I was out the other night testing my gear in prep for moving it out west, and
managed to snag just over an hour's worth of NGC 884 / NGC 869 - the Double
Cluster in Perseus.  Not the deepest of shots (63 minutes, all told), but it
turned out OK.  This was a widefield using the FSQ.

Here's the main page for it:
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/doublecluster.html

Direct link to a 50% sized version:
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t.jpg

I also tried out Noel Carboni's new "StarSpikesPro" software, a new plugin for
Photoshop.  Something a little different for us RCOS-jealous refractor types
<g>.  Here is a direct link to that version:
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t-spiked.jpg

   Regards...Neil
 
www.flemingastrophotography.com 
Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi everyone

I'll probably buy a EM-200 Temma mount in the next few months and I'm curious
about the differences between the Temma PC and the Temma II goto systems.

Someone can shed some light on this ?

thank you

Martin

http://www.messagerceleste.com

Neil,

wonderful portrait of this couple in Perseus.
To be honest: I prefer the 'refractor version'.

Hartmut


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, Neil Fleming <neilfleming@...> wrote:
>
> I was out the other night testing my gear in prep for moving it out west, and
managed to snag just over an hour's worth of NGC 884 / NGC 869 - the Double
Cluster in Perseus.  Not the deepest of shots (63 minutes, all told), but it
turned out OK.  This was a widefield using the FSQ.
>
> Here's the main page for it:
> http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/doublecluster.html
>
> Direct link to a 50% sized version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t.jpg
>
> I also tried out Noel Carboni's new "StarSpikesPro" software, a new plugin for
Photoshop.  Something a little different for us RCOS-jealous refractor types
<g>.  Here is a direct link to that version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t-spiked.jpg
>
>    Regards...Neil
>  
> www.flemingastrophotography.com 
> Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
> Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hello Group,

I bought an "old" FSQ106N and just start to image with it.
As I see the pics from other people, it seems this refractor can also take
wide field pics.
When I connect my small Atik 314 on its back, it delivers me "only" crop
fields (for ex. I cannot take M45 in one view)
Why? Do I need a special adaptor to also take wide field pictures?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Fred


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for the comment, Harmut.

   Cheers...Neil
 
www.flemingastrophotography.com 
Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!




________________________________
From: Hartmut <hvb356@...>
To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 23, 2009 5:21:44 AM
Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: Double Cluster time!

Neil,

wonderful portrait of this couple in Perseus.
To be honest: I prefer the 'refractor version'.

Hartmut


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, Neil Fleming <neilfleming@...> wrote:
>
> I was out the other night testing my gear in prep for moving it out west, and
managed to snag just over an hour's worth of NGC 884 / NGC 869 - the Double
Cluster in Perseus.  Not the deepest of shots (63 minutes, all told), but it
turned out OK.  This was a widefield using the FSQ.
>
> Here's the main page for it:
> http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/doublecluster.html
>
> Direct link to a 50% sized version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t.jpg
>
> I also tried out Noel Carboni's new "StarSpikesPro" software, a new plugin for
Photoshop.  Something a little different for us RCOS-jealous refractor types
<g>.  Here is a direct link to that version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t-spiked.jpg
>
>    Regards...Neil
>  
> www.flemingastrophotography.com 
> Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
> Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The field of view you see is dependent on *both* the scope and the size of the
chip.  It sounds like that chip is smaller than what you had hoped for.

You might want to get this free program that lets you see the size of the FOV
against various objects for various scope/camera combinations.  (I also have a
few hundred extra images for this tool available in the Astro Tools section of
my web site.)
http://www.newastro.com/book_new/camera_app.php

   ...Neil
 
www.flemingastrophotography.com 
Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!




________________________________
From: "Fred - astro26071962@..." <astro26071962@...>
To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 23, 2009 9:50:35 AM
Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Question FSQ106N

Hello Group,

I bought an "old" FSQ106N and just start to image with it.
As I see the pics from other people, it seems this refractor can also take
wide field pics.
When I connect my small Atik 314 on its back, it delivers me "only" crop
fields (for ex. I cannot take M45 in one view)
Why? Do I need a special adaptor to also take wide field pictures?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Fred

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Short answer:

Probably because the other people's pictures you are looking at were taken with
a camera with a larger chip. As I understand it the Atik 314 has a chip that is
8mm on the diagonal. An STL chip is 42 mm and a a 16803 chip is 52 mm on the
diagonal.

The FSQ has a short FL and will give you a larger field of view than other
scopes _with that same chip_ but won't give you as large a field of view with a
given scope as another camera with a larger chip.

(The size , in arc sec, covered by the chip is:

206.3 * size of chip in microns) / focal length.

That Atik has, as I understand it, 1392x1040 pixels so the diagonal is ~ 1737.6
pixels at 4.65 microns/px = ~ 8.0 mm. An STL is 4002x2672 pixels at 9
microns/pixel for example)



Drew Sullivan


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Fred - astro26071962@..."
<astro26071962@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Group,
>
> I bought an "old" FSQ106N and just start to image with it.
> As I see the pics from other people, it seems this refractor can also take
> wide field pics.
> When I connect my small Atik 314 on its back, it delivers me "only" crop
> fields (for ex. I cannot take M45 in one view)
> Why? Do I need a special adaptor to also take wide field pictures?
> Thanks in advance for your replies.
> Fred
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I believe you chip size is

1392 x 1400

This will be the limiting factor on you FOV with the  FSQ

You can change out the scope to a shorter FL to get a larger FOV
or change out the chip to a larger array





MarkK











From: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fred -
astro26071962@...
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 9:51 AM
To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Question FSQ106N





Hello Group,

I bought an "old" FSQ106N and just start to image with it.
As I see the pics from other people, it seems this refractor can also take
wide field pics.
When I connect my small Atik 314 on its back, it delivers me "only" crop
fields (for ex. I cannot take M45 in one view)
Why? Do I need a special adaptor to also take wide field pictures?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Fred

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The Temma II is the latest verison of the Temma mounts. The PC is the older
verison from 2001.

Art Ciampi
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: martin.magnan
   To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:28 PM
   Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Temma PC vs Temma II



   Hi everyone

   I'll probably buy a EM-200 Temma mount in the next few months and I'm curious
about the differences between the Temma PC and the Temma II goto systems.

   Someone can shed some light on this ?

   thank you

   Martin

   http://www.messagerceleste.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lately I have noticed some bloated stars around the edge of my images
(especially on ONE side).  Checking my data in CCD Inspector revealed there is
indeed a problem... but where?

I have loaded an image into my "Neutronman's Stuff" photo folder
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UncensoredTakGroup/photos/album/1071586675/pic/lis\
t?mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&dir=asc

At first I thought there might be an issue with the camera rotator on the FSQ
(just added this a few of months ago).  But by looking at the images, it appears
there has always been an issue, and using the camera rotator and reducer just
exaggerate it.

So, I'm trying to figure out how to identify the problem and fix it.  Is it
flex?  Is it collimation?  Something not "square"?

I appreciate any thoughts and suggestions.

Best,

JOhn

Please contact us and speak to Fred and he can help.

Which model do you have the ED?

Art Ciampi
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: neutronman61
   To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:09 PM
   Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] FSQ Flex problem?



   Lately I have noticed some bloated stars around the edge of my images
(especially on ONE side). Checking my data in CCD Inspector revealed there is
indeed a problem... but where?

   I have loaded an image into my "Neutronman's Stuff" photo folder
  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UncensoredTakGroup/photos/album/1071586675/pic/lis\
t?mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&dir=asc

   At first I thought there might be an issue with the camera rotator on the FSQ
(just added this a few of months ago). But by looking at the images, it appears
there has always been an issue, and using the camera rotator and reducer just
exaggerate it.

   So, I'm trying to figure out how to identify the problem and fix it. Is it
flex? Is it collimation? Something not "square"?

   I appreciate any thoughts and suggestions.

   Best,

   JOhn





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Art, thanks for your response.  Yes, I have the FSQ 106ED.  I'll give Fred a
call.

JOhn

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Art Ciampi \(Texas Nautical
Repair\)" <artc@...> wrote:
>
> Please contact us and speak to Fred and he can help.
>
> Which model do you have the ED?
>
> Art Ciampi
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: neutronman61
>   To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:09 PM
>   Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] FSQ Flex problem?
>
>
>
>   Lately I have noticed some bloated stars around the edge of my images
(especially on ONE side). Checking my data in CCD Inspector revealed there is
indeed a problem... but where?
>
>   I have loaded an image into my "Neutronman's Stuff" photo folder
>  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UncensoredTakGroup/photos/album/1071586675/pic/lis\
t?mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&dir=asc
>
>   At first I thought there might be an issue with the camera rotator on the
FSQ (just added this a few of months ago). But by looking at the images, it
appears there has always been an issue, and using the camera rotator and reducer
just exaggerate it.
>
>   So, I'm trying to figure out how to identify the problem and fix it. Is it
flex? Is it collimation? Something not "square"?
>
>   I appreciate any thoughts and suggestions.
>
>   Best,
>
>   JOhn
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Never mind....bought what I needed today!

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@...> wrote:
>
> HI,
> I am about to order an FSQ 106 EDXIII along with the extender QE.
> I would like to be able to do the following
>
> 1) Visual use with a 2" diagonal
> 2) Visual use with a 2" diagonal and a Extender QE
> 3) CCD Camera usage (Sbig ST11000M)
> 4) CCD Camera usage (Sbig ST11000M) and an extender QE
>
> Going through all of the options is overwhelming!  I would appreciate if
someone could tell me what I need in each of these cases.
>
> Also, are there any examples of imaging with the extender Q?  The search does
not work in the group.
>
> Thanks!
>

I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual setup for
this.
I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm.  Woould
this be a good combo?
I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw in the
store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.

Thanks

Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics also
offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work great on
the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these days.

Best,
Danny


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@...> wrote:
>
> I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual setup
for this.
> I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm.  Woould
this be a good combo?
> I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw in
the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
>
> Thanks
>

I've been told (no personal experience since I don't own a FSQ) that the
entire line of Pentax XW eyepieces work particularly well with the FSQ
because they're specifically designed to be flat-field -- which the FSQ is.
This makes sense since the Pentax scopes were also 4-element flat-field
scopes.

The Pentax XW eyepieces have a 70° field of view, very nice adjustable
height rubber eyeguards (which the Panoptics don't have), and are sealed
against moisture.

> Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics
also offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work
great on the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these
days.
>
> Best,
> Danny
>
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@...>
wrote:
> >
> > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual
setup for this.
> > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm.
Woould this be a good combo?
> > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I
saw in the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Personally, I would go for a shorter focal length eyepiece - something in the
16-24 mm range with a wide field of view.  These work really well for open
clusters, which the FSQ excels at.   And for those really good nights, get
something around 6-8 mm for looking at planets and the moon.

Robert

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@...> wrote:
>
> I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual setup
for this.
> I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm.  Woould
this be a good combo?
> I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw in
the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
>
> Thanks
>

Ya, I used to have some naglers...great eyepieces.  But I wonder if the tak
needs that level of correction.  The Pentax eyepices sound intriguing.

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "dannysperry" <danny@...> wrote:
>
> Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics
also offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work great
on the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these days.
>
> Best,
> Danny
>
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@> wrote:
> >
> > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual setup
for this.
> > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm. 
Woould this be a good combo?
> > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw in
the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>

So many choices....


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "rlnielsen1960" <robertnielsen@...>
wrote:
>
> Personally, I would go for a shorter focal length eyepiece - something in the
16-24 mm range with a wide field of view.  These work really well for open
clusters, which the FSQ excels at.   And for those really good nights, get
something around 6-8 mm for looking at planets and the moon.
>
> Robert
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@> wrote:
> >
> > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual setup
for this.
> > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm. 
Woould this be a good combo?
> > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw in
the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>

This sounds interesting.  I have had naglers, and they worked really well on my
dob and my previous astrophysics scope.  But neither of these were so wide field
nor flat field.
I might give them a try.
Thanks

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Woody Schlom" <woody@...> wrote:
>
> I've been told (no personal experience since I don't own a FSQ) that the
> entire line of Pentax XW eyepieces work particularly well with the FSQ
> because they're specifically designed to be flat-field -- which the FSQ is.
> This makes sense since the Pentax scopes were also 4-element flat-field
> scopes.
>
> The Pentax XW eyepieces have a 70° field of view, very nice adjustable
> height rubber eyeguards (which the Panoptics don't have), and are sealed
> against moisture.
>
> > Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics
> also offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work
> great on the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these
> days.
> >
> > Best,
> > Danny
> >
> >
> > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual
> setup for this.
> > > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm.
> Woould this be a good combo?
> > > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I
> saw in the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Thank you Art for the precision

and feature wise ?

i have found that Temma PC is a little louder than Temma II and slew are slower
at equivalent voltage.

Is this right ?

Thank you

Martin

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Art Ciampi \(Texas Nautical
Repair\)" <artc@...> wrote:
>
> The Temma II is the latest verison of the Temma mounts. The PC is the older
verison from 2001.
>
> Art Ciampi
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: martin.magnan
>   To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:28 PM
>   Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Temma PC vs Temma II
>
>
>
>   Hi everyone
>
>   I'll probably buy a EM-200 Temma mount in the next few months and I'm
curious about the differences between the Temma PC and the Temma II goto
systems.
>
>   Someone can shed some light on this ?
>
>   thank you
>
>   Martin
>
>   http://www.messagerceleste.com
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

What type of correction are you referring to? I wasn't aware Naglers correct for
telescope aberrations... especially since the maker has no idea what kind of
telescope you'll be putting the eyepiece into.

-dp


--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@...> wrote:
>
> Ya, I used to have some naglers...great eyepieces.  But I wonder if the tak
needs that level of correction.  The Pentax eyepices sound intriguing.
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "dannysperry" <danny@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics
also offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work great
on the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these days.
> >
> > Best,
> > Danny
> >
> >
> > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual
setup for this.
> > > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm. 
Woould this be a good combo?
> > > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I saw
in the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
>

The only "correction" type of thing I've heard of from Televue is the Paracorr
... but that's different from a Nagler.

Robert

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "dannysperry" <danny@...> wrote:
>
> What type of correction are you referring to? I wasn't aware Naglers correct
for telescope aberrations... especially since the maker has no idea what kind of
telescope you'll be putting the eyepiece into.
>
> -dp
>
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@> wrote:
> >
> > Ya, I used to have some naglers...great eyepieces.  But I wonder if the tak
needs that level of correction.  The Pentax eyepices sound intriguing.
> >
> > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "dannysperry" <danny@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi. The diagonal from Stellarvue should be fine. TeleVue and Astro-Physics
also offer some excellent diagonals. Pick any good eyepiece and it'll work great
on the FSQ. The 17mm Type 4 Nagler is my eyepiece of choice these days.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Danny
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "tomb1818" <tomb1818@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm about to receive a FSQ-106ED and I would like to get a good visual
setup for this.
> > > > I was thinking about a 2" diagonal (Stellarview) and a panoptic 41mm. 
Woould this be a good combo?
> > > > I know nothing about the stellarview.  Is it good quality?  The one I
saw in the store looked a little rough in terms of the finish.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Martin,

I have an EM200 Temma 2. From the manual:

Max Drive Speed:

Mount                                DC12V                             DC24V
EM-10 Temma2Jr       120X (0.25/0.88A)        250X (0.22/0.9A)
EM-200 Temma2Jr     120X (0.28/0.94A)        250X (0.26/1.94A)
EM-200 Temma2       350X (0.42/0.94A)        700X (0.35/1.07A)
NJP Temma2              175X (0.44/0.71A)        350X (0.35/0.84A)
EM-500 Temma2       260X (0.52/0.73A)       520X (0.39/0.76A)

The number in brackets is the current draw for both sidereal rate and high
speed rate. Interestingly the Temma2 EM-200 has a lower high speed slew
current draw than the slower Temma2Jr.

Gary

On Tuesday 24 November 2009 09:57:41 martin.magnan wrote:
> Thank you Art for the precision
>
> and feature wise ?
>
> i have found that Temma PC is a little louder than Temma II and slew are
>  slower at equivalent voltage.
>
> Is this right ?
>
> Thank you
>
> Martin
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Art Ciampi \(Texas Nautical
Repair\)" <artc@...> wrote:
> > The Temma II is the latest verison of the Temma mounts. The PC is the
> > older verison from 2001.
> >
> > Art Ciampi
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: martin.magnan
> >   To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
> >   Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:28 PM
> >   Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Temma PC vs Temma II
> >
> >
> >
> >   Hi everyone
> >
> >   I'll probably buy a EM-200 Temma mount in the next few months and I'm
> > curious about the differences between the Temma PC and the Temma II goto
> > systems.
> >
> >   Someone can shed some light on this ?
> >
> >   thank you
> >
> >   Martin
> >
> >   http://www.messagerceleste.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Neil,

       Have not communicated with you in a while.  I am STILL, however, admiring
your images from afar.  Thank you for posting the tutorials and helpful advice
that you offer.  I am preparing to take the plunge to move up to a SBIG camera. 
As you know, I've been working with the Meade DSI cameras to get my feet wet in
CCD imaging.  The new ST-8300 monochrome for $2K really makes me salivate and
would blend nicely with my 130mm f7.7 Takahashi refractor.  Stay tuned.... 
Also, you mentioned heading 'out west'.  Are you leaving the astronomy mecca
region of greater Dedham?  That's the thrill of the imaging challenge!!

Have a great Thanksgiving holiday,
Steve LaFlamme



--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, Neil Fleming <neilfleming@...> wrote:
>
> I was out the other night testing my gear in prep for moving it out west, and
managed to snag just over an hour's worth of NGC 884 / NGC 869 - the Double
Cluster in Perseus.  Not the deepest of shots (63 minutes, all told), but it
turned out OK.  This was a widefield using the FSQ.
>
> Here's the main page for it:
> http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/doublecluster.html
>
> Direct link to a 50% sized version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t.jpg
>
> I also tried out Noel Carboni's new "StarSpikesPro" software, a new plugin for
Photoshop.  Something a little different for us RCOS-jealous refractor types
<g>.  Here is a direct link to that version:
>
http://www.flemingastrophotography.com/astropics/Double_Cluster-RGB_cropped_50pc\
t-spiked.jpg
>
>    Regards...Neil
>  
> www.flemingastrophotography.com 
> Direct from Boston - brilliant diamonds in pea soup
> Also check out the astro_narrowbandYahoo group!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Friends.

I hope someone can help me with a question about the tube length of the newer
FS-60C.

I currently own an older FS-60C that is apparently 40mm longer than the current
incarnation of the same telescope.  If that is true, is the reduced length
reflected in a shorter tube that is between the objective unit(black ring) and
the green housing (the unit that holds the focusing mechanism)?

If the tube itself is 40mm shorter than mine (mine is 145mm long from the black
ring on the objective side to the green housing) it would have more backfocus
and allow me to use a filter wheel and digital focuser with this telescope.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Gordon Mandell

Sorry for the bump.  I'm still having problems with this which Chuck's update
doesn't seem to have fixed.  Is anyone else having problems

Martin

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "atikitis" <mabradley@...> wrote:
>
> I have everything running smoothly on XP but have a problem with my new laptop
running windows 7
>
> I am setting teleapi as the "telescope or control system" then selecting
MaxPoint as the "ascom telescope chooser".  The MaxPoint telescope Setup box
comes up ok and I select "telescope by takahashi" in the "select telescope" box.
When I then click "properties" I get an error box headed "Temma Driver" with the
message "runtime error 13 Type mismatch".  On closing this I get a box headed
MaxPoint and a message - "Run-time error 440: automation error!.
>
> As far as I know I have installed everything correctly and have put the
TeleApiplugin into the programme files/common files/system folder to allow The
Sky to communicate with MaxPoint.
>
> If I just ask Sky to connect using "temma by takahashi" it works although it
doesn't appear to be Chuck's driver.  I also have exactly the same problem if I
try to connect from Maxim.
>
> Can anyone help?
>
> Martin
>

Martin,

What version of the ASCOM platform are you running?  Did you install the driver
with administrator rights?

Regards,
Chuck Faranda
http://ccdastro.com




From: atikitis
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:29 AM
To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: temma2 jr,The Sky 6, maxpoint, chuck's driver,
and windows7



Sorry for the bump. I'm still having problems with this which Chuck's update
doesn't seem to have fixed. Is anyone else having problems

Martin

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "atikitis" <mabradley@...> wrote:
>
> I have everything running smoothly on XP but have a problem with my new laptop
running windows 7
>
> I am setting teleapi as the "telescope or control system" then selecting
MaxPoint as the "ascom telescope chooser". The MaxPoint telescope Setup box
comes up ok and I select "telescope by takahashi" in the "select telescope" box.
When I then click "properties" I get an error box headed "Temma Driver" with the
message "runtime error 13 Type mismatch". On closing this I get a box headed
MaxPoint and a message - "Run-time error 440: automation error!.
>
> As far as I know I have installed everything correctly and have put the
TeleApiplugin into the programme files/common files/system folder to allow The
Sky to communicate with MaxPoint.
>
> If I just ask Sky to connect using "temma by takahashi" it works although it
doesn't appear to be Chuck's driver. I also have exactly the same problem if I
try to connect from Maxim.
>
> Can anyone help?
>
> Martin
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Chuck,

I was using 5a but having read you post I uninstalled this and updated to 5b and
then did the further 5.5 update.   It downloads as an msi which doesn't give the
run as administrator option.  I still get the mismatch 13 error.  This is
followed by failed to install driver unable to load activex component.  This is
then followed by the Ascom scope driver is missing the connected property.

Martin

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Faranda" <mail_lists2@...>
wrote:
>
> Martin,
>
> What version of the ASCOM platform are you running?  Did you install the
driver with administrator rights?
>
> Regards,
> Chuck Faranda
> http://ccdastro.com
>
>
>
>
> From: atikitis
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:29 AM
> To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: temma2 jr,The Sky 6, maxpoint, chuck's
driver, and windows7
>
>
>
> Sorry for the bump. I'm still having problems with this which Chuck's update
doesn't seem to have fixed. Is anyone else having problems
>
> Martin
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "atikitis" <mabradley@> wrote:
> >
> > I have everything running smoothly on XP but have a problem with my new
laptop running windows 7
> >
> > I am setting teleapi as the "telescope or control system" then selecting
MaxPoint as the "ascom telescope chooser". The MaxPoint telescope Setup box
comes up ok and I select "telescope by takahashi" in the "select telescope" box.
When I then click "properties" I get an error box headed "Temma Driver" with the
message "runtime error 13 Type mismatch". On closing this I get a box headed
MaxPoint and a message - "Run-time error 440: automation error!.
> >
> > As far as I know I have installed everything correctly and have put the
TeleApiplugin into the programme files/common files/system folder to allow The
Sky to communicate with MaxPoint.
> >
> > If I just ask Sky to connect using "temma by takahashi" it works although it
doesn't appear to be Chuck's driver. I also have exactly the same problem if I
try to connect from Maxim.
> >
> > Can anyone help?
> >
> > Martin
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Can you try simplifying the train of programs by just trying to enter the setup
via POTH?  Use Task Manager first to make sure that no 'zombie' drivers are
running.  Kill anything that says 'temma.exe'.

Regards,
Chuck Faranda
http://ccdastro.com




From: atikitis
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 4:41 PM
To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: temma2 jr,The Sky 6, maxpoint, chuck's driver,
and windows7



Chuck,

I was using 5a but having read you post I uninstalled this and updated to 5b and
then did the further 5.5 update. It downloads as an msi which doesn't give the
run as administrator option. I still get the mismatch 13 error. This is followed
by failed to install driver unable to load activex component. This is then
followed by the Ascom scope driver is missing the connected property.

Martin

--- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Faranda" <mail_lists2@...>
wrote:
>
> Martin,
>
> What version of the ASCOM platform are you running? Did you install the driver
with administrator rights?
>
> Regards,
> Chuck Faranda
> http://ccdastro.com
>
>
>
>
> From: atikitis
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:29 AM
> To: UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [UncensoredTakGroup] Re: temma2 jr,The Sky 6, maxpoint, chuck's
driver, and windows7
>
>
>
> Sorry for the bump. I'm still having problems with this which Chuck's update
doesn't seem to have fixed. Is anyone else having problems
>
> Martin
>
> --- In UncensoredTakGroup@yahoogroups.com, "atikitis" <mabradley@> wrote:
> >
> > I have everything running smoothly on XP but have a problem with my new
laptop running windows 7
> >
> > I am setting teleapi as the "telescope or control system" then selecting
MaxPoint as the "ascom telescope chooser". The MaxPoint telescope Setup box
comes up ok and I select "telescope by takahashi" in the "select telescope" box.
When I then click "properties" I get an error box headed "Temma Driver" with the
message "runtime error 13 Type mismatch". On closing this I get a box headed
MaxPoint and a message - "Run-time error 440: automation error!.
> >
> > As far as I know I have installed everything correctly and have put the
TeleApiplugin into the programme files/common files/system folder to allow The
Sky to communicate with MaxPoint.
> >
> > If I just ask Sky to connect using "temma by takahashi" it works although it
doesn't appear to be Chuck's driver. I also have exactly the same problem if I
try to connect from Maxim.
> >
> > Can anyone help?
> >
> > Martin
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]