote:

I caught this comment by Rolando: "...do you think that 1600mm is a sweet spot for all kinds of deep sky imaging, especially for high resolution work? Especially since the newer Cmos cameras have such small pixels and would be able to take advantage of a high resolution optic for small faint galaxies."

So, what is your opinion about this Rolando?

Occasioned by the fact of my QSI camera being off to Old Blighty for service, I've started to investigate the Chinese CMOS cameras from ZWO and QHYCCD.  I've seen some very impressive images from them.  I saw an image of the IC 434 area (i.e. Horsehead) with a ZWO CMOS camera and 8-inch Rowe-Ackerman astrograph that was to die for.  But I like galaxies.  My TEC140 with QSI 683 does nice pix of galaxy clusters, but not so much for detailed galaxy images, except for the largest galaxies (e.g. M33).  

I like Mr. Chozick's images of M81 and 81/82.



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

 

Not a fan of chinese RC at all. I have two GSO RCs 12" and 10" and i have spent all my time trying to collimate them. I think i maybe have 20 total hours of imaging time with them, they are both sitting here because I don't have the time/energy to try and collimate again. one is 8 years old, the other 2 years old

on our remote obs we switched to planewave CDK and hoping for the best


Brian


On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:15 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via Groups.Io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.
This tells me that it's not worth bringing a new astrograph to market using US labor?

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Chozick via Groups.Io <rchozick=aol.com@groups.io>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 21, 2020 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Thanks. Your TEC 140 is about the same focal length that I used for the M 81 and 82 combination. 

I really love my CMOS camera. I am in line to get one of the new ASI 2600s. I was worried about that even smaller pixels, but, after this discussion, I now think it might be a good thing. 

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.  The AP CCDT67 pairs nicely with them. The key is getting really good collimation. I bought a focuser collimation ring to add to mine so I can use a laser to collimate it. If you do not have a focuser collimation ring or a collimatable focuser you cannot use a laser to collimate it.  The process works really well and I only had to do a tiny amount of tweaking with defocussing a star and I’m not sure I even had to do that. 

Robert 


On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Calypte <ccroulet@...> wrote:

I caught this comment by Rolando: "...do you think that 1600mm is a sweet spot for all kinds of deep sky imaging, especially for high resolution work? Especially since the newer Cmos cameras have such small pixels and would be able to take advantage of a high resolution optic for small faint galaxies."

So, what is your opinion about this Rolando?

Occasioned by the fact of my QSI camera being off to Old Blighty for service, I've started to investigate the Chinese CMOS cameras from ZWO and QHYCCD.  I've seen some very impressive images from them.  I saw an image of the IC 434 area (i.e. Horsehead) with a ZWO CMOS camera and 8-inch Rowe-Ackerman astrograph that was to die for.  But I like galaxies.  My TEC140 with QSI 683 does nice pix of galaxy clusters, but not so much for detailed galaxy images, except for the largest galaxies (e.g. M33).  

I like Mr. Chozick's images of M81 and 81/82.



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Roland Christen
 


For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.
This tells me that it's not worth bringing a new astrograph to market using US labor?

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Chozick via Groups.Io <rchozick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 21, 2020 12:09 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Thanks. Your TEC 140 is about the same focal length that I used for the M 81 and 82 combination. 

I really love my CMOS camera. I am in line to get one of the new ASI 2600s. I was worried about that even smaller pixels, but, after this discussion, I now think it might be a good thing. 

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.  The AP CCDT67 pairs nicely with them. The key is getting really good collimation. I bought a focuser collimation ring to add to mine so I can use a laser to collimate it. If you do not have a focuser collimation ring or a collimatable focuser you cannot use a laser to collimate it.  The process works really well and I only had to do a tiny amount of tweaking with defocussing a star and I’m not sure I even had to do that. 

Robert 


On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Calypte <ccroulet@...> wrote:

I caught this comment by Rolando: "...do you think that 1600mm is a sweet spot for all kinds of deep sky imaging, especially for high resolution work? Especially since the newer Cmos cameras have such small pixels and would be able to take advantage of a high resolution optic for small faint galaxies."

So, what is your opinion about this Rolando?

Occasioned by the fact of my QSI camera being off to Old Blighty for service, I've started to investigate the Chinese CMOS cameras from ZWO and QHYCCD.  I've seen some very impressive images from them.  I saw an image of the IC 434 area (i.e. Horsehead) with a ZWO CMOS camera and 8-inch Rowe-Ackerman astrograph that was to die for.  But I like galaxies.  My TEC140 with QSI 683 does nice pix of galaxy clusters, but not so much for detailed galaxy images, except for the largest galaxies (e.g. M33).  

I like Mr. Chozick's images of M81 and 81/82.


Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
 

Thanks. Your TEC 140 is about the same focal length that I used for the M 81 and 82 combination. 

I really love my CMOS camera. I am in line to get one of the new ASI 2600s. I was worried about that even smaller pixels, but, after this discussion, I now think it might be a good thing. 

For the money the Chinese RC’s work really well.  The AP CCDT67 pairs nicely with them. The key is getting really good collimation. I bought a focuser collimation ring to add to mine so I can use a laser to collimate it. If you do not have a focuser collimation ring or a collimatable focuser you cannot use a laser to collimate it.  The process works really well and I only had to do a tiny amount of tweaking with defocussing a star and I’m not sure I even had to do that. 

Robert 


On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Calypte <ccroulet@...> wrote:

I caught this comment by Rolando: "...do you think that 1600mm is a sweet spot for all kinds of deep sky imaging, especially for high resolution work? Especially since the newer Cmos cameras have such small pixels and would be able to take advantage of a high resolution optic for small faint galaxies."

So, what is your opinion about this Rolando?

Occasioned by the fact of my QSI camera being off to Old Blighty for service, I've started to investigate the Chinese CMOS cameras from ZWO and QHYCCD.  I've seen some very impressive images from them.  I saw an image of the IC 434 area (i.e. Horsehead) with a ZWO CMOS camera and 8-inch Rowe-Ackerman astrograph that was to die for.  But I like galaxies.  My TEC140 with QSI 683 does nice pix of galaxy clusters, but not so much for detailed galaxy images, except for the largest galaxies (e.g. M33).  

I like Mr. Chozick's images of M81 and 81/82.


Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Calypte
 

I caught this comment by Rolando: "...do you think that 1600mm is a sweet spot for all kinds of deep sky imaging, especially for high resolution work? Especially since the newer Cmos cameras have such small pixels and would be able to take advantage of a high resolution optic for small faint galaxies."

So, what is your opinion about this Rolando?

Occasioned by the fact of my QSI camera being off to Old Blighty for service, I've started to investigate the Chinese CMOS cameras from ZWO and QHYCCD.  I've seen some very impressive images from them.  I saw an image of the IC 434 area (i.e. Horsehead) with a ZWO CMOS camera and 8-inch Rowe-Ackerman astrograph that was to die for.  But I like galaxies.  My TEC140 with QSI 683 does nice pix of galaxy clusters, but not so much for detailed galaxy images, except for the largest galaxies (e.g. M33).  

I like Mr. Chozick's images of M81 and 81/82.


Re: Ascom driver failed to connect, errors not displaying

Ray Gralak
 

Peter,

It may be a network congestion issue. Please use the APCC log zipper utility and post a dropbox link to it in a response here.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Peter Bresler via Groups.Io
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 7:56 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Ascom driver failed to connect, errors not displaying

Following a meridian flip failure during the night the following session I was having prolonged difficulty connecting to the
ASCOM driver in APCC. I use an Ethernet hard wire connection. I reset the driver several times. I installed a backup
setting. and it worked, but then started mal-functioning again. Also, errors are not displayed even if I select the option
under tools. I usually have to close and reopen the program, and then they display.


Re: Ascom driver failed to connect, errors not displaying

Rich Sornborger
 

I just went through that very issue.  I put a new ethernet cable in and it resolved the issue.


Re: Confusion With Dome Behavior.........Who To Ask?

Ray Gralak
 

Stacey,

The mount pier side reported by apcc and the driver is usually the opposite of the side of the sky the telescope is pointing. This is correct by the definition of the ASCOM definition for pier side.

You can configure appm to let acp move the dome by setting the dome configuration to passive mode in appm.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Stacey Mills
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 8:18 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Confusion With Dome Behavior.........Who To Ask?

Ray, I checked my ProDome driver setup and the settings are correct for my dome. The driver was written by Tim
Long. I will experiment with APPM again when time permits and the moon is inhibiting deep sky imaging. In its current
state, with some pointing correction by ACP + plate solving, I'm not having any locate/tracking problems. But since I
have encoders on my A-P 1600 mount, ideally I'd like to have pointing tweaked at the scope. I will mention one other
thing that I have seen and scratched my head about. I don't normally open the APCC ASCOM window when imaging,
however, on at least one occasion when I opened it, it showed "east" pointing when ACP properly showed "west"
pointing. I didn't pursue it at the time because things were working as they should and I was ACP imaging. But this
seems to tie to my theory that the problem I'm having with APPM and west imaging is that the dome is getting ASCOM
info. that the scope hasn't flipped. Does that make any sense? Do I have a setting wrong? I'll look at the APCC
ASCOM window again tonight when I'm west pointing and see what it shows.


Re: V vs V2 firmware

Calypte
 

Thank you, Ray, for the assurances about the V chip. 

I've had a lot of trouble trying to get MaxPoint to run so that it does not throw up a UAC prompt.  In the process I've learned some things about Microsoft's built-in system security that I didn't previously know.  Then this issue of getting MaxIm and MaxPoint to work together popped up.  I think this particular installation of MaxPoint on my computer was done as Administrator.  I forget now, because I've tried it both ways.

But it may not matter.  I've had APCC and APPM up and running for several years.  MaxPoint is redundant for my observatory.  I didn't realize that when I bought it as part of upgrading to the latest version of MaxIm DL.


Re: Question on the sky x

Suresh Mohan
 

Dale ,
I do have APT and just downloaded sgp pro , both these cannot apparently connect to the sky
Thanks
Suresh

On 21-Feb-2020, at 10:22 PM, Suresh Mohan Neelmegh <drsureshmohan@...> wrote:

Thanks Stuart
Suresh

Sent from my iPhone

On 21-Feb-2020, at 9:22 PM, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:

TSX has rudimentary sequence orchestration and automation. What you're looking for is more akin to the tasks and capabilities of applications such as SGPro, Voyager, PRISM, APT, CCD-Commander, and the one I personally work on, NINA. TSX is still a great application for helping to plan sessions and I use it myself for that very purpose. Many, if not all, of the apps I mention have the ability to import data in various ways from TSX as well.


On Feb 21, 2020, at 7:18 AM, Suresh Mohan <drsureshmohan@...> wrote:
Can the sky x be used as an image planner eg is it possible to command thro sky x to go to second object after the first is finished ?
Thanks
Suresh





Re: Question on the sky x

Suresh Mohan
 

Thanks Stuart
Suresh

On 21-Feb-2020, at 9:22 PM, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:

TSX has rudimentary sequence orchestration and automation. What you're looking for is more akin to the tasks and capabilities of applications such as SGPro, Voyager, PRISM, APT, CCD-Commander, and the one I personally work on, NINA. TSX is still a great application for helping to plan sessions and I use it myself for that very purpose. Many, if not all, of the apps I mention have the ability to import data in various ways from TSX as well.


On Feb 21, 2020, at 7:18 AM, Suresh Mohan <drsureshmohan@...> wrote:

Can the sky x be used as an image planner eg is it possible to command thro sky x to go to second object after the first is finished ?
Thanks
Suresh





Re: Confusion With Dome Behavior.........Who To Ask?

Stacey Mills
 

Ray, I checked my ProDome driver setup and the settings are correct for my dome.  The driver was written by Tim Long.  I will experiment with APPM again when time permits and the moon is inhibiting deep sky imaging.  In its current state, with some pointing correction by ACP + plate solving, I'm not having any locate/tracking problems.  But since I have encoders on my A-P 1600 mount, ideally I'd like to have pointing tweaked at the scope.  I will mention one other thing that I have seen and scratched my head about.  I don't normally open the APCC ASCOM window when imaging, however, on at least one occasion when I opened it, it showed "east" pointing when ACP properly showed "west" pointing.  I didn't pursue it at the time because things were working as they should and I was ACP imaging.  But this seems to tie to my theory that the problem I'm having with APPM and west imaging is that the dome is getting ASCOM info. that the scope hasn't flipped.  Does that make any sense?  Do I have a setting wrong?  I'll look at the APCC ASCOM window again tonight when I'm west pointing and see what it shows. 


Ascom driver failed to connect, errors not displaying

Peter Bresler
 

Following a meridian flip failure during the night the following session I was having prolonged difficulty connecting to the ASCOM driver in APCC. I use an Ethernet hard wire connection. I reset the driver several times. I installed a backup setting. and it worked, but then started mal-functioning again. Also, errors are not displayed even if I select the option under tools. I usually have to close and reopen the program, and then they display.


Re: Question on the sky x

Dale Ghent
 

TSX has rudimentary sequence orchestration and automation. What you're looking for is more akin to the tasks and capabilities of applications such as SGPro, Voyager, PRISM, APT, CCD-Commander, and the one I personally work on, NINA. TSX is still a great application for helping to plan sessions and I use it myself for that very purpose. Many, if not all, of the apps I mention have the ability to import data in various ways from TSX as well.

On Feb 21, 2020, at 7:18 AM, Suresh Mohan <drsureshmohan@...> wrote:

Can the sky x be used as an image planner eg is it possible to command thro sky x to go to second object after the first is finished ?
Thanks
Suresh



Re: Confusion With Dome Behavior.........Who To Ask?

Ray Gralak
 

Tony,

Can you try configuring APPM to passively monitor the dome? You can find the menu item to edit the dome settings in APPM's setting's menu.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tony Benjamin
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 2:51 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Confusion With Dome Behavior.........Who To Ask?

I have an ASCOM controlled dome...its a Nexdome.

When I want to do an APPM Pointing Model I have SGP/AP V2 Driver/Nexdome set up and connected. When I hit
start the scope will slew to the Zenith (around Hip 2087) and start collecting its points. My problem with this is that
the Nexdome will initially rotate exactly 180 degrees from where it should be (it will rotate to 090 instead of 270
degrees), this results in a failed image as the view of the camera is obstructed by the dome interior (dome needs to
be at 270 degrees).

Now, if I just use a program such as Stellarium (great program and now with ASCOM support) to slew to Hip 2087 -
just to see if it will rotate the dome to the wrong orientation (090 instead of 270) it doesn't - it goes to the proper 270
degrees.

So, why, when using APPM, does the dome want to go to 090 initially and not the 270 degrees it needs? The
dome will go to 270 degrees after about 10 seconds...but by then its too late. How do I determine what the issue is
here? Is it an APPM issue?

I will post this at SGP as well.


Re: V vs V2 firmware

Ray Gralak
 

Your V chip is not obsolete and has nothing to do with MaxPoint not connecting. You might want to be sure that MaxPoint isn't running "as administrator" which might start a second instance of the ASCOM driver.

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Calypte
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 11:04 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] V vs V2 firmware

I have the Mach1GTO mount with GPOCP3 controller. I have ROM chip Version V. That's what APCC reports. I
have a recent version of the V2 driver. The V2 driver is distinct from the ROM chip Version V2 (which I don't
have), and the V2 driver works perfectly well with the Version chip -- correct?

The point of my questioning is this: I'm attempting to set up MaxPoint, to operate with MaxIm DL 6.21. I'm not even
sure that I need MaxPoint. But I've bought it, and I have it installed. Now that I've read the documentation, I'm not
sure that it's going to do anything for me that APCC and the sky model and plate-solves with CCD Commander
aren't already doing perfectly well. But since I have MaxPoint, I'd like to evaluate it.

But MaxPoint isn't connecting to the V2 driver. I'm wondering if it has anything to do with my having an obsolete
ROM chip.


Re: Question on the sky x

Stuart <stuart.j.heggie@...>
 

Suresh, I do not think you can do that with TSX alone. Also, I have not seen a way for TSX to know to flip at the meridian and re-acquire the guide star. I use TSX with CCD-Commander (quite affordable) and it handles all these things artfully for you.


On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 08:18, Suresh Mohan <drsureshmohan@...> wrote:
Can the sky x be used as an image planner eg is it possible to command thro sky x to go to second object after the first is finished ?
Thanks
Suresh




--

Stuart
http://www.astrofoto.ca/stuartheggie/


Re: Close up of M81 without CCDT67

Calypte
 

Very nice image.  I've always had trouble getting a real blue in the spiral arms  It's usually a tepid bluish-gray.


V vs V2 firmware

Calypte
 

I have the Mach1GTO mount with GPOCP3 controller.  I have ROM chip Version V.  That's what APCC reports.  I have a recent version of the V2 driver.  The V2 driver is distinct from the ROM chip Version V2 (which I don't have), and the V2 driver works perfectly well with the Version chip -- correct?

The point of my questioning is this: I'm attempting to set up MaxPoint, to operate with MaxIm DL 6.21.  I'm not even sure that I need MaxPoint.  But I've bought it, and I have it installed.  Now that I've read the documentation, I'm not sure that it's going to do anything for me that APCC and the sky model and plate-solves with CCD Commander aren't already doing perfectly well.  But since I have MaxPoint, I'd like to evaluate it.

But MaxPoint isn't connecting to the V2 driver.  I'm wondering if it has anything to do with my having an obsolete ROM chip.


Question on the sky x

Suresh Mohan
 

Can the sky x be used as an image planner eg is it possible to command thro sky x to go to second object after the first is finished ?
Thanks
Suresh