Fair enough. There are quite a few OAGs on the market though. I am sure one can be made to work with the right adapter.
Guide scopes do work but are often problematic and OAGs are not problematic so its a matter of tracking accuracy at the end of the day. I've used both many times and would always opt for OAG if there were a choice.
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by glend
Perhaps I should have pointed out that my issues with OAG arise because of my DSLR - Canon 450D cold finger mod (where the heatsink/fan extend out the side of the camera) which precludes rotation of the camera in the focuser and the use of a Baader coma corrector and focus range issues. With the OAG it would have to be mounted so that the guidecamera was placed below the bottom of the dslr (due to the body shape) and no rotation would be possible. The Lacerta OAG EOS model comes close but as stated the ring could not rotate in my situation due to proximity to the tube surface. Threads I have read on other forums (CN) suggest separate guidescopes are preferred in this configuration .
Given the OP (Brent) uses a DSLR, the same model actually, these are relevant issues for this thread. In constructing his scope, if clearance is adequate then the Lacerta EOS would be the choice but his ASI guide camera could only clear the body if mounted below and the rotation issue remains.
|