Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Jason Ware's LX800
      #5557122 - 12/06/12 09:21 AM

A few shots I haven't seen posted from Jason Ware. I found this set from a Facebook link on Meade's Facebook site.

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

Link 4


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5557139 - 12/06/12 09:33 AM

His stars aren't round. I wonder what his exposure times and focal length are.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5557160 - 12/06/12 09:48 AM

All three targets would fit into the field of view at native focal length (2,438mm) with an APS-c sized sensor. M1 is much smaller than the other two and would only occupy a small portion of such a sensor.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
orlyandico
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5557326 - 12/06/12 11:33 AM

I would be happy with those results.

I am not sure they are worth the price of a PMX though.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5557401 - 12/06/12 12:07 PM

I'm trying to figure out what to make of them. The soft focus and out of round stars seem peculiar, especially in 1 and 3. Is this typical for the ACF? I'm guessing this was with a 10" ACF- is that right? I had thought it was just a coma effect at first, but stars at the center are elongated. There is also som CA visible on blue-white stars, so it would appear there are more optics of some sort in the imaging train. Are you sure no reducer was used?

They are pretty for sure. There's just something odd seeming about them and I'm trying to figure out why.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5557480 - 12/06/12 12:47 PM

A quote from the Facebook post by Jason on the Crab Nebula image:

"This is the longest exposure so far with the 12" Meade LX800. Total of 8.3 hours in HA, SII and OIII. The seeing was a little soft so the stars are not as sharp as I would like but not bad."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Calypte
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 03/20/07

Loc: Anza, California
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5557545 - 12/06/12 01:24 PM

I'm not impressed.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Hilmi
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/07/10

Loc: Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Calypte]
      #5557760 - 12/06/12 03:39 PM

I'd say they are very good images, sure others have managed better, but that doesnt say these are bad. Looking at how difficult it is for me to obtain good images as 2000 mm, a 12" scope sounds like a bigger challenge.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ahopp
sage


Reged: 05/24/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Hilmi]
      #5557778 - 12/06/12 03:51 PM

Remember too, he has only had this setup for a short time, a few months. And, we do not know how much time he has dedicated it to this beta. Give him time to perfect his process. I plan to when I get my 14" LX800 back from recall.

Tony


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
StarmanDan
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 08/27/07

Loc: Deep in the heart of Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: ahopp]
      #5557836 - 12/06/12 04:30 PM

Also it might help to know he does most of his imaging from a white zone known as the Dallas/Ft. Worth megapolis.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rigel123
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/29/09

Loc: SW Ohio
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: StarmanDan]
      #5558010 - 12/06/12 06:07 PM

The Helix looks great, he may just need more time with the setup.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: rigel123]
      #5558019 - 12/06/12 06:17 PM

Quote:

The Helix looks great, he may just need more time with the setup.




That's what I thought. The Helix impressed me right away. The stars on NGC281 look pretty much perfectly round to me. The Crab was the weakest of the bunch, but it's also the smallest.

Do amateurs with a 12" SCT regularly capture a better Helix than this?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Eric Gage
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 12/13/05

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5558034 - 12/06/12 06:26 PM

I like the Helix shot better than the Hubble comparison. I'm not a Meade guy, but Jason seems to be making good use of it.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
orlyandico
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Eric Gage]
      #5558216 - 12/06/12 08:25 PM

this is the best amateur Helix I've found so far..
http://blog.deepskycolors.com/archive/2008/10/07/the-Helix-Nebula.html

but as pointed out,
1) it's a C9.25
2) it has the Optec 0.5X reducer, so EFL is only 1175mm


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Eric Gage]
      #5558225 - 12/06/12 08:35 PM

I find these images darn good especially at 2400mm focal length assuming it was taken with 12" F/8. It's always difficult to get round stars under bad seeing conditions for ANY mount especially with long focal length. His images are better than mine with my A-P Mach1. My sky is usually less than ideal and I rarely get round stars under bad seeing conditions. But I can get round stars when seeing is excellent but that's rare.

I wonder if Starlock or traditional autoguiding was used.

Kudos to this person making great images.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Griffin!
sage


Reged: 09/12/10

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5558247 - 12/06/12 08:47 PM

He mentioned in an early facebook post (an Orion picture) that he was using StarLock.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Griffin!]
      #5558296 - 12/06/12 09:17 PM

I do not belong to Facebook and I have no interest in joining. It would be nice if Jason joined Cloudy Nights and share his experiences with LX800 here.

If he was using Starlock, then it may prove that the internal Crayford style focuser inside Meade's new SCT scope is working well.

I do not understand why Jason is the only one successful with LX800 unless his mount is the first to be fixed from the recall.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Phil Wheeler
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/31/05

Loc: 3 miles WNW of Celestron
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Griffin!]
      #5558301 - 12/06/12 09:19 PM

A very tough crowd -- "His stars aren't round" & "I'm not impressed".

Those shots at Links 1 thru 4 look really good to me, and the stars look acceptably "round".

I'm not highly motivated to post images here.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Griffin!
sage


Reged: 09/12/10

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5558340 - 12/06/12 09:44 PM

Quote:

I do not belong to Facebook and I have no interest in joining. It would be nice if Jason joined Cloudy Nights and share his experiences with LX800 here.

If he was using Starlock, then it may prove that the internal Crayford style focuser inside Meade's new SCT scope is working well.

I do not understand why Jason is the only one successful with LX800 unless his mount is the first to be fixed from the recall.

Peter




According to his posts he's part of Meade's LX800 testing team, he seems to be helping them refine the StarLock code.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gillmj24
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 12/06/05

Loc: PA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Phil Wheeler]
      #5558359 - 12/06/12 09:58 PM

Quote:

A very tough crowd -- "His stars aren't round" & "I'm not impressed".

I'm not highly motivated to post images here.




Not tough on images just hating on meade a lot lately. If you took pictures with your celestron equipment and shared them they would be very well received. Write it down.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5558371 - 12/06/12 10:10 PM

Quote:

I do not belong to Facebook and I have no interest in joining. It would be nice if Jason joined Cloudy Nights and share his experiences with LX800 here.

If he was using Starlock, then it may prove that the internal Crayford style focuser inside Meade's new SCT scope is working well.

I do not understand why Jason is the only one successful with LX800 unless his mount is the first to be fixed from the recall.

Peter




He's Beta-testing the fixes for Meade.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Raginar
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/19/10

Loc: Rapid CIty, SD
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5558559 - 12/07/12 12:36 AM

I'd be pretty happy with that at native focal length. The only one with stars that were really elongated was image 4 (helix). I could fix that with a quick mask/PSF in PI.

I want to know if it's repeatable . Can you just walk out and have it all work or was their tinkering involved?

I'm really glad to see some products out of this mount!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Phil Wheeler]
      #5558627 - 12/07/12 02:25 AM

Quote:

A very tough crowd -- "His stars aren't round" & "I'm not impressed".

Those shots at Links 1 thru 4 look really good to me, and the stars look acceptably "round".

I'm not highly motivated to post images here.




The standard being applied to these images is NOT what you could expect if you posted your own images. These are being judged harshly because the LX800 on initial release failed rather dramatically to live up to expectations.

Jason is one of Meade's "goto" testers for new equipment--has been for a very long time--so anything short of perfection is not going to be smiled upon. There are a fair number of people who either bought or were thinking of buying LX800's with the expectation of an integrated, simple, well matched astrophotography platform. Personally, I don't think that is possible at these focal lengths--especially "simple".

As far as the quality of the images themselves... Frankly, it is very hard to know how the system is doing without looking at raw data. Are stars bloated because of poor seeing? Por optical quality? Focus shift? Bad focus? Poor tracking? Poor registration? Or just from ordinary processing and stretching? think these images look pretty decent for an experienced astrophotographer working the kinks out on a long focal length setup. I say working the kinks out primarily because there appear to be some minor tracking errors on the Helix.

To really know how the system is performing--to be able to judge I without bringing in our own preferences in processing techniques--we would need FWHM numbers for the guided sub frames and some comparison shots from very short exposures (a few seconds) so we could appropriately account for seeing conditions. I'm not expecting Jason to provide that--not his job.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Jared]
      #5558695 - 12/07/12 05:51 AM

I am interested in conveying autoguiding performance with novel systems, and I use a combination of 1) a processed final image 2) stated measurements of fwhm (") in sub exposures, and 3) raw, linearly stretched views of sub-exposures. An example for the Crab nebula can be found here.

People sometimes compare results to Hubble images, but the Helix nebula is unusual because it is huge and somewhat unique as a "Hubble" result because it is a giant montage and includes data from ground images. A description of the source images can be found here. Note that the ability to spend so much time on a huge montage was partly motivated by the need to point the 'scope away from the incoming Leonid storm of Nov. 2002.

A more representative view of the true resolution capability of the HST can be found in this image. You would need to find and magnify a very tiny piece of the lx800 image and do a side-by-side comparison at the same scale to judge the difference.

Frank

Edited by freestar8n (12/07/12 05:52 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5558891 - 12/07/12 09:25 AM

The LX 800 is specified as 1 arcsecond tracking. At that level, there should be no tracking errors.

Jason has been using SCTs for a while, so I wouldn't anticipate newbie results like focusing errors.

On the bloat on the stars, it has been my impression the entire point of ACF was to avoid that. The stars should be tight pinpoints, shouldn't they?

Now, it would be possible to make tracking errors less visible by purposely processing the stars to bloat them out some. But that would seem to defeat the purpose of even testing the mount.

As for the ad hominem attacks in responses up to now, that's really cheap. The mount and telescope are not only sold as a complete high end imaging system, they've been advertised as that for over a year, and are priced as such. Exactly what should their results be compared with, if not that standard? Software Bisque claims performance only almost as good as the LX 800 and the images from their mounts have tight stars and no bloat.

Just saying it like it is.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5559070 - 12/07/12 11:06 AM

Meade's web site says 1 arcsecond GUIDING using Starlock depending on sky conditions, not tracking of the mount. I am not sure of autoguiding has anything to do with quality of the mount.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
orlyandico
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5559109 - 12/07/12 11:25 AM

1" guiding is great but certainly not groundbreaking, I have "heard" that 0.5" RMS guiding is commonplace with the Mach1 (although it supposedly can do 0.1" if the seeing allows)

I've been using my CGEM a lot since I fixed the encoders. It has 40" of PE and I routinely do 1.8" - and can do 1.1" if I'm really lucky - this only happens once in a while, only at certain mount positions, and doesn't last long. (note this is RMS and not peak-to-peak!)

so 1" from the LX800 should be doable... but if I can get 1.8" from my CGEM, I would expect a CGE Pro would handily beat that, and cost less than the LX800. Celestron claims about 12" p-p for the CGE Pro (3.39" RMS) and 0.91" RMS with PPEC.

Peter - mount quality will affect autoguiding performance. The CGEM has a huge PE so I don't expect guiding performance to go below 1" in fact I've never achieved 1" - only 1.1" when I'm lucky. The lower the native PE, the tighter the guiding will be.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5559162 - 12/07/12 11:54 AM

If the mount is selling for the cost of a Mach1 or mount of that caliber, then it should be judged by results from mounts of that caliber.
Blueman


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JSnuff1
sage


Reged: 12/29/04

Loc: NY
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: blueman]
      #5559289 - 12/07/12 01:18 PM

What most people have not realized is that these are 5 minute subs. The real value of systems in this price range is that they can do excellent guiding and do this over a 15 or even 30 minute time interval.

People that can buy this system also have cameras that can expose for over 15 minutes. This is an area Meade has never entered, and I had a LOT of discussions with them that if they wish to be successful here this mount HAS to be able to guide accurately for more than 5-10 minutes.

One of the reasons for the recall was because of this issue, and that fact that native PE was so high any exposure over 10 minutes would be riddled with elongated stars and guiding errors.

I have yet to see a single successful exposure over 10 minutes from this system. I know from my tests anything over that I had to throw out. I hope the changes have fixed this but that is yet to be seen.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
orlyandico
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: JSnuff1]
      #5559318 - 12/07/12 01:38 PM

Well I didn't know those were 5-minute subs. If anything over 10 minutes, even guided, has to be thrown out, and given the 30" (is it?) native PE... then there is a big disconnect about the price.

1" RMS guiding is not bad as I've said - but you don't need $7K equipment to get that level of performance. And as for not needing a PC for the guiding, I think this is a false economy - there is no 15-minute camera out there that does not need a PC. So you will be hauling the PC around anyway.

If the market was "drop it, let it align, take 5-minute subs with a DSLR" then yes the Starlock is good for that. I don't see that market dropping $7K for a mount though...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5559351 - 12/07/12 01:57 PM

I assumed these images were 10+ minutes subs because they appear to be taken with narrowband filters.

I do not belong to Facebook and have no interest. Can anyone copy Jason's text from Meade's facebook and paste the text here so we all can read more information about the images?

I agree that 5 minute subs is not long enough to make a judgement of this new mount. I take narrow band images at 15 to 30 minutes per sub with my Mach1 and C-8 EdgeHD at 2000mm focal length with reasonable success and round stars. I would like to see that with LX800. At five minute subs, I can easily do that with my previous CPC0800 mounted on Mitty wedge. I even imaged at 30 minute subs with CPC0800 with fairly reasonable round stars.

This is a combination of 15 and 30 minute subs totaling 570 minutes of NGC7331 taken with CPC0800 with Mitty wedge. Not bad for costing less than $3K including Mitty wedge. This was taken at f/10 at 2000mm without focal reducer so the stars are typically elongated at the corners.

NGC7331-CPC0800

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5559391 - 12/07/12 02:17 PM

Quote:

I do not belong to Facebook and have no interest. Can anyone copy Jason's text from Meade's facebook and paste the text here so we all can read more information about the images?




I also have no interest in belonging to Facebook, but you don't need to belong to see the posts.

"This is the longest exposure so far with the 12" Meade LX800. Total of 8.3 hours in HA, SII and OIII. The seeing was a little soft so the stars are not as sharp as I would like but not bad."

Facebook page link


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5559404 - 12/07/12 02:26 PM

That's as far as I can go but when I want to look inside more of Jason's images or information, it prompts me to login.

Where does it say "5 minute subs"?

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5559472 - 12/07/12 03:10 PM

Quote:

That's as far as I can go but when I want to look inside more of Jason's images or information, it prompts me to login.

Where does it say "5 minute subs"?

Peter




It doesn't. His last one did.

http://galaxyphoto.com/jw_lx800_eline_m42.htm


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5559538 - 12/07/12 04:09 PM

Thanks for the link. It looks like Jason is a very experienced astro-photographer. Many of his images look fantastic.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
crow
sage


Reged: 07/09/12

Loc: BC, Canada
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5559613 - 12/07/12 05:05 PM

Rich, you know saying it like it is, isn't allowed anymore, get with the program. You may hurt the telescopes feelings.

And while you're at it, dump your common sense down the drain too.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: crow]
      #5559675 - 12/07/12 05:50 PM

Being the moderator here since the LX80/800 introduction, it is very evident that these threads go downhill because of the adverse reaction to the Meade's lack of success. HOWEVER, WE'VE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE...MANY, MANY TIMES. Snark is not going to get anyone anywhere, especially with the LX80/800 mount threads.

I've said it before, if you have nothing to add constructive or if you feel the need to rehash old, worn out news, leave it at the door. Nothing will get this thread locked quicker than snarky, rehashed information.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
crow
sage


Reged: 07/09/12

Loc: BC, Canada
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5559707 - 12/07/12 06:04 PM

Well, I'd withdraw my comment but it was said in jest and kind of a comment on society not CN or Meade. Probably a bit out of place on a scope forum, apologies.

Personally I hope Meade sort their issues out, competition is good. I was always going to get a Meade scope, orange isn't really my colour.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
galaxy_jason
Vendor


Reged: 05/22/07

Loc: Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: crow]
      #5559933 - 12/07/12 08:36 PM

Hi, I have watched this thread and thought I would answer some of the questions. I hope this gets through. I was a long time contributor to Cloudy Nights until several years ago the moderators started deleting my posts because was named a “vendor”. I sell a few prints a year and somehow that disqualifies me from referencing my website in any post. But I digress.

I have been a Meade beta tester for over 20 years, however, I was not a part of the first round testing of the LX800. I received a 12” LX800 after the recall which already had some enhancements beyond what was first released. I have provided feedback on several issues, some of which have already been addressed. The mechanics of this telescope and mount are first rate in my opinion compared to earlier Meade products. Can you find better? Yes, but at a much higher cost. It represents a good compromise between price/availability and performance. I have suggested a few more enhancements, like reducing the stiffness of the unlocked clutches and more travel in the azmuth adjustment. Not show stoppers but fixing these would make a great product even better.

The majority of the testing has been with regard to the Starlock software. Guiding is hard. Quite frankly I was very skeptical of the idea of a self guiding telescope but as I am using the system I am beginning to believe. The biggest hurdles are flexture in the system. This is a concern anytime a separate guidescope is used. But Meade has done a good job in this respect. The last bit of flex I can see is coming from movement of the main mirror which Meade tells me they are working on. Although the new Crayford focuser is OUTSTANDING, there is some movement. I have been able to eliminate it by locking the mirror with a ¼-20 long-bolt and nut in the shipping bolt hole.

Once the mirror is locked I use a Meade zero image focuser to fine focus. It works well although I found a bit of a light leak that was eliminated with a.... sock.

As for the images. The wide field Helix and PacMan were done with early version of the Starlock firmware and without locking the mirror. I am currently doing 10 minute subs and the guiding is very good. I never do longer then 10 minute subs, I find this is a good compromise between readout noise and number of subs. I want more subs to eliminate cosmic ray hits, affect of any polar misalignment and to take a advantage if dithering.

I also use a non-antiblooming gate camera so I often drop back to 5 minute subs to avoid blooms. The Hubble Helix comparison was with the newest firmware and is much better guided, but still a little trailing. See below.

Meade claims a guiding accuracy of about 1”. This is based on the resolution of the guide scope. All my images are done prime focus with an Apogee U9 6303. With this combination the image scale is about .76”/pixel. What I am finding with the current firmware is a 1-2 pixel elongation which is pretty much within spec, this may improve with upcoming firmware revisions but is not bad considering the Starlock
is about 1/5 the focal length of the 12” f8 OTA. Those desiring better guiding can use an off axis guider and supplemental software. Starlock will shut off when outside guiding is received, it does not fight it.

As for the optics, they are very good. I do most of my imaging from Plano, about 25 miles due north of downtown Dallas. A Metroplex of 6 million people. For the last few months we have had very bad seeing. The Clearsky clock is light blue most nights. The best I can get when focusing is a FWHM of around 2.9” at 2400mm f.l.

The field is almost flat across the 6303 chip with some elongation at the corners. The M42 shot was a mosaic so you can see some elongation at the center since that is the pane boundary. Again, the built in focuser is kick-*BLEEP* but I lose that capability when locking the mirror . Life is full of engineering trade-offs.

All and all this project is shaping up. I was seeing some pointing, initialization errors in the HPP pointing mode and I have received a new firmware version that is supposed to address this. Have not had time to test it yet. Forecast is for snow on Sunday, maybe. (Yes it does that sometime in North Texas).

Hope this answers some the questions and “speculation” (most of it wrong). If you want to ask more questions send an email through my web site since I don’t post here very often.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
n2dpsky
member


Reged: 05/01/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5560016 - 12/07/12 09:48 PM

Thanks, Jason. Awesome work. I know it's easy for everyone to bash you, Meade and the product development, but the absence of other 10-hour Helix photos on the part of the bashers is not all that surprising. Those who do, do. Those who don't, criticize. Come on, boys. Post your shots along with your comments. I spent an hour looking for Helix shot through a Celestron that is even close to your shot and came up empty.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5560023 - 12/07/12 09:51 PM

Thanks for posting, Jason.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: n2dpsky]
      #5560152 - 12/07/12 11:24 PM

It's good to hear something from what is happening. Is this a delta version of the mount then with different components in gears and bearings as had been reported?

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
sphelps
member


Reged: 07/03/10

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5560379 - 12/08/12 03:14 AM

Thanks Jason. I am feeling more confident now about purchasing an LX800 when they are finally re-released. Can't wait to see the final version.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bowmoreman
Clear enough skies
*****

Reged: 09/11/06

Loc: Bolton, MA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5560631 - 12/08/12 10:26 AM

Jason, thanks for your very detailed and on topic post. Btw, as a vendor you ARE allowed to post like this, you simply have to follow the CN TOS for vendors. As long as you don't comment on competitors stuff, nor push yours, generally things go just fine.

Anytime you have questions about that, just contact a mod (David or I on mounts for example).

Again, this was a valuable and information dense post, thanks.

Please consider more active participation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DanlB
member


Reged: 03/29/10

Loc: Indiana
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Bowmoreman]
      #5560732 - 12/08/12 11:29 AM

Jason, thanks for the great update. It is encouraging to read, and see, some positive results for the LX800 mount.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5560829 - 12/08/12 12:41 PM

Quote:

I have suggested a few more enhancements, like reducing the stiffness of the unlocked clutches and more travel in the azmuth adjustment. Not show stoppers but fixing these would make a great product even better.




The clutch stiffness has been addressed few months ago. I did not see much difference though. However, one user disagreed with me. I was told by Meade that there isn't much else they could do about it. Some A-P mounts have very stiff clutches too and that was done on purpose. A mount with stiff axes can withstand wind gusts better.

Travel in the azimuth is not an issue. Just release the bolt underneath the tripod base plate and rotate the mount head 360 degrees. This is a great feature which Meade failed to advertise/document.

Edited by Alph (12/08/12 01:37 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5560923 - 12/08/12 01:48 PM

Thanks for the post, Jason. Very helpful. Also, interesting that you weren't involved in beta testing the original LX800 product. I think having a stronger testing program for that initial rollout might have helped a great deal.

If your seeing conditions the past few weeks/months were limiting you to 2.9" on focus frames, that by itself is enough to explain much of what I see in the linked images. Images at 2,400mm focal length just aren't going to look their best if the seeing is poor.

Frankly, the only thing disappointing in the material you provided is that you are seeing 1-2 pixels of trailing on guided subs even with the mirror locked down. I wish Meade had gone with an OAG solution rather than a small guide scope. But, as you mentioned, one could always switch to an OAG after the fact. And I suppose a lot of people would rather have the flexibility of more guide stars that comes with a smaller guide scope.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Jared]
      #5561201 - 12/08/12 04:55 PM

Quote:

I wish Meade had gone with an OAG solution rather than a small guide scope. But, as you mentioned, one could always switch to an OAG after the fact. And I suppose a lot of people would rather have the flexibility of more guide stars that comes with a smaller guide scope.




Yes...I've wondered about this since Starlock was announced. Wouldn't it be cool if a scope was like Hubble - with integrated "fine guidance sensors" (essentially off-axis guiders) outside the normal imaging frame. Of course, as you mentioned, there are downsides to that.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
n2dpsky
member


Reged: 05/01/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5561273 - 12/08/12 05:56 PM

It's funny you said that, Lee Jay. I sometimes read these posts and feel like that is what people expect from these small telescope manufactures. I actually commend Meade for being bold enough to really innovate. Of course, that comes with downsides as well, but they could have just repackaged another GEM and called it a day. They're really trying to do something that's never been done. I think we'll all benefit from that effort in the long run. If this works, future products will most assuredly follow. Having to worry about guide star selection and pairing guiders to optics will be a thing of the past.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Jared]
      #5561341 - 12/08/12 06:58 PM

Quote:

I wish Meade had gone with an OAG solution rather than a small guide scope



Hmm? As if finding a guide star with OAG could be easily automated.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
andysea
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/03/10

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Alph]
      #5561472 - 12/08/12 08:40 PM

The clutches on my Mach1 are pretty stiff and that's just normal. The Njp axes spin completely loose when the clutches are released. It's just different designs but there is nothing wrong with either one, at least nothing that I am aware of.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
andysea
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/03/10

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5561488 - 12/08/12 08:52 PM

In my experience an OAG gives the best guiding possible, however I am not sure how an OAG could be integrated into a mount/OTA. The OAG needs to be setup in such a way that the guide camera comes into focus at the same point as the imaging camera. Backfocus of DSLR's and CCD cameras varies a lot and it would be nearly impossible to provide an integrated OAG that works out of the box with any imaging system. Not to mention the high price tag of a decent guide camera that is sensitive enough to work with the OAG.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
korborh
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 01/29/11

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Alph]
      #5561714 - 12/08/12 11:53 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I wish Meade had gone with an OAG solution rather than a small guide scope



Hmm? As if finding a guide star with OAG could be easily automated.




One can Calibrate FOV in TheSky and use a Rotator with one of the many automation programs. I have never used a rotator so not sure how easy this is in practice.
I rotate manually and the guide star is there because my FOV and OAG angle is calibrated.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
andysea
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/03/10

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: korborh]
      #5561729 - 12/09/12 12:07 AM

So far with my lodestar, in over a year of imaging, I never had to rotate the oag to find a guide star.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: andysea]
      #5561730 - 12/09/12 12:11 AM

Same here. Never had to hunt for guide star with OAG and Lodestar using C-8 at 2000mm focal length.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: korborh]
      #5561808 - 12/09/12 01:52 AM

Quote:

One can Calibrate FOV in TheSky



How would you automate it? Is the Meade LX200 controller able to run TheSky?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Hilmi
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/07/10

Loc: Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Alph]
      #5561885 - 12/09/12 05:09 AM

I think that should they be able to resolve all the problems before their financial troubles drown them, starlock could prove very popular with people who would like to get into Astro-photography but are intimidated by coming up with a package and integrating it and working out the bugs. I also believe it will be a huge hit with DSLR imagers. 100% PC free imaging out of the box, no extra gadgets needed.

Looking at the resutls so far, maybe it will work better wit slightly shorter focal lengths.

At this price range, the lure is in the simplicity, that is what you are paying a premium for. And honestly, even if the first generation of the technology might not be perfect, the second generation might hit the sweet spot and be a major game changer in the industry.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Hilmi]
      #5561914 - 12/09/12 06:30 AM

I am not optimistic about any system that guides a large sct with a separate guidescope because differential flexure is fundamentally difficult to overcome due to the ota itself and its two reflecting surfaces. On the other hand, the system could work very well for guiding a refractor, and the 130mm apo version of the lx800 at the same price as the 12" ($9999) makes perfect sense as an integrated system that should do well out of the box, and be easy to use. None of the images I have seen with lx800 and a large sct show any benefit of the greater aperture and I think better results would be achievable with a well-focused 130mm refractor - and it would be much easier to operate.

If there are compelling results guiding a large sct with a guidescope system, then the performance can be summarized in two numbers: the achieved fwhm (arc-seconds) in longish exposures (preferably 5-15m) and the flexure rate in arc-seconds per minute. Anyone characterizing the performance of such a system should be measuring those numbers, and if the results are good - I would prefer to see the numbers and example sub-exposures rather than just a final processed image with no measurements.

The measure of a well guided image at long focal length isn't just "round" stars, but small and round stars. If the stars are large and round, it could be due to poor focus and/or guiding, and the size of the stars will mask both flexure and field curvature. If the stars are very small, then the effects of flexure and field curvature become much more noticeable.

Regarding OAG, I think it is essential if you want to realize the full potential of a large aperture sct. I don't think it could be easily offered in some automated form, mainly because of the difficulty in maintaining focus on the guide chip. At the same time it is not that difficult to use once the system is configured, particularly with a sensitive ccd guide camera and a smooth mount that can tolerate long guide exposures.

Regarding the helix image - I have never imaged it myself because it is at -20 declination, and not an easy target from mid-northern latitudes. Even from Dallas it's an odd choice if seeing conditions aren't optimal, and the other examples of pac-man and crab make more sense.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5562141 - 12/09/12 10:23 AM

Quote:

I am not optimistic about any system that guides a large sct with a separate guidescope because differential flexure is fundamentally difficult to overcome due to the ota itself and its two reflecting surfaces.




I am, but they've got to produce the f/5 reducer. Even with the f/8 scopes and the lower read noise sensors we're starting to get, shorter subs are becoming more and more practical. They don't need to get rid of differential flexure, they just need to keep it to a low enough level during the sub exposure, and if the subs are getting down into the 30-300 seconds area, it shouldn't be too difficult to make that happen.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter in Reno
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/15/08

Loc: Reno, NV
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5562280 - 12/09/12 11:40 AM

What about narrow band imaging? It usually requires a significantly longer sub exposure at a minimum of 15 minutes up to 30 minutes. NB imaging is getting very popular especially for light polluted skies.

Peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Peter in Reno]
      #5562355 - 12/09/12 12:27 PM

Quote:

What about narrow band imaging? It usually requires a significantly longer sub exposure at a minimum of 15 minutes up to 30 minutes. NB imaging is getting very popular especially for light polluted skies.

Peter




Good point.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
galaxy_jason
Vendor


Reged: 05/22/07

Loc: Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5562612 - 12/09/12 03:04 PM

Look at my web site. I do 10 minute subs at f8 from Dallas in HA, SII and OIII. 30 minute subs are not needed.

One thing I forgot to mention, on both mount samples I have seen so far the declination backlash is almost non-existent


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ahopp
sage


Reged: 05/24/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5563784 - 12/10/12 09:09 AM

Great work Jason.

Tony


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5564716 - 12/10/12 06:58 PM

I was trying not to go there, but if one were trying to conceal tracking errors, far southern targets and big, blobby stars are a good start.

-Rich

Quote:


The measure of a well guided image at long focal length isn't just "round" stars, but small and round stars. If the stars are large and round, it could be due to poor focus and/or guiding, and the size of the stars will mask both flexure and field curvature. If the stars are very small, then the effects of flexure and field curvature become much more noticeable.

Regarding OAG, I think it is essential if you want to realize the full potential of a large aperture sct. I don't think it could be easily offered in some automated form, mainly because of the difficulty in maintaining focus on the guide chip. At the same time it is not that difficult to use once the system is configured, particularly with a sensitive ccd guide camera and a smooth mount that can tolerate long guide exposures.

Regarding the helix image - I have never imaged it myself because it is at -20 declination, and not an easy target from mid-northern latitudes. Even from Dallas it's an odd choice if seeing conditions aren't optimal, and the other examples of pac-man and crab make more sense.

Frank




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5564847 - 12/10/12 08:29 PM Attachment (45 downloads)

Quote:

I was trying not to go there, but if one were trying to conceal tracking errors, far southern targets and big, blobby stars are a good start.




This is a tight crop of one of Jason's images. Does this meet the criteria you expressed above?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5564870 - 12/10/12 08:42 PM

Rich,

Think you should have tried harder not to go there. I'm not sure what would be gained for Jason or for Meade if the results were not on the level. With all the problems with the LX800 early this year a second round of bad results would be the end of the product... IMO.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
galaxy_jason
Vendor


Reged: 05/22/07

Loc: Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5564961 - 12/10/12 09:42 PM

Yep, that's it. I picked low targets to get big blobby stars to hide tracking errors. As they say on Monday night football. Come on man.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5565004 - 12/10/12 10:19 PM

Time for a cool off. It's locked for the time being.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Lee Jay]
      #5565709 - 12/11/12 10:47 AM

Unlocked. Let's see if we can behave.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ahopp
sage


Reged: 05/24/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5565714 - 12/11/12 10:56 AM

Jason,

Can you compare the performance so far with the LX800 to other platforms you have used? I am a patiently waiting recall customer of the 14".

Tony


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5565758 - 12/11/12 11:22 AM

I only mentioned the low dec. of Helix because someone had requested comparison images. My note prior to that request had specifically pointed to my comparison image of the Crab, and at the same site I additionally have images of Pac-man - and many others. So regarding the specific request for comparison helix images - it is not as common or popular a target from mid-northern latitudes as many other options.

For comparing one system to another in terms of guiding and so forth, I place more value on 1) fwhm in arc-seconds, 2) raw, linearly stretched sub-exposures, and regarding flexure, 3) a measured rate in arc-sec/minute of the flexure. This can be determined from successive plate solves of the sub-exposures directly - assuming no polar rotation. And for best results that capture the guiding capability of the system, I would use an object up from the equator but not too far, so it is in steadier atmosphere but not so far from the equator that it is moving slowly across the sky.

I don't think these are unreasonable things to request since I provide similar information to convey my own autoguiding results. I also provide a video-based tool for realtime analysis of flexure rates - as a free download. A typical sct flexure rate with a guidescope might be 0.1-0.3" per minute - which is tolerable in a 5-minute exposure if the stars are perhaps 4" in diameter, but when they are 2" it becomes a problem that limits exposure time. I don't concern myself with flexure much since I switched to OAG.

For a refractor, flexure tends to be much smaller, and it is harder to get 2" stars in the first place - which is why I thought a refractor, using starlock on lx800, might be a better setup for someone who wants a turn-key imaging system that captures results close to the limit of the optics used.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5566021 - 12/11/12 02:09 PM

My comment was geared towards producing an engineering test of the mount. The emotionally charged response isn't relevant to the issue at hand: performing an unambiguous evaluation of the LX800.

And since this is a second bite at the apple, it's got to hold up.

So, whatever OTA is required to get an image sharp enough to tell if it's tracking needs to be on there. And if that isn't Meade brand, then get ahold of whatever is needed. Evaluation of the ACF can be done separately.

The second item is point at some stuff along the equator requiring long integrations so tracking is obvious.

And yes, do both of these in the same image.

But trying to talk around doing sensitive evaluations or claiming hurt feelings isn't productive.

Because, at the end of all this, there isn't a third bite at the apple. And that's why I'm being critical.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
galaxy_jason
Vendor


Reged: 05/22/07

Loc: Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5566310 - 12/11/12 05:06 PM

Accusations of falsifying data will get an emotional repsponse.

Last night was a little better seeing, not great, around 2" best focus. I also got a chance to try the latest firmware. This included some PEC updates and Starlock initialization updates.

Here is a 5.5 hour HA Rosette shot. The starlock tracking is essentially perfect. For the pixel peepers, you will see a very slight (about 1 pixel which is .77 arc seconds) diagonal elongation at the center of the frame. I believe this is the last bit of differential flexure. Not bad for a Cat.

Keep in mind this is an undprocessed image. Just combined then a slight stretch in PS. Many masterpieces you see on the net are deconvolved, dark overlay trailing reduced, etc.

http://galaxyphoto.com/tmp_800/rosett_5.5.jpg


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
n2dpsky
member


Reged: 05/01/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566375 - 12/11/12 05:59 PM

I asked for comparison shots because it's very easy for people to be critical of others work when their's isn't subject the same sort of evaluation. I think some on the group are very interested in a positive discussion, but when others question the integrity of one of the foremost astrophotographers that I am aware of, I think that reveals their true intent, which is to bash Meade and anyone who works with them. Star hawk, are you even in the market for this scope? You're at a low latitude there in Tuscon. Can we see your Helix shot? I'd like to offer my opinion.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
andysea
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/03/10

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566402 - 12/11/12 06:20 PM

Great photos Jason!
What is the native PE and guided RMS of the mount?

Thanks
Andy


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Lee Jay
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/27/08

Loc: Westminster, CO
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566404 - 12/11/12 06:21 PM

Thanks for the sample, Jason.

I have several questions.

What was the sub length on that shot?
Was this again without the f/5 reducer?
Was this with your make-shift mirror lock or without?
Is Meade still trying to reduce mirror deflection?
Is the OTA you are using with any improvements Meade has already made to it?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
n2dpsky
member


Reged: 05/01/12

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: n2dpsky]
      #5566410 - 12/11/12 06:27 PM

Awesome Rosette, Jason.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
germana1
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 05/14/09

Loc: New Jersey
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: n2dpsky]
      #5566416 - 12/11/12 06:33 PM

I think that shot looks great, I couldn't even come close to getting anything like that stars look round impressive nice work.
Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566427 - 12/11/12 06:44 PM

Quote:

Accusations of falsifying data will get an emotional repsponse.

Last night was a little better seeing, not great, around 2" best focus. I also got a chance to try the latest firmware. This included some PEC updates and Starlock initialization updates.

Here is a 5.5 hour HA Rosette shot. The starlock tracking is essentially perfect. For the pixel peepers, you will see a very slight (about 1 pixel which is .77 arc seconds) diagonal elongation at the center of the frame. I believe this is the last bit of differential flexure. Not bad for a Cat.

Keep in mind this is an undprocessed image. Just combined then a slight stretch in PS. Many masterpieces you see on the net are deconvolved, dark overlay trailing reduced, etc.

http://galaxyphoto.com/tmp_800/rosett_5.5.jpg




That's actually pretty impressive. I would 't have expected so little trailing at 2,400mm focal length using a guide scope. Nice!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
korborh
professor emeritus
*****

Reged: 01/29/11

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: freestar8n]
      #5566491 - 12/11/12 07:38 PM

Quote:

None of the images I have seen with lx800 and a large sct show any benefit of the greater aperture and I think better results would be achievable with a well-focused 130mm refractor - and it would be much easier to operate. Frank




And the latest posted image is no exception. Stars are round but bigger in size (arcsec) than what the optics allows.
Stacking of flexure affected images can result in round stars but they will be large.
To see flexure and image quality, un-processed individual raw subs would be best.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
galaxy_jason
Vendor


Reged: 05/22/07

Loc: Texas
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Jared]
      #5566509 - 12/11/12 07:51 PM

10 minute subs, none rejected. Prime focus no reducer. Native PE is about 16", corrected to 5-6 over six+ minutes. That is trained with PEMPro through ASCOM, should be even better with
direct input once we get the numbers to the PEMPro developers. But that is in the noise. Starlock can guide that out. Only place it may help is on the rare occasion when there are very few guide stars. Starlock has to increase integration times to a few seconds and we sometimes see a bit of trailing. I haven't seen this often with the latest code, better sensitivity....and I am in light pollution hell as well.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rigel123
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/29/09

Loc: SW Ohio
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566673 - 12/11/12 10:24 PM

Details in the Rosette are very nice

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Hilmi
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/07/10

Loc: Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: rigel123]
      #5566808 - 12/11/12 11:49 PM

Jasson,

Regardless of what system you use. I am very impressed. Did you get any feedback on the manufacturer when they will be letting these loose in the wild? Many people are on fire waiting for their mounts to get shipped back to them. Your photos are probably not making it any easier for them as they go green with envy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
sphelps
member


Reged: 07/03/10

Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: galaxy_jason]
      #5566880 - 12/12/12 01:08 AM

Jason, this is pure AstroPorn!
Very nice!
For those of us who don't have countless hours of time to spend on learning how to assemble and operate an astrophotography system, the Meade LX800 will be perfect. I'm glad to see that it's coming along nicely.

Steven

Quote:

Accusations of falsifying data will get an emotional repsponse.

Last night was a little better seeing, not great, around 2" best focus. I also got a chance to try the latest firmware. This included some PEC updates and Starlock initialization updates.

Here is a 5.5 hour HA Rosette shot. The starlock tracking is essentially perfect. For the pixel peepers, you will see a very slight (about 1 pixel which is .77 arc seconds) diagonal elongation at the center of the frame. I believe this is the last bit of differential flexure. Not bad for a Cat.

Keep in mind this is an undprocessed image. Just combined then a slight stretch in PS. Many masterpieces you see on the net are deconvolved, dark overlay trailing reduced, etc.

http://galaxyphoto.com/tmp_800/rosett_5.5.jpg




Edited by sphelps (12/12/12 01:36 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gillmj24
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 12/06/05

Loc: PA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: sphelps]
      #5567080 - 12/12/12 07:35 AM

Jason once you give the mount your blessing can they pay you to write (or probably, RE-write) their instruction manual?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: sphelps]
      #5567086 - 12/12/12 07:39 AM

Jason,

You haven't been accused of falsifying data; you're being asked to make the beta test harsh enough to ensure the LX 800 coming out of it is a clear success.

Meade needs help in that area, or else the original beta program would have successfully wrung out the mount and the initial rollout wouldn't have resulted in a recall.

What this is all about is the objective can't just be to produce pretty pictures- you're obviously doing well at dialing in your personal technique on that score.

The comments I and others are making are about setting that objective aside and doing the types of imaging required to force the mount's tracking to meet its specification. That's exactly what a half dozen CN owners will attempt when they get their LX 800s back, and will be posting the results here.

So, if your beta test leaves anything unresolved, it'll be filling this forum a month after re-delivery. So, personal feelings are irrelevant- the delivered mounts have a variety of different OTAs waiting and advanced imagers who really do very long exposures ready to try that out.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Jason Ware's LX800 new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5567216 - 12/12/12 09:31 AM

Locked.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
18 registered and 24 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay, iceblaze 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 6460

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics