Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
Is anyone using PEC on the EQ8? If so, what was your peak to peak error before and after?
Measured mine recently using PEMPro and my before was 5.4" peak to peak. Haven't applied the PEC yet so I don't know what the after will be.
Given the same data, PECPrep gave me roughly 7" peak to peak. In the scheme of things both are good, but that's a relatively large difference.
My PA was out a fair bit on DEC, so I wonder if that's got anything to do with differences. Maybe the former deals better with that.
I tried to use Astrotortilla to improve my PA earlier that night. According to Astrotortilla I went from 14' low in DEC to 8" low, which is obviously a massive improvement, but resulting alignment was actually significantly worse. I won't be using that again. I probably could have left it how it was originally, but how it is now definitely needs improvement.
Anyway, just curious to see who's using PEC on the EQ8 and what I can expect to get after applying PEC.
|
Lee, there is a discussion (
link here) on the EQ8 Yahoo users group on Periodic Error. The post shows that they were seeing about 8" periodic error as measured using PECPrep which is consistent with your results. I haven't read further yet to see what improvements might be gained by implementing PEC.
I am interested in following this discussion as I am about to start tweaking the polar alignment of my EQ8 and have been contemplating the implementation of PEC as well. I have just moved from a 900mm refractor to an RC10 with a 2 metre focal length and I can see now that the tracking is not quite as good as I would like it to be.