Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelopardalis
Personally, I'm unimpressed seeing a guide graph that is scaled at +/- 8 arc seconds. I scale my graph at +/- 1 arc second and it's easy to be horrified by it, but I feel that just pampers to the PHD insecurity syndrome.
What's important is getting nice round stars. Wouldn't we all like beautifully engineered mounts that look as pretty as they track (sometimes prettier!), but it's seemingly such well trodden ground that a "lowly" EQ6 can do a good job with a little time and effort. Sure, there might be lemons out there, but from what I read here in IIS alone indicates that SW are not alone...
|
Its a nice looking graph and is showing good performance but yes it has been scaled incorrectly. Mine is scaled in 1 arc second increments and is similar but a tad worse. And that is a PME that has routinely delivered round stars fairly easily.
The wider scaling compresses the PE lines on the graph. In fact that graph looks much like my AP1600 at its best in good seeing. The best I have seen it do is .6 arc secs RMS for about 5 minutes before averaging out to .8 arc secs RMS like this graph. It can do that for quite a long time in good seeing. Usually 1 arc sec with the AP and about 2.25 with the PME is what I see as a reference point. This is using PHD2 which to me seems to be the best autoguiding software (although I haven't used Maxim).
Greg.