10 replies to this topic

[dobnomore]

Anybody have any experience putting the ASI2600MM - Duo together with the 925 Edge?  Seems like a great idea combining the main and guide sensors together like that.  But I'm worried that the guide sensor is too far out from center to work well.  Any thoughts or has anybody actually done this?

[bobzeq25]

You're trying to start out in DSO astrophotography with an HAE29, with a 9.25? You have chosen a very difficult road. There are relevant many posts on the beginning imaging forum.

Short version. The two classic beginner errors. An inadequate mount (for the scope), and WAY too big a scope. Seen here over and over again. Not because people are stupid. But because DSO imaging, especially learning DSO imaging, is complicated and unintuitive. Long exposures fundamentally change the rules.

Edited by bobzeq25, 08 November 2024 - 08:58 PM.

[dobnomore]

Sorry, the mount is an AM5N.  The HAE was clearly not up to the task.  The 9.25 is a great scope!  Just need to pair it with the right camera.

[Dennis_Oz]

Some information here:

 

https://www.cloudyni...ecs/?p=13523026

 

Dennis

[dobnomore]

Thanks Dennis - very good info.  Sounds like it should work pretty well with the 9.25.  I don't have any 4.5 nm filters ($) so my 6.5nm should be just fine.  I am new to the hobby for sure (big step up from my 13.1 inch Dob!) so I don't need any clumsy setup to start out with.  Having said that, I may just go with the more tried and true OAG.  That also may be more flexible for the future using faster optics and a different camera. I'll have both pretty soon so I can compare and share.

[bobzeq25]

Thanks Dennis - very good info.  Sounds like it should work pretty well with the 9.25.  I don't have any 4.5 nm filters ($) so my 6.5nm should be just fine.  I am new to the hobby for sure (big step up from my 13.1 inch Dob!) so I don't need any clumsy setup to start out with.  Having said that, I may just go with the more tried and true OAG.  That also may be more flexible for the future using faster optics and a different camera. I'll have both pretty soon so I can compare and share.

Don't know what your "different optics" would be. But I'd cheerfully take a bet that they'll be better for learning the art of DSO AP. <smile>

[dylanear]

You're trying to start out in DSO astrophotography with an HAE29, with a 9.25? You have chosen a very difficult road. There are relevant many posts on the beginning imaging forum.

Short version. The two classic beginner errors. An inadequate mount (for the scope), and WAY too big a scope. Seen here over and over again. Not because people are stupid. But because DSO imaging, especially learning DSO imaging, is complicated and unintuitive. Long exposures fundamentally change the rules.

 

Sorry, the mount is an AM5N.  The HAE was clearly not up to the task.  The 9.25 is a great scope!  Just need to pair it with the right camera.

What am I missing? The 925 Edge OTA weight is 9.5kg/21 lbs. the HAE29C weight capacity without counterweight is 13.5 kg/29.7 lbs. The AM5N is specced for a bit more weight at 15kg/33lbs. 

The AM5N may give you more room for accessories, but the HAE29C should be a reasonable mount for that scope, no? Worst case, add the counterweight. 

It's a bit over the spec at 14kg, and it's just a demo of moving the scope around, not doing precise long exposure imaging, but iOptron has a video of a HAE29 with a C11+ camera on it on the original HAE29 page. Maybe they figured it best not to use that demo video when they made the page for the latest HAE29C?

https://www.ioptron....ct-p/he292a.htm

https://www.ioptron....s/HAE29_C11.mp4

I just find it hard to imagine that the experience of using a Edge 925 on a HAE29 would be dramatically worse than an AM5N? You guys know a secret I don't? 

 

 

[bobzeq25]

What am I missing? The 925 Edge OTA weight is 9.5kg/21 lbs. the HAE29C weight capacity without counterweight is 13.5 kg/29.7 lbs. The AM5N is specced for a bit more weight at 15kg/33lbs. 

The AM5N may give you more room for accessories, but the HAE29C should be a reasonable mount for that scope, no? Worst case, add the counterweight. 

It's a bit over the spec at 14kg, and it's just a demo of moving the scope around, not doing precise long exposure imaging, but iOptron has a video of a HAE29 with a C11+ camera on it on the original HAE29 page. Maybe they figured it best not to use that demo video when they made the page for the latest HAE29C?

https://www.ioptron....ct-p/he292a.htm

https://www.ioptron....s/HAE29_C11.mp4

I just find it hard to imagine that the experience of using a Edge 925 on a HAE29 would be dramatically worse than an AM5N? You guys know a secret I don't?

A very simple one.

Weight is not the only important thing here. Focal length matters. A lot.

[dobnomore]

The biggest problem I had with the HAE29B is that the iMate computer in the mount, along with the requirement that you remote-desktop into it is extremely slowww.  I ditched that setup and got the AM5N to replace it. along with an AsiAir  Works very well and is super fast. Very nice software too.  At this point I'm getting a few good data sets and some nice images. I'm not guiding yet and not using the filter wheel (waiting on a ZWO tilt-plate) but things are looking good so far.  I haven't tried out PixInsight yet but that's next. I've been watching Peter Zelinka's tutorials before I climb into that cockpit.

[dylanear]

A very simple one.

Weight is not the only important thing here. Focal length matters. A lot.

Not buying that as an explanation why AM5N is just fine, but a HAE29 would just be unable to cope when both are using the same scope with the same focal length. The quotes I reacted to was, "The HAE was clearly not up to the task." and "An inadequate mount (for the scope)", if a HAE29 is a fundamental problem, a AM5 isn't going to be dramatically better?

It's a really long focal length scope, sure, mount quality will be important. But both mounts are a lot more similar than they are different and published specs are just numbers, the AM5N may have a slightly better capacity spec, but both mounts should handle that scope without fundamental problems. I wouldn't have said anything if you two were just saying, "The AM5 has a little better capacity spec and being a long focal length scope I wanted that potential for a bit higher capacity." But you are both talking like one is great and the other fundamentally incapable.
 

 

Sorry, the mount is an AM5N.  The HAE was clearly not up to the task. 

 

The biggest problem I had with the HAE29B is that the iMate computer in the mount, along with the requirement that you remote-desktop into it is extremely slowww.  I ditched that setup and got the AM5N to replace it. along with an AsiAir  Works very well and is super fast. Very nice software too.  At this point I'm getting a few good data sets and some nice images. I'm not guiding yet and not using the filter wheel (waiting on a ZWO tilt-plate) but things are looking good so far.  

 

Dobnomore, did you try an HAE29 and it failed to give good tracking results and you tried a AM5N and gave great results? or you just didn't like the iMate that's built in the HAE29B? I could see how being forced to use the iMate only could be a turn off, but that have nothing to do with if the mount can give good tracking with that scope.

Speaking to someone at iOptron I was asking about the HAE29 B vs C and very quickly it was clear I saw no reason to buy the B with the computing built in and no way to bypass it (still find that hard to believe, but that's what I was told!). I keep gear a looong time and never want computing that'll go out of date built into expensive gear that doesn't need computing built into it. I like things as flexible as possible, as future proof as possible. Heck, the employee I talked to pretty much dismissed the B entirely as a good idea very early in the conversation, before I could give my reasons for having reservations! When he said my ASIAIR or Windows laptop wouldn't work on the HAE29B, the iMate in it could not be shut off or bypassed, that was the end of that and I ordered a C. I have both an ASIAIR and an external iMate, and I definitely find the ASIAIR the easier, more elegant solution for my needs at this point, but I do plan to learn the iMate better given I'm a Linux nerd and Kstars/Ekos seem interesting to me. ASIAIR is great for what it is, very user friendly, but it's a bit of a black box. The ASIAIR works flawlessly with the HAE29C in my experience so far. I haven't even deforked my C8 yet to try that on the HAE29C, but I'm already really curious how a 9.25 or even a 11 with the counterweight added would work on it. 

Unless someone gives good actual experience with a similar scope on both an AM5 and a HAE29 and one came out WAY ahead of the other in terms of actual weight capacity, tracking accuracy, not computing related matters, I'm going to stick to believing they are going to perform more or less similarly in that respect.

 

 

 I haven't tried out PixInsight yet but that's next. I've been watching Peter Zelinka's tutorials before I climb into that cockpit.

I'm definitely still looking at options for workflow on the PC. I'll have to check Peter Zelinka's videos, PixInsight looks like an elegant solution? 

https://www.youtube....LBEl5wL&index=2

As far as the 2600mm?? It's going to be a while until I can get a nice cooled astro cam like that! Going to be using my Nikon for the foreseeable future. 
 

[jonnybravo0311]

I think you might struggle with the guide stars, especially if you're planning on imaging at f/10 with tight bandpass filters. The position of the sensor itself isn't the problem - pretty much anyone with an off-axis guider is in a similar situation. The difference is that with an OAG, you put it in front of the filter wheel so the light captured by the pickoff prism isn't affected. Further, the strain wave gear mounts typically require very fast guide exposures and quick corrections - recommendations are usually 0.5" to 1.0". The RA encoders on the iOptron models might mitigate that somewhat (I don't own one, so can't confirm).