On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 07:56 PM, Joe wrote:
I’m using a Canon 6DM2, it’s a full frame as opposed to a crop sensor. I believe the pixels on the 6D are a bit bigger than the T4i, but there are more if them, probably pretty close.If I use Canon 6D on this calculator, with my focal length (1310 mm) it gives me 1.03"/pixel.
Not sure of the Mark II is different.
I’ll try to hit that 28,800 mark and see how it goes.The difference between the recommended steps per degree in the spreadsheet (12,800) and mine (28,800) is close to double.
So maybe with your pixel scale being about double it will even out.
And if you are using a scope at 800mm or 1000mm, then it is even more likely that an LV8729 would do the job more than adequately.
I’ve got some concerns about the inefficiency of my mount. Are you using the PEC with your photography? Do you think that should be a priority to get some decent results?I used PEC when I was not autoguiding. It was all an experiment to postpone autoguiding.
It helped, and so did the Full Compensation Tracking.
But when I switched to autoguiding, I found out that PEC makes no difference.
If the periodic error in your mount is gradual, then autoguiding may be sufficient to take care of it.
If it is too high and happens over a short period of time, then maybe in this case PEC will help.
So, my recommendation is not to bother with it, if you are going to try autoguiding anyway.
If you inspect the graph and see that there is a period, then at that point consider trying PEC.
You can do it without a sensor initially (just record it every session, or park the scope), and if it is helpful, then you can consider adding a sensor.