Date   

Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Bill Long
 

7 position 50mm wheel? 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Brian Valente <bvalente@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 10:07 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
>>>The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Starlight xpress has some excellent filter wheel + built-in OAG

earlier this year they released a 7 position "mid" version, which i find quite good



On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:05 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Roland Christen
 

If you updated the CP4 to the latest version 02-08, we added an intermediate 200x button rate which changed the other rates. So you will need to load the new version of the keypad software into your keypad.

Roland



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Steffens via groups.io <gwsteffens@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

That's what I did. I set the button rate to 1200 but it slews slower that 1200 when using the buttons. I didn't confirm it but it probably slews at 600. :(

Gary

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Gary Steffens
 

That's what I did. I set the button rate to 1200 but it slews slower that 1200 when using the buttons. I didn't confirm it but it probably slews at 600. :(

Gary


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

 

>>>The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Starlight xpress has some excellent filter wheel + built-in OAG

earlier this year they released a 7 position "mid" version, which i find quite good



On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:05 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Roland Christen
 

That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

skester@...
 

Xentex, the similarity in weight and length between the 12.5 and 14 was one of the reasons I posted my question. 

I will also admit to some confusion on my part in how the Mach 2 capacity chart indicates how to measure the OTA diameter/height.  The top two drawings seem to indicate the measurement is of the OTA tube only, and does not include the height of the mounting rings or dovetail, while the piggyback setup measures from the bottom of the dovetail to the top of the upper scope.  Which is the correct way to measure for the CDK?


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Bill Long
 

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Roland Christen
 

You can set the button rate by pressing button #6 and cycling thru the various rates from .25x to 1200x. You can also set the button rate by pressing +- button and using the < and > buttons to access the various rates.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Steffens via groups.io <gwsteffens@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Sun, Dec 20, 2020 11:50 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Hi Roland, thanks for your reply. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm referring to the "Button rate". I set it to 1200 but when I push any of the keypad buttons, the slew speed is slow. If I use the keypad to slew to an object (Moon, Mars, etc), it does slew at 1200. So it's only when I use the keypad N, S, E, or W buttons that the slew speed isn't 1200.

Thanks, Gary

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

steve.winston@...
 

Thanks Konstantin - will give that a try!


Re: Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

Konstantin von Poschinger
 

Take this:

https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/419/419

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger


Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476

Am 21.12.2020 um 16:32 schrieb steve.winston@...:

Hi.

It looks like I need to reload the image in my Mach-1 keypad - I'm getting the "Object Below Horizon" error message, but only for non-stellar / non-solar system objects.

I did a search but could only find this old non-working link to instructions: https://www.astro-physics.com/tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/dataload201/dataload201.htm

Are current instructions available on the website somewhere?

thanks!

Steve
  


Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

steve.winston@...
 

Hi.

It looks like I need to reload the image in my Mach-1 keypad - I'm getting the "Object Below Horizon" error message, but only for non-stellar / non-solar system objects.

I did a search but could only find this old non-working link to instructions: https://www.astro-physics.com/tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/dataload201/dataload201.htm

Are current instructions available on the website somewhere?

thanks!

Steve
  


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Terri Zittritsch
 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

Terri Zittritsch
 

So I'll provide a counterpoint here, but I would still listen to Roland's feedback.

I was thinking exactly the same thing as you, and that is, if it fits within the green zone of use conditions then it should be fair game.    I guess when looking at lesser built mounts that are built for a price rather than performance point, I'd be skeptical and maybe apply judgement to their specifications, but this is Astro-Physics, and I'd expect that if they spec and sell the mount to meet a performance window, than we can all take that to the bank so to speak.    Now maybe what we're seeing is that because of all of the experience here, these users know that you're not actually going to achieve a green-zone build with that scope and therefore will ultimately fall outside of the specification box, then it's good and helpful feedback.    Otherwise I'd like to know that I can use the mach2 within the specification window advertised.  That was a factor for purchasing the mount in the first place and I'd like not to be accused of under mounting a scope that fits in the A-P spec window.    I have the mach2, and the biggest scope I've used on it is an 11" edge and it works well.     


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Robert Chozick
 

Thanks Ernie.  I appreciate your comments. 

Robert 


On Dec 20, 2020, at 9:46 PM, ernie.mastroianni@... wrote:

Great shot. Super sharp, excellent processing.


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Gary Steffens
 

Hi Roland, thanks for your reply. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm referring to the "Button rate". I set it to 1200 but when I push any of the keypad buttons, the slew speed is slow. If I use the keypad to slew to an object (Moon, Mars, etc), it does slew at 1200. So it's only when I use the keypad N, S, E, or W buttons that the slew speed isn't 1200.

Thanks, Gary


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

Great shot. Super sharp, excellent processing.


#Mach2GTO #fieldsetup #mach2gto #Mach2GTO

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

Earlier this evening (Dec. 20) the Mach2 at a lakefront Milwaukee parking lot, set up to shoot the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction. Then clouds.
The good news: daytime field alignment worked.

I leveled the mount, slewed to Home position, then used an iPhone compass app to get a rough direction to the pole. Using the keypad, I slewed to the Moon. With just a little azimuth adjustment and a recal on the moon's center, I spotted Jupiter through a low power eyepiece after a meridian flip.
This was just minutes after sunset.

Unfortunately, I had only 10 or 15 seconds of viewing until the clouds rolled in. I'll try again in 2080. Or maybe Tuesday night.
Bottom line, mount and keypad work great.
Ernie


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

Wayne Hixson
 

I had a 12.5” AGO iDK on my Mach 2 for a few months and it handled it well. 


On Dec 20, 2020, at 4:51 PM, Xentex <michael@...> wrote:

I think it's reasonable to ask the same question regarding the CDK 12.5.  It weighs the same as the CDK 14 and comes in at 17.26" diameter (vs 18.95 for the 14") and 35" length before adding the imaging train (vs 35.7" for the 14").  Not a huge difference between them.

I've asked myself this exact same question about maybe someday putting a CDK on the Mach 2.


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

Xentex
 

I think it's reasonable to ask the same question regarding the CDK 12.5.  It weighs the same as the CDK 14 and comes in at 17.26" diameter (vs 18.95 for the 14") and 35" length before adding the imaging train (vs 35.7" for the 14").  Not a huge difference between them.

I've asked myself this exact same question about maybe someday putting a CDK on the Mach 2.


Re: One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to buy a license for the activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

Micheal Fields Jr
 

You say it is normal but on all my installs it prompts me to install.  I'll keep trying.  Not giving up yet.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 03:25 PM, Ray Gralak wrote:
The Eltima install window will flicker and disappear. That is normal.

The real question is, when you try to create a Virtual Port in APCC does it still ask for a license?

BTW,nif it does ask for a license try right-clicking the APCC installer and running it "as administrator".

-Ray Gralak
Author of PEMPro
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
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 Micheal Fields Jr via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 2:52 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to buy a license for the
activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

Ok created a new admin account and re-installed APCC Pro. Same symptom. The prompt to install the Eltima stuff
never shows but there is a brief flicker of a window that is killed. I have no 3rd party AV stuff installed. And I have
disabled all windows AV, firewalls, etc. And I have the user account control slider all the way to zero.

Doesn't make any sense at all. I have several lap top computers laying around.

Ok, I did a bit more investigating. I grabbed a laptop computer that I have laying around. I did the install. Sure
enough the Eltima pop-up command box popped up and then my computer asked me to give it permission to install the
software. On my main PC with AMD Ryzen, the box just flickers and closes...

So I looked at the path to the install file. C:\Program Files(x86)/Astro-Physics\APCC Pro\vspdx_install.exe So I
went into that folder on my Ryzen PC and found the file. I double click and it still just flickers and closes. Does not
give me a prompt to install. I went back into user account control and moved the bar all the way to the top and I right
clicked on the file and picked "run as administrator" and the same problem persists. I made a video showing what it
is doing and I didn't find any rules against posting youtube lnks. https://youtu.be/FwlRM_OtXMc sorry for the bad
quality. Skip to the last 60 seconds if you are not interested in how I installed ascom and all that nonsense.



On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 01:27 PM, Ray Gralak wrote:



Just out of curiosity, can you try creating a new Windows user account that has admin privileges and install it
from that account?

-Ray Gralak
Author of PEMPro
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
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 Micheal Fields Jr via
groups.io
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 1:00 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to buy a
license for the
activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

Yes, I've done that. There is something wrong where it will not pop up the install option for the virtual
com port driver.
The check box is checked (by default) and left alone each time. I do NOT uncheck it.

I dug out my old computer from the office and installed everything fresh on it and sure enough I can get
that install
option just fine. Uninstalling, rebooting, disabling AV etc, makes zero difference. All systems use the
same version of
windows with the same options. Default.

The only thing I can think of is that my main PC is a AMD Ryzen system not Intel. The other two systems
are Intel
based.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:


Uninstall, reboot, reinstall with AV off.
________________________________

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Micheal Fields Jr via groups.io
<mpfjr@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 9:26 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to buy a
license for
the activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

Only have the default windows security stuff. No different than any of my computers including the one
that
works. But I will turn it all off anyways and see what happens. Thanks

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 08:53 PM, Ray Gralak wrote:


One other thing you might try is temporarily turn off your anti-virus software as it may be blocking the
virtual port component from being registered.

-Ray Gralak
Author of PEMPro
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-
physics.com%2Fapcc-

pro&data=04%7C01%7C%7C3bc8a944900d456aff9308d8a4a7bf4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa
%7C1

%7C0%7C637440387656694593%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luM
zIiLCJ

BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=I1zq0W1%2BlU2miV9uUblMxGlu441KoK32TZLBwh53IX
0%3D
&reserved=0>
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.siriusimaging.com%2Fapdriver&da
ta=04

%7C01%7C%7C3bc8a944900d456aff9308d8a4a7bf4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0
%7C63

7440387656694593%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik
1haWwi

LCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=PX0KPu%2B4RlSO%2F%2FZMHOXnebY32Ga9Byv02Si7m4Z0UCE%
3D&res
erved=0>




-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Micheal Fields Jr via
groups.io
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 8:37 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to
buy a license for the
activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

Hi Ray, Yes I have done that about 5 times in the last hour. I even used geek uninstaller to make
sure it found every
trace in the registry and removed it so I could do a fresh install but still no joy. But I also realize
that it is a device driver
so maybe the move is to go into devices, find the device driver, and remove it there. Then re-
install everything?

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 07:55 PM, Ray Gralak wrote:


ON the main PC system I have an issue where when I try to create a virtual port it has a pop up
saying I
need to buy a
license for the virtual port software. $139 for the cheap one.

There is a step in the APCC installer which will install the virtual ports on your computer. If you
don't perform
that step then you will not get the licensed virtual port components on that computer.

So, try reinstalling APCC Pro and enable the checkbox in the installer to install the virtual ports
component.

-Ray Gralak
Author of PEMPro
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-
physics.com%2Fapcc-

pro&data=04%7C01%7C%7C3bc8a944900d456aff9308d8a4a7bf4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa
%7C1

%7C0%7C637440387656704590%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luM
zIiLCJ

BTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=l3Riq26Ak0SePA7uqoX%2BP5Rb7Ddl9Wv%2BvJKrsS3l
EB8%
3D&reserved=0>
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.siriusimaging.com%2Fapdriver&da
ta=04

%7C01%7C%7C3bc8a944900d456aff9308d8a4a7bf4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0
%7C63

7440387656714585%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik
1haWwi

LCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Gs8js0dcKq%2FwzeYreYMo4IPFbuFiD7BmkFOVnpZMf9I%3D&reserve
d=0>



-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Micheal Fields Jr via
groups.io
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 7:31 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] One computer I can create a virtual port. Second computer says I have to buy a
license
for the
activeX control (virtual port) for this computer. #APCC

So I have two computers that I am setting up. My main PC (desktop gaming system) and a little
Mini pc.
On the little
guy everything seems to work as it should.

ON the main PC system I have an issue where when I try to create a virtual port it has a pop up
saying I
need to buy a
license for the virtual port software. $139 for the cheap one.

I am trying to test out point mapping on my new Mach2 but haven't been able to yet because of
that
license
requirement.

I uninstalled everything AP related and did a full re-install and nothing has changed. So while my
little
PC seems to
be working, I would like to be able to use my main PC while I am at home as it is more
comfortable and
quick and
easier to work with. (dual monitors and all that).

Anyone know what I am talking about and how to resolve this?





7401 - 7420 of 82370