Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

First Image is a screen shot of my tracking after being dialed in better than I have gotten before. Max deviation is 0.25 of a pixel.

I updated my BackyardNikon and gave that a whirl, I like it but there are some features I wish it had that I do not think it does, like auto focus and platesolving.

Any Critique welcome and appreciated.
Thanks for looking,
Matthew

PHD2

(Download)

JPG

(Download)

PNG

(Download)

CraigFair Loc: Santa Maria, CA.

Fantastic job of tracking Matthew. And the shot is crystal clear.
Craig

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Wow! Fantastic Matthew!

So, do you have your pier finished?
Or are you still waiting on the ground to thaw, and shooting from the ice?

Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

I have a temporary pier next to the garage. The one I want to build is on a butte directly behind the house. Roughly 30m above ground, but to build my observatory there my equipment will have to be fault free. I have all the equipment like fiber network links, solar panels, ups and a couple deep cycle batteries, network power switch, couple of spare garage door openers to use for a roll off roof. I'm thinking I'm going to have to hire someone to build this as it seems I have no spare time other than in the middle of winter and the butte is not the most accessible in the winter.

Might just build it next to the garage, thought about attaching it to the garage but that would add square footage to the home and increase my taxes.

We'll have to see presently I'm just figuring out the kinks of my new to me mount. I am happy so far, considering I couldn't get under 2 pixels with my AVX.
Matthew

Albuqshutterbug Loc: Albuquerque NM

Wow I wish I had your skies.
That is gorgeous.
Very nicely done.

Europa Loc: West Hills, CA

I'm not sure which is more impressive, the photo or your tracking...great job!

Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

The skies definitely are dark here. Thanks for all the compliments guys.
Matthew

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I wish I had the space too! I'm all crunched into my backyard with a good view of basically straight UP. I can just see Polaris over the trees to the north. No western view. My view to the east is what I can see over my 2 story house. And view to the south is anything higher than about 45 degrees. I have a better view from my front yard, but two street lights are a problem.

But I agree, the tracking is superb!

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

What is your new-to-you mount? It tracks exceptionally smoothly.

Yes, my bottom-dweller AVX has a pretty hashy graph line in PHD2. But it is very much better than a year ago.
And I was not aware of the update, I was still at 2.5xx. Now at 2.6.2. And I revised my screen to include the Guide Star Profile. I like stuff that moves and monitors current functions.

I realize now how much my long duration exposures is hurting my clarity (focus). Because the minute adjusts going on make my stars blurry and blobby.
But given all the things that can affect or degrade Astrophotography, it is amazing to get anything. I'm gathering pictures of things I cannot see otherwise, which was the idea anyway.
My black tube points into a sky devoid of anything to the eye but the brightest stars, and brings in images unseen. Quite the Mumbo-Jumbo.

You know Matthew, there is a thousand ways to skin a cat. One of my fantasies was a Cupola on the roof-line peak that either rolled sideways, or opened, and let's the mount and telescope be exposed. An attic based observatory, if you will. No additions to the roof-line, just a highlight on the roof that has a hidden function.
I once lived in an older house that had a very simple peaked roof, and a very tall attic. Put a flip-top on it, and a platform on the ceiling, and Woo-Hoo! Elevation and sky access.
(As long as there aren't elephants stomping around, slamming doors, and running into the walls.)

I've been thinking about beginning practicing with the Telescope for the Perseids. Just to get my hand in for later this month.

Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

I recently purchased an AstroPhysics Mach1GTO, I got off Astromart for a pretty good deal. From my initial testing its tracking is buttery smooth and little to no PE. I have been using my AVX to control just a camera and lens which seems to work very well.

The only problems I can foresee with the cupola idea is that the higher a mount/telescope from its support the more resonance vibrations that will be transmitted into the mount. This could be negated using a reinforced concrete pier running through the structure from the base to the mount, but if this was fastened or attached to the home in anyway, any walking or vibration would be probably noticeable. Something like an unbalanced washer load or walking through the home, would easily transmit those vibrations through the mount.

Another issue would be the heat differential between a roof and the ambient air above the home, which is why most of the DIY papers I have read advice installers to avoid building close to the home and be mindful of not shooting over the top of your house. I imagine it has something to do with a shimmering effect the warmer air rising off of home would create.

Not positive but just other people's opinion.
Matthew

Europa Loc: West Hills, CA

I was opting for the Hallelujah Mountains, floating above Pandora to set my permanent mount, I heard very clear skies there.

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

I can absolutely concur, Matthew.
I have seen and worked along side of seismologists, and ground vibrations are the last static one would have to be limited by. All ground induced vibrations are seen.
The ambient air fluctuations is yet another biscuit to crunch.
Just trying to get around your confines.
A Cupola on your garage could dodge the heat factor, probably the vibration factors, and the friggin County Tax Ass-cessors.
But anything that rises is subject to intensified vibration influences.
So the bluff might be a best choice, or it might be a so-so choice... Based on those dampening factors. (Elevation intensified vibrations)

But you have some incredibly outstanding photography to date. So for a "temp" mount, can it get better than what you have exhibited?
Only you can say.

When the 1994 Northridge Earthquake struck here in L.A., the damage to the vast power facility I worked at was extensive. I came to realize that ground movement is very dependent on where exactly something is, and it is rather unknown how bad it will be until it happens.
Like-wise, until we try different spots, we can't guess at how the ground will effect our results at that spot.

What I'm saying is: Will you find a better spot? Or did you luck onto a pretty damned good one already?

Proto-typing, and trial and error can be a real booger.
I believe if I had your results, I might be subject to pause and see if it isn't worthy of a lot of trial for a year or so.

But knowing you, and knowing me, I'd bet you would continue to explore....

Damned incredible results so far my friend.
Damned Incredible.

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Now, now, no need to go to China to take sky pictures...

No need to leave California.

(Notice I can dream W-A-Y beyond my means... )

Europa Loc: West Hills, CA

What are you using for your autoguiding? I'm generally lucky to get a star with a SNR of 12, you have something thru the roof!

Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

Just a simple 50mm finder scope with a locking focus ring. I was using a SSAG camera, which is a waste of money in my opinion. Orion selling these cameras, that are nothing but a firmware hamstrung QHY5M for more than QHY sells the same camera, but with more features, turned me off from anything Orion ever again. When I bought it I had no idea what I needed though so, caveat emptor.

I think the reason I am able to get tight stars is more based on my location, than any equipment. I normally try getting SNR in the 2-4 range, since my seeing is usually pretty decent. I little to no light pollution, little to no wind impacts my setup. I can easily see the milky way with bare eyes on most nights.

Matthew