Date   

Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 

What's the max weight you would carry?

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Chozick via groups.io <rchozick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 1:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

I have a 900 and I think the ability to split the axis for lower weight to carry makes a 900 or 1100 much more portable than the Mach 1 or 2. One of the reasons I changed from the Mach 1 to my 900 was because the Mach 1 was too heavy for me to carry.   I wish the Mach 2 was made with a split axis. For that reason I could never own a Mach 2. 

Robert 


On Apr 23, 2020, at 12:41 PM, Michael Hambrick via groups.io <mike.hambrick@...> wrote:

Thanks Bill. I do love my 1100 mount, and will likely never sell it.

I had a similar dilemma a couple years ago when I posed a question to George whether to get a better mount (I was using an A-P 800 at the time), or to get a better camera. He advised me to sell my 800 mount and get the 1100. That was very good advice and I have never regretted the decision to get the mount.

As you mentioned in your previous post, it often turns out that the financial controller releases more funds later on. This is exactly what happened before. I bought the 1100GTO mount, and then about a year later she let me upgrade my camera.

Isn't it funny how most of the financial controllers are female ? I know that at least for my case I would probably be broke if I were the financial controller :>)

I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Bill Long" <bill@...>
To:        "main@ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 12:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on.




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent:
Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To:
main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject:
Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
 

I have a 900 and I think the ability to split the axis for lower weight to carry makes a 900 or 1100 much more portable than the Mach 1 or 2. One of the reasons I changed from the Mach 1 to my 900 was because the Mach 1 was too heavy for me to carry.   I wish the Mach 2 was made with a split axis. For that reason I could never own a Mach 2. 

Robert 


On Apr 23, 2020, at 12:41 PM, Michael Hambrick via groups.io <mike.hambrick@...> wrote:

Thanks Bill. I do love my 1100 mount, and will likely never sell it.

I had a similar dilemma a couple years ago when I posed a question to George whether to get a better mount (I was using an A-P 800 at the time), or to get a better camera. He advised me to sell my 800 mount and get the 1100. That was very good advice and I have never regretted the decision to get the mount.

As you mentioned in your previous post, it often turns out that the financial controller releases more funds later on. This is exactly what happened before. I bought the 1100GTO mount, and then about a year later she let me upgrade my camera.

Isn't it funny how most of the financial controllers are female ? I know that at least for my case I would probably be broke if I were the financial controller :>)

I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Bill Long" <bill@...>
To:        "main@ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 12:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on.




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent:
Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To:
main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject:
Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



--
Brian  



Brian Valente
portfolio brianvalentephotography.com  [nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]




Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Christopher Erickson
 

That is EXACTLY how I got my first scope!

A Sears 60mm refractor on an Alt-Az mount. 50 years ago I mowed their lawn for an entire summer to get that scope.

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:57 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:


I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.
Give it to a local kid who is just starting out in astronomy. That, and a scope you are no longer using. Have him/her mow your lawn as payment ;^))

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Hambrick via groups.io <mike.hambrick=arlanxeo.com@groups.io>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 12:41 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Thanks Bill. I do love my 1100 mount, and will likely never sell it.

I had a similar dilemma a couple years ago when I posed a question to George whether to get a better mount (I was using an A-P 800 at the time), or to get a better camera. He advised me to sell my 800 mount and get the 1100. That was very good advice and I have never regretted the decision to get the mount.

As you mentioned in your previous post, it often turns out that the financial controller releases more funds later on. This is exactly what happened before. I bought the 1100GTO mount, and then about a year later she let me upgrade my camera.

Isn't it funny how most of the financial controllers are female ? I know that at least for my case I would probably be broke if I were the financial controller :>)

I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Bill Long" <bill@...>
To:        "main@ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 12:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on.




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent:
Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To:
main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject:
Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices


--
Brian  



Brian Valente
portfolio brianvalentephotography.com  [nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]



Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 


I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.
Give it to a local kid who is just starting out in astronomy. That, and a scope you are no longer using. Have him/her mow your lawn as payment ;^))

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Hambrick via groups.io <mike.hambrick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 12:41 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Thanks Bill. I do love my 1100 mount, and will likely never sell it.

I had a similar dilemma a couple years ago when I posed a question to George whether to get a better mount (I was using an A-P 800 at the time), or to get a better camera. He advised me to sell my 800 mount and get the 1100. That was very good advice and I have never regretted the decision to get the mount.

As you mentioned in your previous post, it often turns out that the financial controller releases more funds later on. This is exactly what happened before. I bought the 1100GTO mount, and then about a year later she let me upgrade my camera.

Isn't it funny how most of the financial controllers are female ? I know that at least for my case I would probably be broke if I were the financial controller :>)

I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Bill Long" <bill@...>
To:        "main@ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 12:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on.




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent:
Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To:
main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject:
Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Michael Hambrick <mike.hambrick@...>
 

Thanks Bill. I do love my 1100 mount, and will likely never sell it.

I had a similar dilemma a couple years ago when I posed a question to George whether to get a better mount (I was using an A-P 800 at the time), or to get a better camera. He advised me to sell my 800 mount and get the 1100. That was very good advice and I have never regretted the decision to get the mount.

As you mentioned in your previous post, it often turns out that the financial controller releases more funds later on. This is exactly what happened before. I bought the 1100GTO mount, and then about a year later she let me upgrade my camera.

Isn't it funny how most of the financial controllers are female ? I know that at least for my case I would probably be broke if I were the financial controller :>)

I still have the old 800 mount that I need to figure out what I am going to do with it.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Bill Long" <bill@...>
To:        "main@ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 12:25 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on.




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent:
Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To:
main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject:
Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



--
Brian  



Brian Valente
portfolio brianvalentephotography.com  [nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]




Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 

Go for the encoders.

The 92's will be more and more available as time goes on. I plan another run after #3 is finished (unless the virus gets me).

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 11:34 am
Subject: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices


Re: AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

Roland Christen
 

Yes, remove the Dec compensation. In fact i would remove it in both. The further you go north the more overcompensated Ra guiding becomes.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Shade <mshade@q.com>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 11:01 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

One additional question...I am using Maxim 5.18 to guide the 1600GTO through the CDK 17.  As I understand it, Maxim has built in declination compensation (I am also using an Optec Gemini rotating focuser).  I also use ACP to run everything.  ACP also has guiding declination.  Curious if the declination compensation in ACP is not needed and might be causing some conflict with Maxim with RA guiding.  Reason is that I get ever so slightly out of round stars in the E/W direction, just a few pixels but enough to notice (.63"/pixel).  Always in the E/W direction.  I suspect a guiding issue as this system will do a 5 minute unguided image near the zenith with round stars so I am not suspecting polar alignment, PEC curve issues, gear mesh.
 
I did bump the minimum move in Maxim from .01" to .02", might need to go a light bit more perhaps.
 
Mike J. Shade
Mike J. Shade Photography:
 
In War: Resolution
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Goodwill
Sir Winston Churchill
Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.
Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half
a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest
Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...
Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights
 
International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org
 
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mike Shade
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 5:53 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?
 
OK, thanks...will try that and see how it goes.
 
Mike J. Shade
Mike J. Shade Photography:
 
In War: Resolution
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Goodwill
Sir Winston Churchill
Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.
Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half
a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest
Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...
Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights
 
International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org
 
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 4:38 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?
 
With my 17" astrograph and 1600 mount I have used .02sec mostly. Max move is .5 sec.
 
Rolando
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Shade <mshade@q.com>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Apr 22, 2020 5:46 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?
Have a first generation 1600GTO/Planewave CDK 17/SBIG STL6303E camera, permanent observatory setup.  Guiding with the internal guider on the camera, ST237 chip.  Main imaging scale .63"/pixel unbinned, guider binned 3X3, guiding at 1X sidereal.
 
Curious as to what folks have found to be a useful minimum move setting in Maxim for guiding (I'm still using V5.18) with a 1600?
 
Using ASCOM to guide, not the guider relays.  ACP runs the whole show. 
 
Looking for what folks have found to be a starting point.  Seeing here tends to run about 2", sometimes a bit better, sometimes a bit worse.
 
Thanks...
 
Mike J. Shade
Mike J. Shade Photography:
mshadephotography.com
 
In War: Resolution
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Goodwill
Sir Winston Churchill
Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.
Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half
a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest
Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...
Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights
 
International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Bill Long
 

Do not sell the 1100! It is the best mount A-P makes for all around use IMHO. VERY portable, excellent and spacious cabling system, support for encoders, high weight capacity, and the list just goes on and on. 



From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:22 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
 
Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

dvjbaja
 

Guess I'm really odd.  In over 40 years of imaging, I've never needed a mount with absolute encoders and I have had a wee bit of success with my images.  Always go for the gold!  The Telescope!  Sell your 1100, get the Mach 2.  Problem solved. In fact, that's my decision. I have a new 1100 but if the Mach 2 has the load bearing capability as described, it's smaller size would make life a little easier.    ;-)  

J. Gleason.  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 

I guess i am the odd one out - i would pick the encoders

you have some great scopes there, time to put them to even better use!

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:34 AM M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...> wrote:
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Keith Olsen
 

Buy the Stowaway, sell the Tele-Vue and then buy the encoders.


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Bill Long
 

Stowaway. The encoders will be there later, for a time in the future when the controller relinquishes more funds. 😉 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of M Hambrick <mhambrick563@...>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 9:34 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
 
I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices


Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

M Hambrick
 

I am somewhere on the waiting list for one of the 92 mm Stowaway refractors, and I currently own an 1100GTO mount without absolute encoders. Someday, lady luck may finally shine her light on me and I will get notified that there will be a Stowaway available for me to order. I am also seriously thinking about upgrading my 1100 mount with the absolute encoders. The financial controller at my house tells me that I have to pick between the scope or the mount upgrade. I would be interested to hear comments from the other members which they would choose. I do almost exclusively imaging, and I already own two nice refractors; a recently upgraded Astro-Physics 180EDT, and a Tele-Vue NP101is. Choices. Choices


Re: AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

Mike Shade
 

One additional question...I am using Maxim 5.18 to guide the 1600GTO through the CDK 17.  As I understand it, Maxim has built in declination compensation (I am also using an Optec Gemini rotating focuser).  I also use ACP to run everything.  ACP also has guiding declination.  Curious if the declination compensation in ACP is not needed and might be causing some conflict with Maxim with RA guiding.  Reason is that I get ever so slightly out of round stars in the E/W direction, just a few pixels but enough to notice (.63"/pixel).  Always in the E/W direction.  I suspect a guiding issue as this system will do a 5 minute unguided image near the zenith with round stars so I am not suspecting polar alignment, PEC curve issues, gear mesh.

 

I did bump the minimum move in Maxim from .01" to .02", might need to go a light bit more perhaps.

 

Mike J. Shade

Mike J. Shade Photography:

mshadephotography.com

 

In War: Resolution

In Defeat: Defiance

In Victory: Magnanimity

In Peace: Goodwill

Sir Winston Churchill

Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.

Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half

a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest

Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...

Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights

 

International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mike Shade
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 5:53 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

 

OK, thanks...will try that and see how it goes.

 

Mike J. Shade

Mike J. Shade Photography:

mshadephotography.com

 

In War: Resolution

In Defeat: Defiance

In Victory: Magnanimity

In Peace: Goodwill

Sir Winston Churchill

Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.

Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half

a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest

Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...

Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights

 

International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 4:38 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

 

With my 17" astrograph and 1600 mount I have used .02sec mostly. Max move is .5 sec.

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Shade <mshade@q.com>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Apr 22, 2020 5:46 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP 1600 minimum move/MAXIM?

Have a first generation 1600GTO/Planewave CDK 17/SBIG STL6303E camera, permanent observatory setup.  Guiding with the internal guider on the camera, ST237 chip.  Main imaging scale .63"/pixel unbinned, guider binned 3X3, guiding at 1X sidereal.

 

Curious as to what folks have found to be a useful minimum move setting in Maxim for guiding (I'm still using V5.18) with a 1600?

 

Using ASCOM to guide, not the guider relays.  ACP runs the whole show. 

 

Looking for what folks have found to be a starting point.  Seeing here tends to run about 2", sometimes a bit better, sometimes a bit worse.

 

Thanks...

 

Mike J. Shade

Mike J. Shade Photography:

mshadephotography.com

 

In War: Resolution

In Defeat: Defiance

In Victory: Magnanimity

In Peace: Goodwill

Sir Winston Churchill

Already, in the gathering dusk, a few of the stars are turning on their lights.

Vega, the brightest one, is now dropping towards the west.  Can it be half

a year since I watched her April rising in the east?  Low in the southwest

Antares blinks a sad farwell to fall...

Leslie Peltier, Starlight Nights

 

International Dark Sky Association: www.darksky.org


Re: Pointing Model vs. OAG with PHD2

 

i've been following your SX and PHD discussions, and yes that is completely frustrating. hopefully that can get resolved and you will be back to your oag soon


On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:22 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
Thanks, Brian

I think between your response and that of Roland's, I will stick with the integrated OAG system.  In fact, I need to move the new MIDI version as I need 2" filters for my new ASI2600MC Pro.  Hoping to test things again Sunday night when it should be clear but it just doesn't;t make sense why this just stopped working.  I checked cables, 2- cameras, etc and both mount and guide camera connect but no stars on the PHD2 view- just snow but my images are fine.  I'll try to get a clear star view from the capture software using the guide camera and se what happens.  If I do, I should see it in the PHD2 view screen and it should calibrate but will see what happens. 
  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I think i have the same oag/filter wheel as you, and it does eventually work

what is your imaging resolution? 

re: unguided, I think it can work quite effectively, particularly with a quality mount like AP

in my experience (with losmandy not AP) ability to do unguided really boils down to excellent polar alignment, good periodic error correction, and generally good imaging "hygiene" (avoid cable snags, things are tightened down well, etc.). 

i was able to get 5 min unguided exposures @ around 1.1 arcsec/pix. not earth shattering but not too shabby

Personally i found setting up OAG to be easier than figuring out unguided. With unguided, there are so many small fiddly things you really have to nail down, and they can shift a bit every night, so i had to be constantly diligent. with AP there are less fiddly things related to the mount which will make your life a little easier

I encourage you to try it, but also a bit of caution that you will be inheriting other types of challenges.



On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:58 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
Hi Brian

The idea is to do unguiding.  I can do about 60s now but would prefer to do 120s unguided.  

Weather bad now so I am at a standstill at the moment.  The mount connects with PHD2 but no focus achieved, so no calibration.  I have no idea why.  Anyway, I agree that once the guide cam is in focus, it should remain that way but at times things seem to shift with the integrated OAG/filter wheel setup that I have.  I like it in that it is one piece of hardware vs two but for whatever reason(s), I seem to have to readjust things once in a while despite nothing shifting or moving.  That is why I want to at least explore this option which may not be a better way.




On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:49 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
Hi Bruce

this is more from a PHD perspective (and also i know you've had some posts at SX forum)

Is your idea that you want to do unguided imaging vs. guided?

It seems you have an issue that is unresolved and you are still looking for the root cause, but once it's solved, you would not be refocusing your camera at all. just gotta figure out what's causing it

Brian

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:37 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
I would feedback from those doing pointing models if would be advantageous for me to try it based on my specific setup on stick with OAG.

I am in a permanent observatory above my garage roof which is about 12 feet above street level. In the observatory, my C11" EdgeHD (with an 80mm piggybacked onto it) is on an AP1100 which is on top of a Pier Tech adjustable steel pier (can be raised 18 inches).  The steel pier lies on top of a cement pier that runs down below street level.  So, the scope itself is about 8 ft above the observatory floor, requiring me to use safety ladder to get to it but just about everything is automated now with few exceptions. My setup is well built, has excellent polar alignment and cable management.  I would have to recheck my PE on my 1.5 year old AP1100.  For guiding, I have been using PHD2 with an OAG for about 2 years but I find it to be finicky and I often have to get up on the ladder to re-focus the guide camera (one of the few non-automated steps).  Seeing and transparency in my area is generally not very good and I do not get many clear nights.  Typically, my seeing is around below average/average with many nights of poor and few above average/excellent. I am thinking of using the 80mm as the guide scope for the C11 since it has an autofocuser but I am still dealing with PHD2 and my so-so skies. 

With this as an introduction, would taking the time to learn to build a pointing model save me a lot of aggravation (i.e.,up and own on the ladder for the OAG adjustments or using the less effective 80mm) in the long run or am I just exchanging one set of problems for potential another set?  Would a pointing model be more or less advantageous for guiding in my sky conditions or just the same as using an OAG approach?

Bruce



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: CP4 Sharing?

Dominique Durand
 

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:15 PM, George wrote:

Dominique,

 

In that case, you will be in excellent shape.   It is a good plan.   You should have a lot of fun.

 

Regards,

 

George


Thanks George,

This is the good plan that I am considering, but while waiting for this passage from CP3 to CP4 for the Mach1 I am bored of still not being able to try my Mach2 yet

Regards.

Dominique

 


Re: Pointing Model vs. OAG with PHD2

Bruce Donzanti
 

Thanks, Brian

I think between your response and that of Roland's, I will stick with the integrated OAG system.  In fact, I need to move the new MIDI version as I need 2" filters for my new ASI2600MC Pro.  Hoping to test things again Sunday night when it should be clear but it just doesn't;t make sense why this just stopped working.  I checked cables, 2- cameras, etc and both mount and guide camera connect but no stars on the PHD2 view- just snow but my images are fine.  I'll try to get a clear star view from the capture software using the guide camera and se what happens.  If I do, I should see it in the PHD2 view screen and it should calibrate but will see what happens. 
  

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:12 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
I think i have the same oag/filter wheel as you, and it does eventually work

what is your imaging resolution? 

re: unguided, I think it can work quite effectively, particularly with a quality mount like AP

in my experience (with losmandy not AP) ability to do unguided really boils down to excellent polar alignment, good periodic error correction, and generally good imaging "hygiene" (avoid cable snags, things are tightened down well, etc.). 

i was able to get 5 min unguided exposures @ around 1.1 arcsec/pix. not earth shattering but not too shabby

Personally i found setting up OAG to be easier than figuring out unguided. With unguided, there are so many small fiddly things you really have to nail down, and they can shift a bit every night, so i had to be constantly diligent. with AP there are less fiddly things related to the mount which will make your life a little easier

I encourage you to try it, but also a bit of caution that you will be inheriting other types of challenges.



On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:58 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
Hi Brian

The idea is to do unguiding.  I can do about 60s now but would prefer to do 120s unguided.  

Weather bad now so I am at a standstill at the moment.  The mount connects with PHD2 but no focus achieved, so no calibration.  I have no idea why.  Anyway, I agree that once the guide cam is in focus, it should remain that way but at times things seem to shift with the integrated OAG/filter wheel setup that I have.  I like it in that it is one piece of hardware vs two but for whatever reason(s), I seem to have to readjust things once in a while despite nothing shifting or moving.  That is why I want to at least explore this option which may not be a better way.




On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:49 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
Hi Bruce

this is more from a PHD perspective (and also i know you've had some posts at SX forum)

Is your idea that you want to do unguided imaging vs. guided?

It seems you have an issue that is unresolved and you are still looking for the root cause, but once it's solved, you would not be refocusing your camera at all. just gotta figure out what's causing it

Brian

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:37 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
I would feedback from those doing pointing models if would be advantageous for me to try it based on my specific setup on stick with OAG.

I am in a permanent observatory above my garage roof which is about 12 feet above street level. In the observatory, my C11" EdgeHD (with an 80mm piggybacked onto it) is on an AP1100 which is on top of a Pier Tech adjustable steel pier (can be raised 18 inches).  The steel pier lies on top of a cement pier that runs down below street level.  So, the scope itself is about 8 ft above the observatory floor, requiring me to use safety ladder to get to it but just about everything is automated now with few exceptions. My setup is well built, has excellent polar alignment and cable management.  I would have to recheck my PE on my 1.5 year old AP1100.  For guiding, I have been using PHD2 with an OAG for about 2 years but I find it to be finicky and I often have to get up on the ladder to re-focus the guide camera (one of the few non-automated steps).  Seeing and transparency in my area is generally not very good and I do not get many clear nights.  Typically, my seeing is around below average/average with many nights of poor and few above average/excellent. I am thinking of using the 80mm as the guide scope for the C11 since it has an autofocuser but I am still dealing with PHD2 and my so-so skies. 

With this as an introduction, would taking the time to learn to build a pointing model save me a lot of aggravation (i.e.,up and own on the ladder for the OAG adjustments or using the less effective 80mm) in the long run or am I just exchanging one set of problems for potential another set?  Would a pointing model be more or less advantageous for guiding in my sky conditions or just the same as using an OAG approach?

Bruce



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: CP4 Sharing?

George
 

Dominique,

 

In that case, you will be in excellent shape.   It is a good plan.   You should have a lot of fun.

 

Regards,

 

George

 

George Whitney

Astro-Physics, Inc.

Phone:  815-282-1513

Email:  george@...

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dominique Durand via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:11 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] CP4 Sharing?

 

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 04:02 PM, George wrote:

Dominique,

 

“Swap” implies that you want to go back and forth repeatedly.   That you cannot do without losing the PE each time.

 

If you want to make a onetime move of the CP4 to the other mount, you can certainly do that.   However, you will need to make a new PE once you’ve changed mounts.   After that, you’ll be fine…unless you change the CP4 back. 

      Regards,

 

 George

Hi George,

To be more precise, I will have my Mach2 / CP5 in my observatory which will not move and my Mach1 for mobile use. On the mach1 I want to replace the CP3 with a CP4 and upgrade the keyboard to benefit from the new correction routines and ultimately have a Mach1 / CP4.

Regards

Dominique

 


Re: Pointing Model vs. OAG with PHD2

Bruce Donzanti
 

OK- that answers that question.  I'll fix my OAG issue and carry on.

Thanks much

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:06 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I have used a pointing model at my observatory which has a 175 F8 refractor. I find that for imaging up to 20 minutes the model does just fine but my mount has encoders and essentially zero periodic error. For a non-encoder mount you might be more limited in time to perhaps 10 minutes unless you have excellent periodic error corrections.

The main problem with SCT scopes is mirror flop which cannot be modeled since it is a random error. Using a separate guide scope again limits the exposure time because of mirror flop which causes differential pointing errors between the two scopes (differential flex). The only way to assure proper imaging with SCTs at their native focal length is off-axis guiding.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 9:37 am
Subject: [ap-gto] Pointing Model vs. OAG with PHD2

I would feedback from those doing pointing models if would be advantageous for me to try it based on my specific setup on stick with OAG.

I am in a permanent observatory above my garage roof which is about 12 feet above street level. In the observatory, my C11" EdgeHD (with an 80mm piggybacked onto it) is on an AP1100 which is on top of a Pier Tech adjustable steel pier (can be raised 18 inches).  The steel pier lies on top of a cement pier that runs down below street level.  So, the scope itself is about 8 ft above the observatory floor, requiring me to use safety ladder to get to it but just about everything is automated now with few exceptions. My setup is well built, has excellent polar alignment and cable management.  I would have to recheck my PE on my 1.5 year old AP1100.  For guiding, I have been using PHD2 with an OAG for about 2 years but I find it to be finicky and I often have to get up on the ladder to re-focus the guide camera (one of the few non-automated steps).  Seeing and transparency in my area is generally not very good and I do not get many clear nights.  Typically, my seeing is around below average/average with many nights of poor and few above average/excellent. I am thinking of using the 80mm as the guide scope for the C11 since it has an autofocuser but I am still dealing with PHD2 and my so-so skies. 

With this as an introduction, would taking the time to learn to build a pointing model save me a lot of aggravation (i.e.,up and own on the ladder for the OAG adjustments or using the less effective 80mm) in the long run or am I just exchanging one set of problems for potential another set?  Would a pointing model be more or less advantageous for guiding in my sky conditions or just the same as using an OAG approach?

Bruce


Re: Pointing Model vs. OAG with PHD2

 

I think i have the same oag/filter wheel as you, and it does eventually work

what is your imaging resolution? 

re: unguided, I think it can work quite effectively, particularly with a quality mount like AP

in my experience (with losmandy not AP) ability to do unguided really boils down to excellent polar alignment, good periodic error correction, and generally good imaging "hygiene" (avoid cable snags, things are tightened down well, etc.). 

i was able to get 5 min unguided exposures @ around 1.1 arcsec/pix. not earth shattering but not too shabby

Personally i found setting up OAG to be easier than figuring out unguided. With unguided, there are so many small fiddly things you really have to nail down, and they can shift a bit every night, so i had to be constantly diligent. with AP there are less fiddly things related to the mount which will make your life a little easier

I encourage you to try it, but also a bit of caution that you will be inheriting other types of challenges.



On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:58 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
Hi Brian

The idea is to do unguiding.  I can do about 60s now but would prefer to do 120s unguided.  

Weather bad now so I am at a standstill at the moment.  The mount connects with PHD2 but no focus achieved, so no calibration.  I have no idea why.  Anyway, I agree that once the guide cam is in focus, it should remain that way but at times things seem to shift with the integrated OAG/filter wheel setup that I have.  I like it in that it is one piece of hardware vs two but for whatever reason(s), I seem to have to readjust things once in a while despite nothing shifting or moving.  That is why I want to at least explore this option which may not be a better way.




On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:49 AM Brian Valente <bvalente@...> wrote:
Hi Bruce

this is more from a PHD perspective (and also i know you've had some posts at SX forum)

Is your idea that you want to do unguided imaging vs. guided?

It seems you have an issue that is unresolved and you are still looking for the root cause, but once it's solved, you would not be refocusing your camera at all. just gotta figure out what's causing it

Brian

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:37 AM Bruce Donzanti <donza2735@...> wrote:
I would feedback from those doing pointing models if would be advantageous for me to try it based on my specific setup on stick with OAG.

I am in a permanent observatory above my garage roof which is about 12 feet above street level. In the observatory, my C11" EdgeHD (with an 80mm piggybacked onto it) is on an AP1100 which is on top of a Pier Tech adjustable steel pier (can be raised 18 inches).  The steel pier lies on top of a cement pier that runs down below street level.  So, the scope itself is about 8 ft above the observatory floor, requiring me to use safety ladder to get to it but just about everything is automated now with few exceptions. My setup is well built, has excellent polar alignment and cable management.  I would have to recheck my PE on my 1.5 year old AP1100.  For guiding, I have been using PHD2 with an OAG for about 2 years but I find it to be finicky and I often have to get up on the ladder to re-focus the guide camera (one of the few non-automated steps).  Seeing and transparency in my area is generally not very good and I do not get many clear nights.  Typically, my seeing is around below average/average with many nights of poor and few above average/excellent. I am thinking of using the 80mm as the guide scope for the C11 since it has an autofocuser but I am still dealing with PHD2 and my so-so skies. 

With this as an introduction, would taking the time to learn to build a pointing model save me a lot of aggravation (i.e.,up and own on the ladder for the OAG adjustments or using the less effective 80mm) in the long run or am I just exchanging one set of problems for potential another set?  Would a pointing model be more or less advantageous for guiding in my sky conditions or just the same as using an OAG approach?

Bruce



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente