Jump to content


Photo

Let's see your Pempro results!

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 14 March 2009 - 09:20 PM

What an awesome program! I finally had a night of good seeing. I was able to get a very good pec training. What have you folks that use PemPro had for results? Here is my mounts uncorrected PE.

Attached Files



#2 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 14 March 2009 - 09:21 PM

And the result after uploading the curve and applying PEC.

Attached Files



#3 DeanS

DeanS

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 15 March 2009 - 08:09 AM

This is my 1200GTO PE out of the box, PEC off.

Chris yours is friggin Fantastic :bow:

Attached Files



#4 DeanS

DeanS

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 15 March 2009 - 08:12 AM

And this is the only test I did with factory supplied PEC on. I know I could get it better under steady skies but it guides so well don't see any reason to bother, other than for bragging :) I do love this mount.

I have not done my Mach1GTO yet, but again it guides so well I don't need to know.

Attached Files



#5 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1341
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 15 March 2009 - 10:28 AM

You guys with the AP mounts are making me jealous.

I don't have a Pempro graph of my CGE handy, but it definitely doesn't look like that. With PEC, I get my overall PE down to 2 or 3 arc seconds, but there is some high frequency noise that I can't smooth out.

I have an AP1200 in my future, but my wife has a list of things that she wants done before I order it (and then there's the wait time after that...) I think that I'm about 2 years out.

-Wade

#6 nik hodges

nik hodges

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 975
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2007
  • Loc: UK

Posted 15 March 2009 - 11:20 AM

cant compete with that but here is an idea of what it can do with a lesser mount (lx200acf fork). An AP mount is is in my future too

red before
blue after

-)

N

Attached Files



#7 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 15 March 2009 - 11:39 AM

Anybody know how Pempro compares to Celestrons Free Pectool??

#8 Miguel Lopes

Miguel Lopes

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Portugal

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:22 PM

Posted Image
Vixen SXD out of the box, no PEC applyed. +5.3/-6.3
Too bad the DEC motor is not that good...

#9 DeanS

DeanS

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:27 PM

The DEC axis does not have period error since it does not continually turn in a direction. If you have large spikes then that is probably gear backlash.

#10 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:51 PM

And this is the only test I did with factory supplied PEC on. I know I could get it better under steady skies but it guides so well don't see any reason to bother, other than for bragging :) I do love this mount.

I have not done my Mach1GTO yet, but again it guides so well I don't need to know.


Although my 900 and your 1200 have about the same total PE your "swings" are more gradual. I'm a software junkie and I love to look at this type of data. I'm sure your 1200 can be brought below an arc second with PEC. Although as you said it's not something you have to do but it sure is fun to try :grin: I would really like to see your Mach 1 curve since I should be getting the call for one soon.

#11 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:53 PM

Nik,

Those are some pretty awesome results! It's not about a competition but about the magical power of PemPro ;) you should be very, very happy with that result.

#12 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:55 PM

Miguel,

Do you have a corrected curve to share? My buddy has a SXD and soon I hope to run Pempro on his mount and see what kind of corrected results we can obtain.

#13 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 15 March 2009 - 12:57 PM

Have no experience with the Celestron tool. Pempro has many, many useful features though. You can use Pempro for polar alignment as well. There is a free fully functional trial of Pempro at the CCDWare website. If you have not tried it you should.

#14 freestar8n

freestar8n

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3923
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2007

Posted 15 March 2009 - 01:23 PM

Anybody know how Pempro compares to Celestrons Free Pectool??



The free PECTool works fine to remove the fundamental and harmonics of my CGE. What remains is gearbox noise that cannot be removed by PEC - so there is no benefit in reducing the fundamental further.

I just record 8-10 periods while autoguiding, and the PECTool averages them and loads them into the mount. No bells or whistles, but works great.

Examples of my autoguided results, with PEC trained by PECTool, are at:

CGE images guided with PEC trained by PECTool

Just to be clear, I train PEC by autoguiding, and I image with PEC enabled - since it does reduce the work done by the autoguider. I see no conflict between PEC and autoguiding, and PEC during autoguiding does seem to help when in the 2" fwhm regime.

Frank

#15 DrBuck

DrBuck

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 536
  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008
  • Loc: Susanville, No. Calif.

Posted 15 March 2009 - 05:37 PM

Anybody know how Pempro compares to Celestrons Free Pectool??



The free PECTool works fine to remove the fundamental and harmonics of my CGE. What remains is gearbox noise that cannot be removed by PEC - so there is no benefit in reducing the fundamental further.

I just record 8-10 periods while autoguiding, and the PECTool averages them and loads them into the mount. No bells or whistles, but works great.

Examples of my autoguided results, with PEC trained by PECTool, are at:

CGE images guided with PEC trained by PECTool

Just to be clear, I train PEC by autoguiding, and I image with PEC enabled - since it does reduce the work done by the autoguider. I see no conflict between PEC and autoguiding, and PEC during autoguiding does seem to help when in the 2" fwhm regime.

Frank

Frank----thanks. Great photos. Haven't had mine long enough to work out the bugs. But soon-------- :)

#16 Miguel Lopes

Miguel Lopes

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Portugal

Posted 15 March 2009 - 05:57 PM

Miguel,

Do you have a corrected curve to share? My buddy has a SXD and soon I hope to run Pempro on his mount and see what kind of corrected results we can obtain.


Forget it. The PEC feature in SXD is useless. You can't program it from the PC and you have to redo it each time you power the mount...
One of SXD's firmware disapointments...

#17 Tapio

Tapio

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1327
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Tampere, Finland

Posted 15 March 2009 - 06:06 PM

Interesting thread.
Here's a graph of our clubs LX200 mount (not done with Pempro but with K3CCDTools and PEAS):
http://einarin.1g.fi..._pec_280908.jpg
Not too bad I think.

#18 DeanS

DeanS

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 16 March 2009 - 11:05 PM

Ok, I did a couple PemPro runs tonight with the 1200, seeing was not great but what an improvement over the factory curve. Or maybe I just have it broke in and should have run it earlier. I will try to refine it when we get some better conditions. But it went from 1.55 to 0.66 peak to peak. I can live with that.

Attached Files



#19 Strgazr27

Strgazr27

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ****-
  • Posts: 7104
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2004
  • Loc: StonyHill Observatory

Posted 16 March 2009 - 11:08 PM

Ok, I did a couple PemPro runs tonight with the 1200, seeing was not great but what an improvement over the factory curve. Or maybe I just have it broke in and should have run it earlier. I will try to refine it when we get some better conditions. But it went from 1.55 to 0.66 peak to peak. I can live with that.


:bigshock: :foreheadslap: :applause:

#20 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • ****-
  • Posts: 10886
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 17 March 2009 - 12:23 AM

But it went from 1.55 to 0.66 peak to peak. I can live with that.

Do ya think? Less than an arc second peak to peak is scary good.

#21 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 17 March 2009 - 07:26 AM

Very nice Dean. I'm betting a refinement will not make a difference. Look at your frequency spectrum. Are any of your remaining errors fundamentals? Ray (the author of pempro) recently advised me that there was no gain to be made with a refinement with my curve. My only true fundamentals where 1, and 2. The first curve took care of those and any remaining error was most likely seeing induced. Great results man!

#22 DeanS

DeanS

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 17 March 2009 - 08:21 AM

Hi Chris,

Yes I agree yours is so good I would not mess with it as I doubt you could improve it much anyways. And likewise with mine. I always guide so this just makes it easier on the guider. I'll try the Mach1 next month at the Texas Star Party as I am not going to unpack it before then.

I noticed your image scale was close to 2 arcsecs, mine was close to 1 arcsecs. I wonder how this affects the results? Maybe not since we average several runs?

Dean

#23 lineman_16735

lineman_16735

    Tak-o-holic

  • -----
  • Posts: 3118
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Central PA

Posted 17 March 2009 - 12:50 PM

Hi Dean,

My image scale is 1.87 arcseconds/pixel. According to Ray the data is most accurate at or below 2 arc seconds. I would guess that since we average all the runs and that the centroid position in modern software is so accurate then the image scale if reasonable the curve should be accurate. My factory installed PEC curve was 3.65 arcseconds peak to peak. My recent curve was slightly lower than that.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics