View Single Post
  #5  
Old 12-04-2019, 07:49 AM
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV (Chris)
Registered User

ChrisV is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,737
+1 with what the others have said. But I have tried an OAG on my newt and it didn't really improve things compared to using my guidescope - so I stuck with the guidescope as I have no plans to try really long focal length scopes.

Your calculations are correct. I'm using same newt specs as you, but a 200mm guidescope with an asi290 which has 2.9um pixels. So I'm 3x imaging scale on the guidescope. But you're using an EQ6R which I would say is better than my CGEM - which I'm sure would balance out my smaller guidescope imaging scale. So just make sure your guidescope is clamped really well. My guidescope is held by two heavy duty ADM tube rings which are firmly held to the newt tube rings.

The main thing for me is the seeing. On bad nights I'm getting 1.3arcsec rms error in PHD2 - I can see a slight egg shape to the stars on my images. And last night it was 0.8arcsec - all looked good in my images.

So I suppose what does your guiding graph look like and how are your stars coming out in the images? Are you happy with that?
Reply With Quote