Can I go wrong with a Paramount MX?

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

After looking at the database add-on, it's $219...which is a tiny bit rich at this point for me. I'll stick with manual for now I think.

[frolinmod]

Is your FOV really small? NOMAD is only needed for really small FOVs. I do just fine with Hipparcos-Tycho and UCAC4.

[graham.hobart (Graham stevens)]

just out of interest - how do you get these catalogues - (I have the GSC 1.1 which MAXIM DL advises which I can plate solve with my 120mm refractor and my QSI 600 series, but I will be using the QSI with an RC 8 on the PMX.
Do you reckon I should change my catalogue?
Graham.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Originally Posted by frolinmod

Is your FOV really small? NOMAD is only needed for really small FOVs. I do just fine with Hipparcos-Tycho and UCAC4.

Umm...yeah, another moment. Was using subframes when I was playing around so the FOV was tiny...hehe.

Now I know what I'm doing I'll change my setup from using the SCT to take pictures to using my APO 80mm (said in 'Arnie style') and possibly use two models, one for visual with the SCT and the other for photography with the APO. Logan suggested this to me a while back and I wanted to understand better what he meant by 'mirror flop' and 'flexure'. After reading the Tpoint report in detail, I see just how much error is introduced when you don't mount the tube using mount rings!

It's been an eye-opener for me. I don't think you can pay to understand this first hand...well actually you can because I did... but to experience it all first hand is better for me.

[Logieberra (Logan)]

Simon, do you have UCAC4 database? I can arrange a copy for you. PM me.

[frolinmod]

Sorry, I was off on a trip to where there is no Internet, so I didn't see your question earlier. Fortunately it looks like you're getting a copy of UCAC4 now. You can also download it from me if need be if you can't get a copy on DVD.

[Logieberra (Logan)]

Simon, direct download from Ernie might be easier?

[gregbradley]

You can get a free CD database from the US Naval Observatory. They sent me one.

Also - not enough stars - try longer exposure and bin it to pick up more stars. Don't do short exposures otherwise it may not pick up fainter stars.

You can also lower the threshold for this in the software.

I only got that message when there was cloud interfering.

Greg.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Got it, thank you all.

Sorry Ernie if I keep calling you 'Dan'...skydrive is leading me astray.

On the next clear night, I'll give it all a 'shot'.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Happy to report, after adding and compiling the database in TSX, I'm now plate solving without issue.

Thanks for the help.

[frolinmod]

Cool.

After I installed UCAC4 and then turned off everything except Hipparcos-Tycho and UCAC4, my image links became much faster.

[NilRecurring]

When my MX is tracking a sidereal rate I notice that if I place my hand on the RA worm block cover I can feel a slight vibration - the isn't the normal "music" that the MX produces but rather a slower more of a 'chug chug' vibration. Is this normal?

I haven't ye had a first light due to bad weather otherwise I'd just measure my PE but I was hoping someone would help me out before I take the mount outside.

[Steffen]

I have never used (or seen first hand) Bisque's hardware, but from what I've read and seen in pictures it must be awesome.

[rant]
Some of their software on the other hand I have experienced, "The Sky X" for Mac in my case. I'm hesitant to say this but it was so bad it was almost comical. It was practically unusable and, as software goes, the worst $100+ dollars I've ever spent.

The UI was full of cut-off buttons, text that wouldn't fit in the allotted space, and most spectacular of all DSO images that would rotate 360º around their centre when I shifted the FOV by 45º or so. When they started asking for more money after 12 months for bug fixes that never occurred I gave it a miss and filed it under mistakes to learn from.

Needless to say, I will never spend another cent on their wares, no matter how sexy and well made their mounts look (and probably are).

As software goes, I'm still not really satisfied with the choices I have today. My mainstay is SkySafari Pro, but it is lacking a lot of things I had gotten used to with XEphem during the nineties. Things like measuring angles between any two point in the sky, or solving for minima or maxima or plotting curves of any numeric value the programme could calculate. It seems that planetarium software mainly shoots for visual impact these days.

[/rant]

Cheers
Steffen.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Steffen,

Have you tried logging on to Software Bisque's forums and posting your specific concerns there? From what I have read on those forums, they are actively monitored by the team and they respond very quickly, doing their best to resolve issues with the software.

It can be frustrating, every now and then I still get a crash, but after troubleshooting it's often because of a device I've plugged in (latest troubleshooting was with a video grabber of all things!).

Daniel Bisque releases 'daily builds' frequently when you have a subscription to the software - it's the same concept as software maintenance agreements - which I have found made the software much more stable and in some cases adds some more functionality.

Mind, I'm no expert, I'm still learning with my hardware and software, after reading the manual many times over including the Tpoint add-on I find I'm still posing questions for those that are more experienced than I.

Speaking of which - question on modelling. Now I have my model accurate to 7 arc seconds, I want to build a second model for the C9.25 mounted in side-by-side with my APO. I've saved the current model. Is it just a matter of wiping it and starting again - except with the C9.25 and camera instead of the APO and camera, then saving that and when I want to use the APO loading that model?

So in other words if you're using two models, just a matter of loading whichever applies to the appropriate scope?

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Originally Posted by NilRecurring

When my MX is tracking a sidereal rate I notice that if I place my hand on the RA worm block cover I can feel a slight vibration - the isn't the normal "music" that the MX produces but rather a slower more of a 'chug chug' vibration. Is this normal?

I haven't ye had a first light due to bad weather otherwise I'd just measure my PE but I was hoping someone would help me out before I take the mount outside.

Nil,

Is the vibration with the scope loaded and balanced?

[NilRecurring]

Originally Posted by baileys2611

Nil,

Is the vibration with the scope loaded and balanced?

Yes. Scope is balanced in both axes. The vibration is still there when everything is removed except the counterweight shaft so I don't think it had anything to do with the scope.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

I'd take it out and see if it's making the scope 'bounce' when tracking.

I know the guys here have been talking about different types of belts that are grey or black in the worm drive assemblies, could it have something to do with setting the worm drives too tight or the belts moving at some stage?

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Steffen

[rant]
Some of their software on the other hand I have experienced, "The Sky X" for Mac in my case. I'm hesitant to say this but it was so bad it was almost comical. It was practically unusable and, as software goes, the worst $100+ dollars I've ever spent.

The UI was full of cut-off buttons, text that wouldn't fit in the allotted space, and most spectacular of all DSO images that would rotate 360º around their centre when I shifted the FOV by 45º or so. When they started asking for more money after 12 months for bug fixes that never occurred I gave it a miss and filed it under mistakes to learn from.
[/rant]

The problems you experienced are easily explained. (I have highlighted the relevant word above for clarity). TA..DA... problem identified...

[frolinmod]

Originally Posted by Steffen

I have never used (or seen first hand) Bisque's hardware...

Some of their software on the other hand I have experienced, "The Sky X" for Mac in my case. I'm hesitant to say this but it was so bad it was almost comical.

Steffen, your post is so opposite others experience that I quite frankly have to chalk it up to possible "blathering idiot user" until demonstrated otherwise. Although I'm not a MAC guy myself, MAC is the platform of choice for most of the Bisques and their sub-contractors. They use TheSkyX on MAC every day. You should upgrade to the latest version and latest daily build, then start reproducing and documenting this behavior in detail with posts on the Software Bisque support forum. Otherwise it seems you're just bad mouthing their software in public for the sheer fun of getting a rise out of people who should know better.