411Re: GT-ONE tracking tests
- Feb 1, 2001I recieved my mount tonight. WOW is all I can say. Setup was fast but
I am currently drilling so that I can mount my scope on it and
hopefully by tommorrow night I can give a report of tracking. I am
also putting it on a permanent pier. I hope to have that done by
tommorrow night too. later.
--- In William-Optics@y..., "Ron Wodaski" <ronw@n...> wrote:
> Test setup: Takahashi FSQ-106 at 530mm, ST-8E camera.
> This is my "first order" test setup -- if a mount passes (and I
> having <10 arc seconds PE uncorrected, and no jerkiness, to be a
> score), then I will test it with a longer focal length instrument.
> work to do the longer focal length tests, and especially when I had
> few hours of half-clear weather, I wanted the fastest possible
setup so I
> didn't miss the opportunity.
> A C-11 would be a great scope on this mount; I look forward to your
> Ron Wodaski
> The New CCD Astronomy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: evang@d... [mailto:evang@d...]
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 11:57 AM
> To: William-Optics@y...
> Subject: [William-Optics] Re: GT-ONE tracking tests
> I am one of the five to receive the mount - mine is still with
> Anacortes. They are holding onto it so William can make the cold
> weather alteration when he arrives tomorrow.
> (I will be shooting CCD (MX-916). My setup will be @1760mm (a C-11
> with a 6.3 focal reducer). I will be using the Star 2000 to track.)
> Could you precisely describe your setup for your tests?
> focal length of setup etc.
> In William-Optics@y..., "Ron Wodaski" <ronw@n...> wrote:
> > I had a few hours of not quite clear skies last night, but I was
> able to
> > image with the CCD camera through the fog. I mis-aligned the GT-
> from the
> > pole in order to get a picture of how well it tracks. One is
> for a
> > nearly straight curve that shows smooth periodic error. Although
> only the
> > size of periodic error is frequently quoted in mount specs, the
> speed and
> > frequency at which it varies are critically important.
> > The bottom line: the GT-ONE has excellent tracking
> Here is
> > a link to an image that shows the mount's tracking over a 6-minute
> > I took 15 images, pointing at various places in the sky (just in
> case!), and
> > they all look just like this (253k file):
> > For a cropped image showing just a couple of star trails (25k):
> > For a rotated image showing the star trails horizontal (10k):
> > (If the links break onto two lines, you'll need to cut and paste
> into your
> > browser's address line to see these.)
> > The GT-ONE trails are about twice as good as other mounts in this
> > range. These results are actually better than many mounts costing
> lot more
> > money. <g>
> > I'll need to use a longer focal length to do definitive tests, but
> > important than the magnitude of the PE is the extreme smoothness
> > curve -- an autoguider could guide the GT-ONE at very long focal
> > with a tight, smooth curve like this. Compare the GT-ONE star
> > those of an over-$3000 mount that must remain nameless (taken with
> > scope and camera):
> > http://www.buytelescopes.com/manufacturers/wyo/images/compare.jpg
> > Note that PE is significantly larger, and much more erratic. The
> > changes to the motor mounts are extremely successful, and show off
> the full
> > capabilities of the high-quality gears in the mount. This is not
> empty hype;
> > I'm getting one of these mounts for my personal use and expect to
> > with it extensively. Those of you who know my work know that I am
> about as
> > picky as you can get when it comes to mounts.
> > Ron Wodaski
> > The New CCD Astronomy
> > http://www.newastro.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>