Thanks Raymo,
I am starting to think the cheap telescope is really a detriment instead of a tool to learn. I noted the doubled stars as well and cannot find a reason for them. I don't think it is focus related. That artefact didn't show up in the first set of images, but it was a different camera.
The double star affect hasn't shown up in images I took last night of M42 but again a different camera (could be a trend developing).
Getting all of this worked out is my objective, hence the posting of mistakes. I certainly can look at it and say it's not right, but I don't know what or why... yet!
Focus is still very manual, live view, zoomed in as far as the camera can go and focusing as tight of a spot as possible. Has been a bit tricky with the only visible stars fading in and out a fair bit. Working on a Bahtinov mask to improve accuracy. I've not invested anything yet into laptop monitoring and such, so knowing some yoga positions has been a definite advantage (Backyard EOS and Backyard NIKON are both on the wishlist).
Not to hijack my own thread, but the one obstacle I'm encountering with polar aligning with DARV (Peter Kennett's version), is the precise alignment of the reticle for each adjustment. What isn't specified is what the viewer's orientation to the scope is. I do have a rudimentary understanding what is being done and can sort of rationalise what should happen, but I find that setting the reticle to be something I just cannot get past.
Fortunately tonight should be clear again so I will be out fussing with it. Based on my images of M42 (that I haven't processed yet) I'm very close.
I do have my mount position standardised and quite accurate as far as pointing South and latitude setting. The 2 star alignment error is never reported more than 1 arc minute out in either plane. I usually go through a couple of adjustment rounds to get it down to less than 10 arc seconds. Is this still not close enough?
Back to slicing and dicing my mask(s)...
