Just wondering how people have gone about tilt adjustment with the 2600MC camera?
The documentation from ZWO isn't exact that helpful; in essence the documentation says: "adjust the screws on the tilt plate until the image gets better".
ive started playing around with hocus focus in NINA but that seems to be a very time consuming approach and I am now thinking it should be possible to adjust tilt using the onscreen aberration inspector (short exposures 1-2 seconds and high gain).
Any advice would be much appreciated
Cheers,
Rob
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
|
Dear Rob, thank you for your mail, unfortunately I do not work with NINA, I have the tilt plate in "Zero" position. The Tilter is only senseful, if the sensor is not in the correct position. In my opinion, you do not should balance the errors of the scope / focuser with the tilter. Wolfi
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
|
ASTAP has an image aberration inspector which will show tilt in your images. Be mindful that it shows tilt within the entire system and not just the camera. I have the 2600 both MM and MC and neither have tilt. I built a rig as shown in this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw2oTwb4GjY. |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Robert,
The Aberration Inspector function in NINA, (actually in the Hocus Focus plug-in) is a real generational change in how sensor tilt is evaluated and changed.
The old school tools like ASTAP or CCD inspector are single point and difficult to use/interpret. Tilt adjustment becomes increasingly important as sensor size increases. The APS-C and Full Frame sensors are definitely large enough to reward correct sensor tilt in image quality across the frame.
The Aberration Inspector uses the multiple focus points in a normal focusing run to create a very detailed evaluation of the imaging sensor tilt and back focus. If given all the information about your focuser unit (primarily how many microns each step moves) it will give the amount of distance from being flat relative to the imaging circle for each corner of the sensor in or out in focuser encoder steps and in absolute distance (microns). Along with that, the Inspector also determine how from from correct backfocus distance the sensor is in or out.
The first time I used it, I was using the ZWO OEM tilt plate. Since the tilt plate is a three point adjustment vs. a four point measurement in the Inscpector, it takes a bit of trial and error to get a feel for which adjustment to make. I was fortunate that my physical configuration allowed access to the tilt adjustment grub screws on the tilt plate - I've seen some that do not (most in fact).
I need to point out that I did not attempt to make the adjustment until I had watched this video from ASG that covers the process in detail:
https://youtu.be/i950CYNBYrc
I was able to determine from subsequent focus runs in the following days, that the ZWO tilt plate appears to flex slightly (measured in microns) once it gets moved from full contact with the face of the camera by the tilt adjustment. For that reason, I went to the ASG website and configured/ordered their Photon Cage (demonstrated in the video)
Welcome to ASG Astronomy, llc
The photon cage is designed to work with the information provided by the Aberration Inspector, so I was able to get the tilt with less than 5 microns in just 3-4 iterations. It isn't necessary to use it for the tilt adjustment with Aberration Inspector, but it does make it easier/faster to accomplish. It is also more robust/rigid than the zwo tilt plate (IMO - YMMV).
Clayton
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
I would recommend reading this thread, started by Chris White:
https://www.astrobin.com/forum/c/astrophotography/equipment/fixing-the-dreaded-tilt-and-backspacing-error-in-optical-systems-with-objective-analysis/?page=1
It goes over how to do this with NINA or ASTAP.
The first and foremost thing is to not try to do this with the 2600's adjustment screws but invest in something better, like the Octopi.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/ |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Robert,
The Aberration Inspector function in NINA, (actually in the Hocus Focus plug-in) is a real generational change in how sensor tilt is evaluated and changed.
The old school tools like ASTAP or CCD inspector are single point and difficult to use/interpret. Tilt adjustment becomes increasingly important as sensor size increases. The APS-C and Full Frame sensors are definitely large enough to reward correct sensor tilt in image quality across the frame.
The Aberration Inspector uses the multiple focus points in a normal focusing run to create a very detailed evaluation of the imaging sensor tilt and back focus. If given all the information about your focuser unit (primarily how many microns each step moves) it will give the amount of distance from being flat relative to the imaging circle for each corner of the sensor in or out in focuser encoder steps and in absolute distance (microns). Along with that, the Inspector also determine how from from correct backfocus distance the sensor is in or out.
The first time I used it, I was using the ZWO OEM tilt plate. Since the tilt plate is a three point adjustment vs. a four point measurement in the Inscpector, it takes a bit of trial and error to get a feel for which adjustment to make. I was fortunate that my physical configuration allowed access to the tilt adjustment grub screws on the tilt plate - I've seen some that do not (most in fact).
I need to point out that I did not attempt to make the adjustment until I had watched this video from ASG that covers the process in detail:
https://youtu.be/i950CYNBYrc
I was able to determine from subsequent focus runs in the following days, that the ZWO tilt plate appears to flex slightly (measured in microns) once it gets moved from full contact with the face of the camera by the tilt adjustment. For that reason, I went to the ASG website and configured/ordered their Photon Cage (demonstrated in the video)
Welcome to ASG Astronomy, llc
The photon cage is designed to work with the information provided by the Aberration Inspector, so I was able to get the tilt with less than 5 microns in just 3-4 iterations. It isn't necessary to use it for the tilt adjustment with Aberration Inspector, but it does make it easier/faster to accomplish. It is also more robust/rigid than the zwo tilt plate (IMO - YMMV).
Clayton
ASTAP isn't old school at all and in my experience with very fast optics, the Epsilon in my case, NINA didn't work very well as you approached getting the sensor squared. In fact it started to give opposite movement suggestions for some reason.
Tagging @Chris White as we worked on this issue together.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
The old school tools like ASTAP or CCD inspector are single point and difficult to use/interpret. Tilt adjustment becomes increasingly important as sensor size increases.
ASTAP does offer a single frame analysis, however it also has the capabilities of running analysis on a full set of bracketed focus captures, similar to NINA Hocus Focus. Look up Hyperbolic Curve Fitting in the ASTAP documentation to see how to use this feature.
ASTAP uses HFD as the proxy for tilt analysis, Hocus Focus uses HFR.
ASTAP derives tilt measurement (in steps) by using the center of the frame as the reference with corner output as the delta between the corner and the center. Hocus Focus uses an average of all four corners as the reference with corner output as the delta between corner and the average of the corners.
In my experience ASTAP is a little more accurate than Hocus Focus, however both are excellent to get you most of the way to flat. The biggest problem, IMO is that HFR and HFD (as well as FWHM) are not ideal proxies for analyzing tilt. They rely on the theory that a corrected field is infinitely large and that the primary presentation of tilt is defocus. In practical application however, we dont have an infinitely large corrected field and even at optimal spacing we still have field curvature to some extent as well as other factors such as mechanical vignetting. These all lead to non-round aberrations (eccentricity, astigmatism, or mechanical diffraction) which confuses algorithms that are measuring HFR, HFD, or FWHM.
The bottom line is that you must perform visual analysis for the final adjustments, as once you get very close to flat you can end up with a see-saw in the output. This is particularly an issue with large chips such as the IMX455. You may find that ASTAP and Hocus Focus are perfectly capably of directing you to a tilt free field when the corrected field of the telescope is significantly larger than the sensor. In this case, tilt, more or less causes defocus rather than severe aberration.... thus the analysis is more accurate.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
Here you go Jason
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/850937-player-one-poseidon-camera/page-2#entry12396482
Problems accounted for by the manufacturer. Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
Here you go Jason
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/850937-player-one-poseidon-camera/page-2#entry12396482
Problems accounted for by the manufacturer. Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people.
Thanks for the link, and I see that the manufacturer is responsive and just posted a fix today, as I would expect.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
Here you go Jason
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/850937-player-one-poseidon-camera/page-2#entry12396482
Problems accounted for by the manufacturer. Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people.
Thanks for the link, and I see that the manufacturer is responsive and just posted a fix today, as I would expect.
Yeah, they posted some code that apparently didn't fix the problem.
One of the issues I've seen with these CMOS camera manufacturers, especially new ones that pop up out of nowhere, is that the software is often lacking.
I'm going to have to pass on this, and pass on any recommendations I see until they can prove they have stable software running these cameras.
My advice to you remains.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
Here you go Jason
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/850937-player-one-poseidon-camera/page-2#entry12396482
Problems accounted for by the manufacturer. Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people.
Thanks for the link, and I see that the manufacturer is responsive and just posted a fix today, as I would expect.
Yeah, they posted some code that apparently didn't fix the problem.
One of the issues I've seen with these CMOS camera manufacturers, especially new ones that pop up out of nowhere, is that the software is often lacking.
I'm going to have to pass on this, and pass on any recommendations I see until they can prove they have stable software running these cameras.
My advice to you remains.
It is very much a chicken-and-egg problem. How do you get started in an industry dominated by a small number of mature players, even with an innovative solution? The fact that they seem to be responsive and working directly with the community to solve issues is encouraging. We need more players in this space, competition drives innovation. I suppose the difference here is that I assume, because they are using industry standard parts that companies like ZWO, QHY, and Altair have been successful with, that they can be successful too. I assume that their software problems are solvable because they are. And based on that assumption I think their hardware is very desirable because it represents a $700 cost savings over a comparable camera from a mature manufacturer + something like the ASG Photon Cage. I just bought a Photon Cage, it's very well made, and I've gotten great support from them, so I think it's a great product that I will recommend to others. But I also wish I didn't need it. And The Poseidon-C is a solution that doesn't. That's why if I were in the market for an ASI2600 I'd get the Poseidon-C instead.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
Jason Coon:
I was using the NINA aberration inspector just last night with an ASG photon cage. Having the adjustments in a 4-point configuration and accessible from the rear of the camera certainly makes the entire process a lot easier. The tilt plate on the ASI cameras is a good idea but a poor implementation. If I were looking to purchase an ASI2600 today I’d get the Poseidon-C Pro instead because it has rear accessible 4-point tilt adjustment.
https://player-one-astronomy.com/product/poseidon-c-pro-imx571-usb3-0-color-cooled-camera/
Small warning that these cameras, at least the mono ones from what I've been told, have significant driver problems causing artifacts and glow in images on sensors that we as a community know are otherwise very clean.
While I appreciate the heads-up, I have no doubt that even if true driver problems are easily overcome.
I think you missed the point in the warning. Otherwise (meaning in other products) these problems do not exist.
These are brand new cameras on the market, and I get the excitement, but let's cool down on the recommendations while the product itself has legitimate imaging problems.
I think the same can be said for the warnings based on "what I've been told". Unless you have first-hand experience you are just spreading rumors and potentially harming a new entrant into this field. I also didn't recommend it to anyone, I said it's what I would do. When I first started in this hobby I was misdirected substantially by people simply repeating what they have been told, or read from someone else who was just a retelling of what someone else had been told. The "old wives tales" as it were of bad information being repeated over and over. So I apologize if this comes across as rude, that is not my intent, but the phrase "I've been told" is a big red flag for me. If there are numerous examples of people having issues, or of the manufacturer acknowledging them I can accept that, share a link, I'd be happy to read up and educate myself. But warning people away from a new product, and particularly from a new company trying to innovate in this space, is just as harmful, if not more so, as what you suggested I was doing.
Here you go Jason
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/850937-player-one-poseidon-camera/page-2#entry12396482
Problems accounted for by the manufacturer. Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people.
Thanks for the link, and I see that the manufacturer is responsive and just posted a fix today, as I would expect.
Yeah, they posted some code that apparently didn't fix the problem.
One of the issues I've seen with these CMOS camera manufacturers, especially new ones that pop up out of nowhere, is that the software is often lacking.
I'm going to have to pass on this, and pass on any recommendations I see until they can prove they have stable software running these cameras.
My advice to you remains.
It is very much a chicken-and-egg problem. How do you get started in an industry dominated by a small number of mature players, even with an innovative solution? The fact that they seem to be responsive and working directly with the community to solve issues is encouraging. We need more players in this space, competition drives innovation. I suppose the difference here is that I assume, because they are using industry standard parts that companies like ZWO, QHY, and Altair have been successful with, that they can be successful too. I assume that their software problems are solvable because they are. And based on that assumption I think their hardware is very desirable because it represents a $700 cost savings over a comparable camera from a mature manufacturer + something like the ASG Photon Cage. I just bought a Photon Cage, it's very well made, and I've gotten great support from them, so I think it's a great product that I will recommend to others. But I also wish I didn't need it. And The Poseidon-C is a solution that doesn't. That's why if I were in the market for an ASI2600 I'd get the Poseidon-C instead.
Simple really, Jason.
Let me help you here.
You test your product, Jason. You don't leave that to your customers. This problem is a 101 level failure. The most basic of functions of the camera did not work correctly. It didn't take brain surgery to find it.
I gave design feedback to Josh on the Photon Cage last year, and gave the Epsilon community and excellent recommendation based on my actual use of the product itself. I even had the ability to use it alongside the Octopi.
I do not see any data that shows the tilt corrector in that camera works as well as the two products I used do. Have you? It failed so far to properly take light frames. But we now jump to assume the rest of it works as advertised?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Simple really, Jason.
Let me help you here.
You test your product, Jason. You don't leave that to your customers. This problem is a 101 level failure. The most basic of functions of the camera did not work correctly. It didn't take brain surgery to find it.
I gave design feedback to Josh on the Photon Cage last year, and gave the Epsilon community and excellent recommendation based on my actual use of the product itself. I even had the ability to use it alongside the Octopi.
I do not see any data that shows the tilt corrector I'm that camera works as well as the two products I used do. Have you?
I also own both an Octopi and a Photon Cage, and honestly had the Photon Cage existed a year ago I'd own two. The OctoPi works, but it's 3-position adjustment was problematic to use, and the 3D printed filter holders, while better than nothing, just feel very imprecise relative to the built quality of the overall device. There was also virtually no documentation on the OctoPi, I ended up learning most of what I know about how to use it from other owner's sharing their experience online, so I truly appreciate the help and support Josh at ASG has offered. That's why, despite the current software issues with the Poseidon-C, I take it as a very good sign that they are engaging directly with the community to work through the issues.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Epsilon Community so I don't understand the reference.
I don't see any data that shows how well either the Photon Cage or OctoPi works either, and yet I still bought them both and they both work as advertised. Why wouldn't the rear accessible 4-point adjustments on the Poseidon not work?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
|
Driver issues aside, the PlayerOne tilt adjustment does appear to be a well thought out feature. For those of us with fast optics it’s a very important feature indeed. The ZWO tilt adjustment is for practical purposes nearly useless. If you have to remove the camera to make the adjustment you are largely defeating the purpose. I ended up getting a Gerd Neumann CTA48 and have made significant progress using that and CCDInspector. I’m close to the point where my eyes will be the final fine tuning.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
I thought this thread was about the ZWO 2600. Maybe a separate thread for the PlayerOne should be started if people want to talk about that camera.
I'll stay on for a bit if the OP circles back...
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Chris Barr:
Driver issues aside, the PlayerOne tilt adjustment does appear to be a well thought out feature. For those of us with fast optics it’s a very important feature indeed. The ZWO tilt adjustment is for practical purposes nearly useless. If you have to remove the camera to make the adjustment you are largely defeating the purpose. I ended up getting a Gerd Neumann CTA48 and have made significant progress using that and CCDInspector. I’m close to the point where my eyes will be the final fine tuning.
I'm all for the on paper design of this new camera and it's tilt corrector. The Apx60 from Atik uses a similar design as well. So it's not like this is some revolutionary thing. What matters to me most though, is how well does it actually work. I could care less about hype.
Jason Coon:
Simple really, Jason.
Let me help you here.
You test your product, Jason. You don't leave that to your customers. This problem is a 101 level failure. The most basic of functions of the camera did not work correctly. It didn't take brain surgery to find it.
I gave design feedback to Josh on the Photon Cage last year, and gave the Epsilon community and excellent recommendation based on my actual use of the product itself. I even had the ability to use it alongside the Octopi.
I do not see any data that shows the tilt corrector I'm that camera works as well as the two products I used do. Have you?
I also own both an Octopi and a Photon Cage, and honestly had the Photon Cage existed a year ago I'd own two. The OctoPi works, but it's 3-position adjustment was problematic to use, and the 3D printed filter holders, while better than nothing, just feel very imprecise relative to the built quality of the overall device. There was also virtually no documentation on the OctoPi, I ended up learning most of what I know about how to use it from other owner's sharing their experience online, so I truly appreciate the help and support Josh at ASG has offered. That's why, despite the current software issues with the Poseidon-C, I take it as a very good sign that they are engaging directly with the community to work through the issues.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Epsilon Community so I don't understand the reference.
I don't see any data that shows how well either the Photon Cage or OctoPi works either, and yet I still bought them both and they both work as advertised. Why wouldn't the rear accessible 4-point adjustments on the Poseidon not work?
The Epsilon Community is users of the Takahashi Epsilon series of telescopes. The ones I interact with are mostly E160-ED users. You know, that f3.3 telescope with 3 micron spots that can correct a full frame IMX455 sensor with great stars? Getting there requires extreme work on backfocus and sensor orthogonality. Probably the most brutal optical system to get perfected, as is basically an extremely fast RC.
Honestly, I really don't care what you do for your own purchases. What I do care about is bad recommendations given by folks that don't own products they are suggesting, in the face of legitimate issues with said products.
What Josh did a great job of was showing his product in use, by him, with the software his customers would likely be using. I'm sure you saw that before you forked over money. Similarly, the extensive threads CN (especially the one by Chris White) no doubt informed your Octopi purchasing decision. If it didn't, you just got lucky. Plenty of data there, go find it. It's publically available.
Acting the fool when you get called out doesn't look good either.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Actually, despite the title, I think the real meat of this thread is about Tilt Adjustment in NINA, regardless of camera. But you are correct, it went off on a tangent about camera hardware that is distracting from the main topic. That's my fault. I'll try to bring it back.
Having used the Aberration Inspector for the past two nights in NINA, I'm finding some odd inconsistencies. For example, in the graph view the tilt measurements given were about half the values shown in the 3D plot view. These screenshots are from the same analysis run:
I'm curious if that is a bug, or does it represent a different view of the same data?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
The Epsilon Community is users of the Takahashi Epsilon series of telescopes. The ones I interact with are mostly E160-ED users. You know, that f3.3 telescope with 3 micron spots that can correct a full frame IMX455 sensor with great stars? Getting there requires extreme work on backfocus and sensor orthogonality. Probably the most brutal optical system to get perfected, as is basically an extremely fast RC.
Honestly, I really don't care what you do for your own purchases. What I do care about is bad recommendations given by folks that don't own products they are suggesting, in the face of legitimate issues with said products.
What Josh did a great job of was showing his product in use, by him, with the software his customers would likely be using. I'm sure you saw that before you forked over money. Similarly, the extensive threads CN (especially the one by Chris White) no doubt informed your Octopi purchasing decision. If it didn't, you just got lucky. Plenty of data there, go find it. It's publically available.
Acting the fool when you get called out doesn't look good either.
My goodness, remember when you said this just a few minutes ago?
"Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people."
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
Actually, despite the title, I think the real meat of this thread is about Tilt Adjustment in NINA, regardless of camera. But you are correct, it went off on a tangent about camera hardware that is distracting from the main topic. That's my fault. I'll try to bring it back.
Having used the Aberration Inspector for the past two nights in NINA, I'm finding some odd inconsistencies. For example, in the graph view the tilt measurements given were about half the values shown in the 3D plot view. These screenshots are from the same analysis run:
I'm curious if that is a bug, or does it represent a different view of the same data?
It's two different models of the same data. The sensor model usually isn't right and I completely stopped using it. To be fair, I also stopped using the tool entirely when it was discovered it was calculating the actual focus offsets incorrectly.
That wasn't my find, so I'll let Chris explain more.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jason Coon:
The Epsilon Community is users of the Takahashi Epsilon series of telescopes. The ones I interact with are mostly E160-ED users. You know, that f3.3 telescope with 3 micron spots that can correct a full frame IMX455 sensor with great stars? Getting there requires extreme work on backfocus and sensor orthogonality. Probably the most brutal optical system to get perfected, as is basically an extremely fast RC.
Honestly, I really don't care what you do for your own purchases. What I do care about is bad recommendations given by folks that don't own products they are suggesting, in the face of legitimate issues with said products.
What Josh did a great job of was showing his product in use, by him, with the software his customers would likely be using. I'm sure you saw that before you forked over money. Similarly, the extensive threads CN (especially the one by Chris White) no doubt informed your Octopi purchasing decision. If it didn't, you just got lucky. Plenty of data there, go find it. It's publically available.
Acting the fool when you get called out doesn't look good either.
My goodness, remember when you said this just a few minutes ago?
"Seriously dude... Spend less time being rude to people."
You didn't take the advice, so I didn't either. 🙂
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
5.96
1.20
0.00
6.15
11.99
2.39
11.02
20.43
0.00
