ASA DDM60 Pro vs. GM1000HPS
Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:42 AM
... opened a new thread.
OK - but put a link to it here please - otherwise we have no idea where it is continued .... you don't even say what it is called
Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:38 PM
Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:36 PM
...where it went an hour with no commands from me to change position.
What does that mean?
Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:26 PM
Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:28 PM
Anyway, the mount tracking on the GM1000 appears to have been ostensibly perfect, with a linear error in the X direction to the tune of
49.1 pixels in X and 155.4 pixels in Y, where it slowly increased over time, which appears to be polar alignment error after a three star alignment, a quick align on Polaris, and then a follow-up three star alignment.
Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:30 PM
Posted 18 October 2013 - 12:11 AM
Anyway, I expect it will meet Hilmi's 20 minute unguided requirement, but at the moment I am wondering why the exposure will need to be so long.
And by the way, I know these aren't beautiful. That isn't the objective.
Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:51 AM
Posted 18 October 2013 - 10:22 AM
That makes sense for SII. The mount is very responsive- and at 15 degrees per second slewing, it's really quick and nimble. It has a large pointing model capability. I'm wondering if that may even quietly include c11 mirror flop as a result of motion. In any case, there don't seem to be any sleeping gotchas at this point. The three star alignment with one shot at polar alignment left me with no swirl (the brig star image in the corner is the start of the run and the end if the run stacked, so you can see there was no rotation whatsoever).
I didn't want to end the evening with nothing but engineering images, so I finished with a large series on Orion. I should be able to get that assembled this weekend.
The surprise for me has been how mature this controller is since it isn't one a fourth or fifth generation product from this vendor. They apparently found people with real expertise in this field to get a lot of the internals right.
I should have my last real chance to do major imaging with the mount in early November. Then I'll have to give it back. I expect to miss it.
Posted 18 October 2013 - 10:31 PM
Could you explain the blurry look of the start in the upper right corner image? I'm not sure that I understand what this is a result of.
Posted 19 October 2013 - 11:25 AM
I was doing several experiments during that hour of tracking with the GM 1000HPS. Besides taking photos to get some idea of the mount's movement, I wanted to experiment with the effects from an aperture mask on a C11 (like what happens to coma?) In the one scene, I took images in these configurations:
(1) f/10 at prime focus.
(2) Unobstructed aperture mask series- it covered the entire front of the telescope with a single offset aperture:
(A) 76.2 mm aperture
(B) 50.8 mm aperture
© 31.75mm aperture
(3) return to unmasked f/10 prime focus.
So, there was a large increase in airy disk size inversely proportional to the reduction in the aperture, and so I wound up with coverage for the whole time, but with bigger stars in the middle and smaller stars at the beginning and end.
I also to a series afterwards on the Orion Nebula using the Starizona f/7.5 reducer/ flattener which is about ready to post. The amazing thing on that one is how out of 56 frames I took for it, I lost only one to mount movement, where I was touching the camera to start the interval series. I did that two more times and had usable frames. I lost three frames to neighbors' lights coming on.
Posted 19 October 2013 - 01:53 PM
The GM1000 HPS was very happily steady for this series- for each interval set, the first frame was made with my hand on the camera, and the mount was stable in 2/3 cases where this was done.
Now, the camera was set to high sensitivity (ISO 25100) for the brightest shot, which does result in background noise. Breaking out the interval timer remote would result in longer exposures. And since longer exposure is more effective than deeper stacking, that's a better answer.
Posted 19 October 2013 - 01:56 PM
Also notice how the local sky glow still comes in on the blue channel- that I have reduced, but did so by scaling rather than clipping so the performance of the UHC filter in a broadband light pollution environment is visible.
Posted 19 October 2013 - 02:11 PM
The reason I am putting such a high value on Hyperstar is it is the one configuration of a SCT which really gets to deep magnitudes without relying so much on the mount, and is also the only one which can produce really tight stars thanks to the reduction in focal length.
In any of these cases, the GM1000HPS is certainly proved to be capable to carry a long focal length and I'm not even sure how much weight it will really take since it wasn't vibrating while touching the focus knob of a C11. The obvious answer is more weight than that.
I'd like to hear back on where you all are after looking at my results, which were largely generated because of this thread. I have probably one new-moon night coming up where I can really use this, and for personal reasons, I'd really like to have some pretty pictures to show for it. So, on my own, I'd probably either use it for hyperstar, and go to somewhat longer exposures just to see how deep an image I could get, but that is probably going to be under 5 minutes in any case. Or I could try doing some DSOs with the AP 130 EDFGT, which produces really nice sharp images. I will likely do those with the Astro Tech flattener, which seemed to be effective in my short test earlier. Or, I may put in the AP reducer and see if I have image collapse in the corners or not. In any case, if left to my own devices, I'm probably not going to long focal lengths unless I do another engineering setup (maybe next weekend) and try out chasing satellites.
Posted 19 October 2013 - 03:04 PM
Posted 19 October 2013 - 04:11 PM
That shouldn't be a problem. I'll see about doing it on something straight overhead to get atmospherics out of the result. I'll do the full pointing model, so it should be as good as it gets.
What focal length would you like?
Posted 19 October 2013 - 11:07 PM