Re: APCC log question
Ray Gralak
Hi Mike,
I just redid my PE correction with PemPro and that had improved matters quite a bit. If you have anyAPCC Pro can do full-sky or declination-arc drift correction. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
Re: APCC log question
Hi Ray,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I just redid my PE correction with PemPro and that had improved matters quite a bit. If you have any suggestions about measuring and correcting drift, I’m all ears. Thanks for your reply. Mike
On Dec 14, 2021, at 5:33 AM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: AP1600 Lost
Bob Enouen
Thank you Ray.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Bob Robert J. Enouen Cell 513-504-4410
On Dec 14, 2021, at 8:28 AM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Install APCC first or AP V2?
Ray Gralak
Here is the recommended order:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
1. Update to .NET Framework 4.7.2 or later (if needed) 2. Install the ASCOM Platform 6.5 SP1 3. Install the AP V2 ASCOM Driver 4. Install APCC -Ray
-----Original Message-----
|
|
Re: APCC log question
Ray Gralak
Hi Mike,
I seem to have fat-fingered the PEM setting in APCC Pro last night and I was wondering whether the PEMIf you are worried about tracking performance, it is best to capture some unguided data using PEMPro or PHD2 and look at the periodic error and drift. If you need more specific instructions, let me know. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
Re: AP1600 Lost
Ray Gralak
Hi Bob,
- Mount would not respond to the NSEW buttons or start tracking no matter what I tried. An error code thrownThe mount is hitting an axis limit, which is separate from a Horizon or Meridian limit. The best solution is to go to the "Homing/Limits" tab in APCC and click the "Configure Home and Limits" button to have APCC reconfigure the mount's limits. You must reconfigure the limits after moving the mount manually with the clutches released. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
Re: Install APCC first or AP V2?
Larry Phillips
George, what was the answer?
Larry
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Bill Long
Sorry, I was asking about the CFF 92 Flattener.
🙂 I know the Stowaway one will.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 5:59 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Yes, the flattener works very well with the IMX455.
Roland
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Sent: Mon, Dec 13, 2021 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III Well this is good information. The CFF92 was the other scope I thought of for being in the game for a well corrected field. Sounds like it's not terrible with the reducer, but could be improved on.
What about the flattener? Can it cover the IMX455.
Either way, sounds like more positive data for the AP92 upgrade option for the full frame capability and the TCC.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Dale Ghent <daleg@...>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 6:13 AM To: main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io> Cc: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III It’s something I would be interested in, and I don’t even have a Stowaway. I have a CFF 92 f/6 refractor and the M63 APM-Riccardi reducer that have been using on it is baaaaarely passable, with some leniency, when using it with my APS-C sensor.
I’m using an OAG with this scope since it’s a compact travel imager, so its pick-off mirror is definitely sitting outside the corrected area in order to avoid intruding into the sensor’s fov. A larger corrected field is certainty something that I miss and
would jump at the opportunity to have, even if it meant a focuser upgrade (my CFF 92 came with a 3” FTF; an improved optical design similar to the M63 format or a little larger, would be fine in my case.)
The APS-C Sony IMX571 sensor that is now in many CMOS astrocams is a fantastic sensor and is fairly accessible in terms of price, which is fueling its rise as a common sensor to see now. It’s the smaller cousin of the full-frame IMX455 which
is also popular, of course. A TCC and flattener that could competently handle both would be noticed. Other makes of (mainly Chinese) refractors in the 90-110mm range also lack a competent reducer/flattener for these sensor sizes and one could find use with
those.
On Dec 11, 2021, at 19:33, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:
-- Roland Christen Astro-Physics
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Roland Christen
Yes, the flattener works very well with the IMX455.
Roland
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Sent: Mon, Dec 13, 2021 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III Well this is good information. The CFF92 was the other scope I thought of for being in the game for a well corrected field. Sounds like it's not terrible with the reducer, but could be improved on.
What about the flattener? Can it cover the IMX455.
Either way, sounds like more positive data for the AP92 upgrade option for the full frame capability and the TCC.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Dale Ghent <daleg@...>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 6:13 AM To: main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io> Cc: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III It’s something I would be interested in, and I don’t even have a Stowaway. I have a CFF 92 f/6 refractor and the M63 APM-Riccardi reducer that have been using on it is baaaaarely passable, with some leniency, when using it with my APS-C sensor.
I’m using an OAG with this scope since it’s a compact travel imager, so its pick-off mirror is definitely sitting outside the corrected area in order to avoid intruding into the sensor’s fov. A larger corrected field is certainty something that I miss and
would jump at the opportunity to have, even if it meant a focuser upgrade (my CFF 92 came with a 3” FTF; an improved optical design similar to the M63 format or a little larger, would be fine in my case.)
The APS-C Sony IMX571 sensor that is now in many CMOS astrocams is a fantastic sensor and is fairly accessible in terms of price, which is fueling its rise as a common sensor to see now. It’s the smaller cousin of the full-frame IMX455 which
is also popular, of course. A TCC and flattener that could competently handle both would be noticed. Other makes of (mainly Chinese) refractors in the 90-110mm range also lack a competent reducer/flattener for these sensor sizes and one could find use with
those.
On Dec 11, 2021, at 19:33, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:
-- Roland Christen Astro-Physics
|
|
Re: Install APCC first or AP V2?
George
Answered by phone.
Regards,
George
George Whitney Astro-Physics, Inc. Phone: 815-222-6538 (direct line) Phone: 815-282-1513 (office) Email: george@...
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Jim Grubb via groups.io
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 4:32 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: [ap-gto] Install APCC first or AP V2?
I'm setting up a new imaging PC. I can't remember if I'm supposed to install the V2 driver first or APCC.
|
|
Install APCC first or AP V2?
Jim Grubb
I'm setting up a new imaging PC. I can't remember if I'm supposed to install the V2 driver first or APCC.
Thanks, Jim
|
|
Re: loose part 1100GTOAE
George
Linwood,
Please contact me directly, as I’ll need your address for forwarding an upgraded part.
Regards,
George
George Whitney Astro-Physics, Inc. Phone: 815-222-6538 (direct line) Phone: 815-282-1513 (office) Email: george@...
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
On Behalf Of ap@...
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2021 12:07 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] loose part 1100GTOAE
I now have the same issue. DIdn't notice until I tried the RAPAS for the first time for real (I put it in when new, but have never used it, NINA's TPPA is too easy).
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Bill Long
Well this is good information. The CFF92 was the other scope I thought of for being in the game for a well corrected field. Sounds like it's not terrible with the reducer, but could be improved on.
What about the flattener? Can it cover the IMX455.
Either way, sounds like more positive data for the AP92 upgrade option for the full frame capability and the TCC.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Dale Ghent <daleg@...>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 6:13 AM To: main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io> Cc: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III It’s something I would be interested in, and I don’t even have a Stowaway. I have a CFF 92 f/6 refractor and the M63 APM-Riccardi reducer that have been using on it is baaaaarely passable, with some leniency, when using it with my APS-C sensor.
I’m using an OAG with this scope since it’s a compact travel imager, so its pick-off mirror is definitely sitting outside the corrected area in order to avoid intruding into the sensor’s fov. A larger corrected field is certainty something that I miss and
would jump at the opportunity to have, even if it meant a focuser upgrade (my CFF 92 came with a 3” FTF; an improved optical design similar to the M63 format or a little larger, would be fine in my case.)
The APS-C Sony IMX571 sensor that is now in many CMOS astrocams is a fantastic sensor and is fairly accessible in terms of price, which is fueling its rise as a common sensor to see now. It’s the smaller cousin of the full-frame IMX455 which
is also popular, of course. A TCC and flattener that could competently handle both would be noticed. Other makes of (mainly Chinese) refractors in the 90-110mm range also lack a competent reducer/flattener for these sensor sizes and one could find use with
those.
On Dec 11, 2021, at 19:33, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:
|
|
APCC log question
I seem to have fat-fingered the PEM setting in APCC Pro last night and I was wondering whether the PEM change gets written to the APCC log file. This would help me separate causes of tracking problems.
Thanks in advance. Mike Hayford
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Carl Brosius
I would be all over a supercharged 92 Can I get in line now?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Currently using Televue 85 for photography, 11”SCT for visual and AP900 carrying both Carl . Fantastical interpretations of my perfect spelling courtesy of Apple.
On Dec 13, 2021, at 6:13 AM, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Dale Ghent
It’s something I would be interested in, and I don’t even have a Stowaway. I have a CFF 92 f/6 refractor and the M63 APM-Riccardi reducer that have been using on it is baaaaarely passable, with some leniency, when using it with my APS-C sensor. I’m using an OAG with this scope since it’s a compact travel imager, so its pick-off mirror is definitely sitting outside the corrected area in order to avoid intruding into the sensor’s fov. A larger corrected field is certainty something that I miss and would jump at the opportunity to have, even if it meant a focuser upgrade (my CFF 92 came with a 3” FTF; an improved optical design similar to the M63 format or a little larger, would be fine in my case.) The APS-C Sony IMX571 sensor that is now in many CMOS astrocams is a fantastic sensor and is fairly accessible in terms of price, which is fueling its rise as a common sensor to see now. It’s the smaller cousin of the full-frame IMX455 which is also popular, of course. A TCC and flattener that could competently handle both would be noticed. Other makes of (mainly Chinese) refractors in the 90-110mm range also lack a competent reducer/flattener for these sensor sizes and one could find use with those.
On Dec 11, 2021, at 19:33, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: [ap-ug] M33 with 92mm Stowaway, combining RGB, H-alpha, and O-III
Wei-Hao
Hi Roland,
There definitely will be interest for such an astrograph. I am certainly interested. (Problem is that I can't put my hand on a 92 yet.) Some of those who plan to buy TAK FSQ will turn their heads to an AP 92 if the reducer has full-frame capability. Furthermore, I would hope that the flattener can produce a 55mm image circle (sharp corner stars, no or very low vignetting) to cover medium format sensors like the Fuji GFX. Cheers, Wei-Hao
|
|
Re: AP1600 Lost
Bob Enouen
The issue is resolved thanks to your help! More details below: - I physically moved it to Park 3, unparked from last position, and tried to use NINA to successfully plate solve but it would not sync because the mount was not tracking. - Mount would not respond to the NSEW buttons or start tracking no matter what I tried. An error code thrown was Fault Triggered: East Limit. I checked the 3D view and could see that the mount was displaying almost upside down despite my attempts to ReCal via the GoTo tab. - I was finally able to resolve by going to the APPC - Meridian Tracking limits Explorer and after selecting the ‘West’ button clicked Go To Meridian. The mount then moved far enough away from the limit that I was able to start tracking, but I had to use the Stop Slew button before it really turned upside down. I was then able to plate solve and sync in NINA. I’ve not yet established Meridian Limits and simply tell the mount to flip at the Meridian. - I checked the logs and can see that the time was not an issue and it unparked from Last Position the night it failed so I’m not sure how I got stuck here, but am happy Ito have discovered another solution if it happens again. Thanks again! Bob Robert J. Enouen Cell 513-504-4410
On Dec 9, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: loose part 1100GTOAE
ap@CaptivePhotons.com
It also looks like mine is cracked, perhaps from thru-the-mount cables tugging against it while it was out of place? Should I replace it? Can I get a replacement if so?
|
|
Re: loose part 1100GTOAE
ap@CaptivePhotons.com
I now have the same issue. DIdn't notice until I tried the RAPAS for the first time for real (I put it in when new, but have never used it, NINA's TPPA is too easy).
Did you just push it back up? Is there something that is supposed to actually hold it there? It is a little disturbing that it just falls down like that, if it is protecting that very expensive encoder. If no one has a better answer, will call Monday. But in case a second data point is helpful. Others might want to take a look also, I have no idea how long it had been down.
|
|