Thank You for your answer One more @Steven. As I also have esprit 150, is it blocking by legs of tripod while pointing high zenith altitudes? I worry about length of the tube, filter wheel
With big refractors I find a pier is always handy and gives that extra bit of clearance. If you can’t get a pier then setting limits or just being careful because you can do some serious damage if you hit a tripod and it keeps trying to track. I’ve bent a spacer before.
Hi Steve your guide stars are quite low in peak brightness was this intentional? Guiding seems although very good. I‘m wondering if i should lower my gain or exposuretime aswell. I can’t get my HEQ5 Pro under 1.2
I wanted to leave everything standard to the ASIAir system. I hadn’t changed any settings apart from the exposure which I usually like to have at half second exposures. Some people prefer longer.
Hey Steve, is that normal for the counter weight shaft to 'kick' out of the mount like that? Around @0.28 seconds looks very odd that the shaft kicks out forward
@@StevenMorrisPhotography I'm wondering if you'll get better guiding if the shaft is inline with the mount? I'm guessing that the mount may require more torque to move in that position? I'm coming from a CEM70 which has similar grub screws at the top of the counter weight shaft for adjustment although I haven't adjusted it nowhere near like you have. Did you do that so as to avoid hitting the tri-pod legs?
That is correct, I moved the centre pin on the tripod to try something which then resulted in the counter weight adjustment so it wouldn't hit the tripod legs.
Nice! performing well! --------- UNLIKE my CGX-L in the observatory, it is being a pain in the ass the last few months. Last summer it was fine again for period, getting around 0.6" total error, but now I just want to hit it with a hammer! Even over the last week it has been completely inconsistent, and even last night, it wouldn't calibrate until I went back to the ST4 cable and switched PHD2 to 'on camera'. I have another CGX-L arrived for outside the Obo on the Edge11 setup, but not tried it out yet to see what it is like.
@@StevenMorrisPhotography It has always been a really sticky mount, particularly on the DEC axis, with no load on the saddle, it even feels sticky, so thing I am going to have a go and giving it a strip down and bearing clean and relube at some point etc. some good clear photos on cloudy nights of others tearing it down.
@@StevenMorrisPhotography It was weird watching it doing its calibration, for example, as the west steps were in creasing, you would start to see the distance increase, and then it would hit a point and the distance would start to fall off again and then it would fail.
Iv'e been lucky to not have a sticky example, but still its been a pain in the arse, atm a paper weight :P Gotta love the Celestron life haha. Hope your problems gets resolved tho! Personally I'm out for the rest of this year.
Not too bad. I'm really interested in that mount. I'm a bit upset anyway, 0. 4", 0,5" is what I had here tonight with my azeq6, with terrible jet stream high in the sky. I thought the cq350 could guide better. Anyway, I think it's a smarter design, I love the CEM principle.
I have azeq6 and get similar guiding results. Really it all depends on seeing and polar aligment, balance, total payload etc. They did not make this mount to blow away their already capable mounts, they designed it to offer 30lbs more payload than our mounts.
@@scampbelltube The EQ8 guides about the same ( mine guides only a little bit better). Actually, such quiding performances are already pretty darn good even for more demanding telescopes. What you pay for is not really more stable guiding, you pay for the ability to have the same level of performance as a brand new EQ6 while having a much heavier payload. Better guiding typically requires to go up to the +10k mounts.
Be bold! Try out the longer guiding exposures (although 5s is long enough for me): the better the mount, the fewer corrections it needs. Full moon nights give you a chance toe xperiment. Clear skies!@@StevenMorrisPhotography
This is excellent. Probably on average 0.4-0.6” rms. Is it real? This is tough to tell. ZWO could reverse engineered PHD2, and numbers may not be real. Why not to try with proper PHD2 using OAG, which is recommended for big scopes.
0.4-0.6 is not really "excellent" for a 4k usd mount. I guess with some fine tuning and OAG it should perfomr well under 0.35 My EQ6R guides at 0.4, and even 0.35 in good nights
@@dgodiex It is excellent if it is average guiding for whole night and data from PHD2. Data from ASAir doesn’t count. What is your FWHM numbers? This is what is matter. I have seen only 2 people who drops below 2” on your mount.
Guiding looked amazing mate
Thanks mate, I’ll have to see what my CGXL does now, never really took much notice.
Damn, that's really tight guiding!
Solid results. Thanks for sharing.
Your welcome
Great guiding.
Nice guiding!
Guiding looked good there mate I think Logan probably hit the nail on the head regarding gusts of wind, nonetheless it looked pretty good.
great video. ive picked up a CQ350. would you mind sharing your guiding setpoints? guiding speed, max RA and DEC times and calibration numbers?
Guiding looked pretty damn good. I presume the odd sudden wander in the RA was due to wind gusts?
I can only assume that too… I was inside lol.
Your ASIair Pro has an antenna?
hello, which mounting plate do you use on top of rings? I looking for some mounting means.
I use primaluce lab mounting plates.
Thank You for your answer
One more @Steven. As I also have esprit 150, is it blocking by legs of tripod while pointing high zenith altitudes? I worry about length of the tube, filter wheel
With big refractors I find a pier is always handy and gives that extra bit of clearance. If you can’t get a pier then setting limits or just being careful because you can do some serious damage if you hit a tripod and it keeps trying to track. I’ve bent a spacer before.
Hi Steve your guide stars are quite low in peak brightness was this intentional? Guiding seems although very good. I‘m wondering if i should lower my gain or exposuretime aswell. I can’t get my HEQ5 Pro under 1.2
I wanted to leave everything standard to the ASIAir system. I hadn’t changed any settings apart from the exposure which I usually like to have at half second exposures. Some people prefer longer.
💯👍
Hey Steve, is that normal for the counter weight shaft to 'kick' out of the mount like that? Around @0.28 seconds looks very odd that the shaft kicks out forward
The counter weight shaft is adjustable, I have it kicked out that way just for a play.
@@StevenMorrisPhotography I'm wondering if you'll get better guiding if the shaft is inline with the mount? I'm guessing that the mount may require more torque to move in that position? I'm coming from a CEM70 which has similar grub screws at the top of the counter weight shaft for adjustment although I haven't adjusted it nowhere near like you have. Did you do that so as to avoid hitting the tri-pod legs?
That is correct, I moved the centre pin on the tripod to try something which then resulted in the counter weight adjustment so it wouldn't hit the tripod legs.
👍😉
Gr8 video
The guiding on that mount is pretty good! Does it have encoders?
That’s a good question, unfortunately I no longer have it, it’s gone back to sky Watcher Australia. Sorry mate I couldn’t answer your question.
Nice! performing well! --------- UNLIKE my CGX-L in the observatory, it is being a pain in the ass the last few months. Last summer it was fine again for period, getting around 0.6" total error, but now I just want to hit it with a hammer! Even over the last week it has been completely inconsistent, and even last night, it wouldn't calibrate until I went back to the ST4 cable and switched PHD2 to 'on camera'. I have another CGX-L arrived for outside the Obo on the Edge11 setup, but not tried it out yet to see what it is like.
That’s interesting, I have great guiding with my CGXL. I guess anything mass produced can have inconsistencies.
@@StevenMorrisPhotography It has always been a really sticky mount, particularly on the DEC axis, with no load on the saddle, it even feels sticky, so thing I am going to have a go and giving it a strip down and bearing clean and relube at some point etc. some good clear photos on cloudy nights of others tearing it down.
@@StevenMorrisPhotography It was weird watching it doing its calibration, for example, as the west steps were in creasing, you would start to see the distance increase, and then it would hit a point and the distance would start to fall off again and then it would fail.
wow that is a bit weird and interesting at the same time.
Iv'e been lucky to not have a sticky example, but still its been a pain in the arse, atm a paper weight :P Gotta love the Celestron life haha. Hope your problems gets resolved tho! Personally I'm out for the rest of this year.
Not too bad.
I'm really interested in that mount. I'm a bit upset anyway, 0. 4", 0,5" is what I had here tonight with my azeq6, with terrible jet stream high in the sky. I thought the cq350 could guide better.
Anyway, I think it's a smarter design, I love the CEM principle.
I have azeq6 and get similar guiding results. Really it all depends on seeing and polar aligment, balance, total payload etc. They did not make this mount to blow away their already capable mounts, they designed it to offer 30lbs more payload than our mounts.
@@scampbelltube The EQ8 guides about the same ( mine guides only a little bit better). Actually, such quiding performances are already pretty darn good even for more demanding telescopes. What you pay for is not really more stable guiding, you pay for the ability to have the same level of performance as a brand new EQ6 while having a much heavier payload. Better guiding typically requires to go up to the +10k mounts.
Why would you even need a better guding as 0.4-0.5? You got 3000mm focal length?
Good guiding.
You might get better if you up the guiding exposures to 3 seconds or more, else you are probably chasing the seeing.
I actually now do that now, about 2 second exposures on my eq8 r pro. Good suggestion though, thank you.
Be bold! Try out the longer guiding exposures (although 5s is long enough for me): the better the mount, the fewer corrections it needs. Full moon nights give you a chance toe xperiment.
Clear skies!@@StevenMorrisPhotography
This is excellent. Probably on average 0.4-0.6” rms. Is it real? This is tough to tell. ZWO could reverse engineered PHD2, and numbers may not be real.
Why not to try with proper PHD2 using OAG, which is recommended for big scopes.
0.4-0.6 is not really "excellent" for a 4k usd mount.
I guess with some fine tuning and OAG it should perfomr well under 0.35
My EQ6R guides at 0.4, and even 0.35 in good nights
@@dgodiex It is excellent if it is average guiding for whole night and data from PHD2. Data from ASAir doesn’t count.
What is your FWHM numbers? This is what is matter. I have seen only 2 people who drops below 2” on your mount.
it look like IOPTRON CEM
Good video but please work on getting that focus right!
P r o m o S M