Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

FSQ & MonsterMOAG OAG

Expand Messages
  • Frank S Barnes III
    I use a FSQ-106N and a SBIG STL-11K/FW-8 combo. Before I added the FW-8, my images had nice round stars out to the corners of the image. When I added the FW-8,
    Message 1 of 9 , Dec 23, 2007
      I use a FSQ-106N and a SBIG STL-11K/FW-8 combo. Before I added
      the FW-8, my images had nice round stars out to the corners of the
      image. When I added the FW-8, I started getting elongation in my stars
      on one side of the chip. This said to me that I probably now had a tilt
      in the camera. However, when I rotated the camera (I also have a
      Astrodon Takometer), the elongation got worse in certain PAs and better
      in others. After much testing, I came to the conclusion that the
      additional weight of the FW-8, plus the fact that the weight is offset
      to the main optical path, was causing flex/sag in my optical train. I
      started investigating where the flex/sag/elongation could be happening
      and determined that there are 3 basic places this is most likely to
      happen, 1. the focuser, 2. the CAA, 3. the guidescope. I addressed each
      one and found "play, slop, looseness", in the focuser and CAA, and
      eliminated the guidescope by installing an Astrodon MonsterMOAG. I now
      have the imaging chip back square to the optical plane in all PAs and
      the flex/sag is gone. I now guide with the MonsterMOAG (MMOAG) and
      don't have to worry about flexure or focusing of the guidescope. The
      addition of the MMOAG makes a very tight. compact, rigid imaging train
      from the CAA to the main chip.

      I put together a Word document that describes the adjustments I
      made, and how I installed the MonsterMOAG on my FSQ. It is available
      for download on my website here:

      http://www.skyimager.com/FSQ-MMOAG/. The document is called
      "Using an Astrodon MonsterMOAG with a Tak FSQ-106N".

      Also, here is a link to the first image I took after these
      modifications. It is a Ha image with the individual exposures (16 of
      them, 30 min each), guided with the MMOAG.

      http://www.skyimager.com/imagedata/IC405-IC410_12-18-07.html

      If you are seeing any issues in your images similar to what I
      did, this might be of some help. The MMOAG is an excellent alternative
      to a separate guidescope.
    • sc02492
      Frank, nice write up. In some of the photos on your website, I notice that you positioned your FSQ on the rings so that the Robofocus is on top. Does that
      Message 2 of 9 , Dec 23, 2007
        Frank, nice write up. In some of the photos on your website, I notice
        that you positioned your FSQ on the rings so that the Robofocus is on
        top. Does that position minimize focuser sag as well?

        Steve

        Steve Cannistra
        http://www.starrywonders.com

        --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Frank S Barnes III"
        <SBarnes@...> wrote:
        >
        > I use a FSQ-106N and a SBIG STL-11K/FW-8 combo. Before I added
        > the FW-8, my images had nice round stars out to the corners of the
        > image. When I added the FW-8, I started getting elongation in my stars
        > on one side of the chip. This said to me that I probably now had a tilt
        > in the camera. However, when I rotated the camera (I also have a
        > Astrodon Takometer), the elongation got worse in certain PAs and better
        > in others. After much testing, I came to the conclusion that the
        > additional weight of the FW-8, plus the fact that the weight is offset
        > to the main optical path, was causing flex/sag in my optical train. I
        > started investigating where the flex/sag/elongation could be happening
        > and determined that there are 3 basic places this is most likely to
        > happen, 1. the focuser, 2. the CAA, 3. the guidescope. I addressed each
        > one and found "play, slop, looseness", in the focuser and CAA, and
        > eliminated the guidescope by installing an Astrodon MonsterMOAG. I now
        > have the imaging chip back square to the optical plane in all PAs and
        > the flex/sag is gone. I now guide with the MonsterMOAG (MMOAG) and
        > don't have to worry about flexure or focusing of the guidescope. The
        > addition of the MMOAG makes a very tight. compact, rigid imaging train
        > from the CAA to the main chip.
        >
        > I put together a Word document that describes the adjustments I
        > made, and how I installed the MonsterMOAG on my FSQ. It is available
        > for download on my website here:
        >
        > http://www.skyimager.com/FSQ-MMOAG/. The document is called
        > "Using an Astrodon MonsterMOAG with a Tak FSQ-106N".
        >
        > Also, here is a link to the first image I took after these
        > modifications. It is a Ha image with the individual exposures (16 of
        > them, 30 min each), guided with the MMOAG.
        >
        > http://www.skyimager.com/imagedata/IC405-IC410_12-18-07.html
        >
        > If you are seeing any issues in your images similar to what I
        > did, this might be of some help. The MMOAG is an excellent alternative
        > to a separate guidescope.
        >
      • ancient.sull
        That s a very helpful writeup. I had, as many of you know, a terrible time with the FSQ-ED(X) (New Q) and that same camera/FW combination. The STL 8-place
        Message 3 of 9 , Dec 23, 2007
          That's a very helpful writeup.

          I had, as many of you know, a terrible time with the FSQ-ED(X) (New
          Q) and that same camera/FW combination. The STL 8-place filter wheel
          (FW8-STL) isn't just heavy, it is eccentric with the center of mass
          of the Camera+FW far from the optical axis.

          http://www.ancientstarlight.com/TwoTaks.html

          That's the camera+FW on a different focuser but to give you the scale
          that is a 4" Field Flattener and the filter wheel is about a foot on
          a side.

          I never did solve my flexure problem. I could see flexure in the
          focuser (ie I could see the draw tube moving in its sleeve) even with
          the focuser tension adjusted maximally (not the clamp on the bottom
          of the focuser, the hex screws that tighten the tension on the draw
          tube itself).

          My FSQ-N (like the one in Frank's writeup) works fine with that same
          camera FW combination but there is a different way to clamp the
          focus draw tube with the "N". I get the N to approximate focus with
          its native focuser, lock the draw tube at that position with the top
          clamp and use an FLI PDF to focus thereafter (you need to focus this
          fast OTA frequently.)

          If anyone out there does have an STL11K camera _with the FW8-STL
          filter wheel_ and the New Q and is getting images with round stars to
          the corners and no flexure I'd love to hear from you. I have chatted
          with a lot of people with the STL11K with the standard 5 postion
          wheel and they seem to have no problem, nor do people with the heavy-
          but-more-symmetric Apogee cameras.

          Drew Sullivan
          Still Stumped in California
        • Frank S Barnes III
          Hi Steve, I have a set of custom made rings from Andy Homeyer to hold my FSQ. They attach to a set of Losmandy Dovetail plate adapter (DA). They are pretty low
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 24, 2007
            Hi Steve,

            I have a set of custom made rings from Andy Homeyer to hold my
            FSQ. They attach to a set of Losmandy Dovetail plate adapter (DA). They
            are pretty low profile rings and the clearance wasn't enough to mount
            the FSQ with the focuser on the bottom. So rather than add spacer
            blocks to the DAs, I turned the scope 90 degrees so the focuser was on
            the side and had plenty of room for all my adjustments and balance. I
            have another FSQ-106N with the same camera/filter wheel combo that is
            mounted with Parallax rings and has the focuser and Robo on the bottom.
            The sag is bad on this one as well, and I plan to do the same mod to it
            after the first of the year, so it doesn't appear that the orientation
            makes a big difference. The key is a good tight focuser :-)))




            >On 24 Dec 2007 11:07:37 -0000, UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com wrote:

            >5b. Re: FSQ & MonsterMOAG OAG
            > Posted by: "sc02492" sc02492@... sc02492
            > Date: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:06 pm ((PST))
            >
            >Frank, nice write up. In some of the photos on your website, I notice
            >that you positioned your FSQ on the rings so that the Robofocus is on
            >top. Does that position minimize focuser sag as well?
            >
            >Steve
            >
            >Steve Cannistra
            >http://www.starrywonders.com
            >
            >--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Frank S Barnes III"
            ><SBarnes@...> wrote:
            >>
            >> I use a FSQ-106N and a SBIG STL-11K/FW-8 combo. Before I added
            >> the FW-8, my images had nice round stars out to the corners of the
            >> image. When I added the FW-8, I started getting elongation in my stars
            >> on one side of the chip. This said to me that I probably now had a tilt
            >> in the camera. However, when I rotated the camera (I also have a
            >> Astrodon Takometer), the elongation got worse in certain PAs and better
            >> in others. After much testing, I came to the conclusion that the
            >> additional weight of the FW-8, plus the fact that the weight is offset
            >> to the main optical path, was causing flex/sag in my optical train. I
            >> started investigating where the flex/sag/elongation could be happening
            >> and determined that there are 3 basic places this is most likely to
            >> happen, 1. the focuser, 2. the CAA, 3. the guidescope. I addressed each
            >> one and found "play, slop, looseness", in the focuser and CAA, and
            >> eliminated the guidescope by installing an Astrodon MonsterMOAG. I now
            >> have the imaging chip back square to the optical plane in all PAs and
            >> the flex/sag is gone. I now guide with the MonsterMOAG (MMOAG) and
            >> don't have to worry about flexure or focusing of the guidescope. The
            >> addition of the MMOAG makes a very tight. compact, rigid imaging train
            >> from the CAA to the main chip.
            >>
            >> I put together a Word document that describes the adjustments I
            >> made, and how I installed the MonsterMOAG on my FSQ. It is available
            >> for download on my website here:
            >>
            >> http://www.skyimager.com/FSQ-MMOAG/. The document is called
            >> "Using an Astrodon MonsterMOAG with a Tak FSQ-106N".
            >>
            >> Also, here is a link to the first image I took after these
            >> modifications. It is a Ha image with the individual exposures (16 of
            >> them, 30 min each), guided with the MMOAG.
            >>
            >> http://www.skyimager.com/imagedata/IC405-IC410_12-18-07.html
            >>
            >> If you are seeing any issues in your images similar to what I
            >> did, this might be of some help. The MMOAG is an excellent alternative
            >> to a separate guidescope.
            >>
          • sc02492
            Thanks, Frank. I have already been down this road with my FSQ- tightened the CAA as well as the focuser tube (those 4 screws on top). The CAA is great, but I
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 24, 2007
              Thanks, Frank. I have already been down this road with my FSQ-
              tightened the CAA as well as the focuser tube (those 4 screws on top).
              The CAA is great, but I still haven't found the sweet spot for the
              focuser tube, even though it's better. If I adjust the focuser so
              that it doesn't have sag, turning the focuser shaft takes a fair
              amount of torque, which raises concerns over the Robofocus slipping.
              And if I don't tighten it enough, I get a bit of sag (and it doesn't
              take much with the larger chips). I'll take another crack at this,
              perhaps tonight since the skies are supposed to be clear.

              Steve

              --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Frank S Barnes III"
              <SBarnes@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi Steve,
              >
              > I have a set of custom made rings from Andy Homeyer to hold my
              > FSQ. They attach to a set of Losmandy Dovetail plate adapter (DA). They
              > are pretty low profile rings and the clearance wasn't enough to mount
              > the FSQ with the focuser on the bottom. So rather than add spacer
              > blocks to the DAs, I turned the scope 90 degrees so the focuser was on
              > the side and had plenty of room for all my adjustments and balance. I
              > have another FSQ-106N with the same camera/filter wheel combo that is
              > mounted with Parallax rings and has the focuser and Robo on the bottom.
              > The sag is bad on this one as well, and I plan to do the same mod to it
              > after the first of the year, so it doesn't appear that the orientation
              > makes a big difference. The key is a good tight focuser :-)))
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > >On 24 Dec 2007 11:07:37 -0000, UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
              wrote:
              >
              > >5b. Re: FSQ & MonsterMOAG OAG
              > > Posted by: "sc02492" sc02492@... sc02492
              > > Date: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:06 pm ((PST))
              > >
              > >Frank, nice write up. In some of the photos on your website, I notice
              > >that you positioned your FSQ on the rings so that the Robofocus is on
              > >top. Does that position minimize focuser sag as well?
              > >
              > >Steve
              > >
              > >Steve Cannistra
              > >http://www.starrywonders.com
              > >
              > >--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Frank S Barnes III"
              > ><SBarnes@> wrote:
              > >>
              > >> I use a FSQ-106N and a SBIG STL-11K/FW-8 combo. Before I added
              > >> the FW-8, my images had nice round stars out to the corners of the
              > >> image. When I added the FW-8, I started getting elongation in my
              stars
              > >> on one side of the chip. This said to me that I probably now had
              a tilt
              > >> in the camera. However, when I rotated the camera (I also have a
              > >> Astrodon Takometer), the elongation got worse in certain PAs and
              better
              > >> in others. After much testing, I came to the conclusion that the
              > >> additional weight of the FW-8, plus the fact that the weight is
              offset
              > >> to the main optical path, was causing flex/sag in my optical train. I
              > >> started investigating where the flex/sag/elongation could be
              happening
              > >> and determined that there are 3 basic places this is most likely to
              > >> happen, 1. the focuser, 2. the CAA, 3. the guidescope. I
              addressed each
              > >> one and found "play, slop, looseness", in the focuser and CAA, and
              > >> eliminated the guidescope by installing an Astrodon MonsterMOAG.
              I now
              > >> have the imaging chip back square to the optical plane in all PAs and
              > >> the flex/sag is gone. I now guide with the MonsterMOAG (MMOAG) and
              > >> don't have to worry about flexure or focusing of the guidescope. The
              > >> addition of the MMOAG makes a very tight. compact, rigid imaging
              train
              > >> from the CAA to the main chip.
              > >>
              > >> I put together a Word document that describes the adjustments I
              > >> made, and how I installed the MonsterMOAG on my FSQ. It is available
              > >> for download on my website here:
              > >>
              > >> http://www.skyimager.com/FSQ-MMOAG/. The document is called
              > >> "Using an Astrodon MonsterMOAG with a Tak FSQ-106N".
              > >>
              > >> Also, here is a link to the first image I took after these
              > >> modifications. It is a Ha image with the individual exposures (16 of
              > >> them, 30 min each), guided with the MMOAG.
              > >>
              > >> http://www.skyimager.com/imagedata/IC405-IC410_12-18-07.html
              > >>
              > >> If you are seeing any issues in your images similar to what I
              > >> did, this might be of some help. The MMOAG is an excellent
              alternative
              > >> to a separate guidescope.
              > >>
              >
            • r1300rs
              Nice document. I m also a new Q EDX user with the CAA attached. I also use Robo and noticed that your stepsize must be different than mine. Would you mind
              Message 6 of 9 , Dec 25, 2007
                Nice document. I'm also a new "Q" EDX user with the CAA attached. I also use Robo and
                noticed that your stepsize must be different than mine. Would you mind sharing your Robo
                settings with me? Whenever I try to "train" the Robo; I get a disturbing motor clatter unless
                the stepsize is set to 4. I'd like to use 2 or 1 to increase the number of steps for FocusMax.

                Thanks,
                Rick.
              • Frank S Barnes III
                Hi Rick, I use a Micropause = 4, and a Stepsize = 1. When I calibrate my Robo, I get a Max. Travel of 10254. I have found that the value of 4 for Micropause
                Message 7 of 9 , Dec 26, 2007
                  Hi Rick,

                  I use a Micropause = 4, and a Stepsize = 1. When I calibrate my
                  Robo, I get a Max. Travel of 10254. I have found that the value of 4
                  for Micropause works well in my applications. Reducing that value would
                  cause the motor to run "faster" , while increasing the number would
                  cause it to run "slower". Running the motor too fast may be causing the
                  "clatter" you refer to.



                  >On 26 Dec 2007 10:52:22 -0000, UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com wrote:

                  >________________________________________________________________________
                  >
                  >2a. Re: FSQ & MonsterMOAG OAG
                  > Posted by: "r1300rs" cardiofuse@... r1300rs
                  > Date: Tue Dec 25, 2007 6:26 am ((PST))
                  >
                  >Nice document. I'm also a new "Q" EDX user with the CAA attached. I also use Robo and
                  >noticed that your stepsize must be different than mine. Would you mind sharing your Robo
                  >settings with me? Whenever I try to "train" the Robo; I get a disturbing motor clatter unless
                  >the stepsize is set to 4. I'd like to use 2 or 1 to increase the number of steps for FocusMax.
                  >
                  >Thanks,
                  >Rick.
                • r1300rs
                  Frank: The info is much appreciated; I hadn t considered the Micropause inspite of asking the company directly. It certainly makes sense and I will give it a
                  Message 8 of 9 , Dec 27, 2007
                    Frank:

                    The info is much appreciated; I hadn't considered the Micropause inspite of asking the
                    company directly. It certainly makes sense and I will give it a try!

                    Best Regards,

                    Rick.
                  • r1300rs
                    Frank: nice document describing the use of the MMOAG with the FSQ. Quick question; I also use the FSQ with the CAA attached (EDX version). I do use the
                    Message 9 of 9 , Jan 3, 2008
                      Frank: nice document describing the use of the MMOAG with the FSQ. Quick question; I also
                      use the FSQ with the CAA attached (EDX version). I do use the ST-10XME and was thinking of
                      trying the MMOAG with my Starfish camera for OA guiding. Does the MMOAG come with the
                      connector to attach directly to the standard TAK 11mm ring attached to the CAA? I use a
                      Feldstein #4 to the ST. It has 72mm threads; I'm wondering if it would connect to the camera
                      side of the MMOAG.

                      Thanks.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.