Username:

Password:

Altair AstroDIO DehumidifiersAtik CamerasModern AstronomyDavid HindsNe3 Filters

Author Topic: PHD (1 and 2) perfect straight line, but star trails for some objects  (Read 8124 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Hi all


I have a problem since some time with my setup and I decided now to address it as it keeps persisting even after I upgradedto HEQ5 from EQ5, and I have no idea what it can be.

I always used an EQ5 with PHD1, I have an OrionMini Guider (the 50mm) plus Starshoot camera, all nice and working in EQMod. I have recently upgraded to HEQ5, and I started also using PHD2 with it.

I always get quite perfect guiding up to 10 mins (never go over it for light pollution), using my Altair Astri RC6.



Problem is that recently I tried starting a session on M101 (between 22:00 and 00:00 when it's still relatively high for my location), but although I get my usual perfect guiding I get always star trails in the pic for this object:



For some reason it seems to go better image after image..like if it's some sort of stabilisation. With the HEQ5 it seems the trailing is less visible than with the EQ5, but still there. I never minded because it happens only for that object so I went on, in particular with the HEQ5.

Last night I started imaging NGC7331, and the trailing (same direction) was VERY visible, and for several images, although PHD2 was producing a perfectly flat nice guiding graph:



I always have a good 90/95% rate success, and considering my resolution and pixel size with my full frame DSLR, is quite good.

For some reason on some objects, for now these two, I have this problem, images trailing while guide is as good as all the other times. Now...when I imaged ngc7331 I remember surely that scope was WEST and pointing high toward zenith, while when imaging M101 cannot remember but I think at that time as well it was slight WEST? Don't remember and not sure I have a way to check..

Any suggestion what it could be? Is getting quite frustrating to have such good guiding and for some objects only seeing this discrepancy with the final image...if it's some sort of flexture, I should get it always, while it's not the case. Other objects relatively low at horizon or also high in the sky get same perfect guide and no star trails at all over prolonged imaging sessions.


P.S this is the usual graph I get in PHD2 or PHD, that usually makes stars perfectly round

AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Online chris.bailey

  • Administrator
  • Galactic Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 9519
  • If at last you do succeed, don't try again
    • Rosemount Observatory
Giancarlo.

I suspect more than one factor may be at play here.

Your guide setup has an image scale of 6.35"/pxl and is guiding an imager with a pixel scale of 0.9"/pxl i.e. effectively a multiplier of 7. Though the guide graph you posted looks very flat with a reasonable RMS it is in pixels so needs amplifying by 7 to get it in imager arc seconds! If you look at the scatter plot there are target excursions of +/- 1.5 " i.e. 3" in total and with an image scale of 0.9", that is quite a lot. When I image with the 10" RC I use an off-axis guider with a guiding image scale of 1"/pxl compared to an imager scale of 0.76"/pxl and work to get the maximum guide excursions within the 1 pixel range i.e around about 1". Trying to avoid those largish guide excursions would probably help. Its worth turning on the corrections graph as PHD may be over-correcting based on those Agr/Hys/Min Move settings.

Most commonly good guiding with star trailing is a mechanical issue between the guide scope and imager scope. At your image scale those trails are only a few arc seconds in length so any looseness between the mountings will easily show up. Less likely but it could also be some movement in the primary with the scope bing pointed nearly straight up it can tend to wobbly on the support elements. Guide pulse are quite aggressive and your guider would be unaware of any movements in the imaging scope (one reason I like using an OAG at long focal lengths...you can see what you are getting).

Lastly, if your Polar Alignment is poor, field rotation comes in to play. Imaging up towards Zenith makes this more critical. As you have just changed mounts, how sure are you that the polar scope is accurately aligned, assuming you use this for Polar Alignment? How long were the subs you posted?

Unfortunately it can be a factor of all of these and its a matter of tweaking all three. For mechanical issues you can't beat a dial guage for seeing just how much things can move around when given a bit of a push.

Chris
LX200|ZS70|FSQ85|FLT110|Altair DF250RC|EQ6 Pro(Rowan Belt Mod)|ParamountMX
ATIK383L+/EFW2/OAG|Lodestar|Baader 36mm LRGBHaSIIOIII
Starlight Express SXVRH16/ONAG/FW|Lodestar X2|Baader 2" Filters
Starlight Express SXVRH814/ONAG/FW|LodestarX2|Baader 2" Filters
Lunt LS60PTBF1200|DMK41|Quark Chromo
Samyang 135mm f1.8

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Hi Chris,

right all understood about the scales, indeed comparing them considering the higher resolution camera and longer focal length it makes perfect sense. First question: how much would improve situation going to the Altair Astro 60mm guider/finder scope with my same Orion Starshooter guider? That should make the scale smaller, and I think overall the rings/dovetail system seems more rigid, what do you think?

I'll change the scale indeed to get the phd movement in arcsec and will try to make it all more understandable.

What surprises me is that it happens only sometimes, and with same graph: other times the graph is even slightly more wobbly and yet stars are perfectly round. That's why for example the play between components is what popped up in my mind. I checked soon after how fitting was the dovetail to the scope and it seemed just 'slightly' loose, so I tighten that, and will see if that changes anything.

Polar scope alignment is indeed something I ignored thinking that if it was bad I would check it...so probably is time to check it! Another nice use of the glatter laser to check it indoors. I indeed use the polar scope and hour discs and PolarAlign app to align, so that could be indeed an issue.

The subs were 300sec for m101 and 480sec for NGC7331..I know it could be indeed any of those causes, just trying to address one after the other. Most of all because it happened between two very different objects: one pointing up to zenith, one being relatively 'close' to home position and so in theory a more 'comfortable' position..

AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Online chris.bailey

  • Administrator
  • Galactic Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 9519
  • If at last you do succeed, don't try again
    • Rosemount Observatory
Personally I don't like rings at all on a guide scope. However rigid it seems, there is still the potential for movement somewhere and a few arc seconds is hardly discernible. Having said that my current setup has a guide scope in rings but everything is torqued down until the parts are screaming and that is 250mm FL guiding 450mm FL. Matching the guider scale closer to the imager scale would help though. The old rule of thumb used to be a multiplier of no more than 5 but this seems to have got overtaken with modern sub-pixel guide algorithms. I also don't like the Vixen dovetails, the Losmandy ones are far stiffer and allow things to be clamped down more securely. Anything slightly loose will tend to move as a guide pulse shifts the mount slightly. It really does not take much. One thing I do rigorously is recheck everything is tight once it has cooled.

If you have not checked your polar scope then that is a good thing to do. You can't do it with the Glatter. All you need do is wind the Alt down so you can see a fixed distant object in the polar scope and rotate it. If the object stays put then all well and good. If not there are three "tiny" grub screws and you want to adjust it to half the error and repeat. You would need to be a long way out to get the amount of field rotation you are seeing in those subs over 10 minutes but it would not help.

Chris
LX200|ZS70|FSQ85|FLT110|Altair DF250RC|EQ6 Pro(Rowan Belt Mod)|ParamountMX
ATIK383L+/EFW2/OAG|Lodestar|Baader 36mm LRGBHaSIIOIII
Starlight Express SXVRH16/ONAG/FW|Lodestar X2|Baader 2" Filters
Starlight Express SXVRH814/ONAG/FW|LodestarX2|Baader 2" Filters
Lunt LS60PTBF1200|DMK41|Quark Chromo
Samyang 135mm f1.8

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Ok, so I don't have many alternatives.

I also have a WO Zenithstar 66 400mm that could be a good guidescope if I find good fitting rings (I have now an HEQ5 with the Altair Astro 6RC so more than enough). Problem is that the 66 is anyway relatively heavy for its size and I'm not sure it would be stable enough on the short RC6 and HEQ5..maybe a bit an overkill bringing other problems?

Getting the Altair Astro 60 would take the scale down to 4.8 and that would be under the old rule of thumb of 5, and would improve by about 35% the situation compared to now.

What do you think would be best solution between those two? One more heavy but longer focal length, the other much lighter and made specifically for guiding, but shorter focal length.

OAG is not good for me because my full frame edges are not good, and putting the prism down too much would be another obstruction added to the secondary mirror that in the 6inch RC is already big, so I would rather improve the guiding scope if possible.

In the meantime later I'll also check the polarscope alignment, I aligned well the one of my old EQ5 but I had the same problem with same object and same RC6 / Orion guider....so must be something about scope/guider, I suspect some flex for not having all well tight.

Anyway any suggestion between the Altair Astro 60 and my WO 66 Pletzval as guidescopes is welcome :)
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline tomhow

  • Tom How
  • Galactic Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3112
  • Making equipment is far more fun than buying it.
    • The Curdridge Observatory
I think Chris covers all the bases there :) He's correct: As the focal length increases (or more exactly, the image scale gets higher in resolution) then an OAG simplifies things immensely.

In 7331 the trailing vector is neither aligned to RA or Dec, which points to flexure.



This kind of thing is usually down to either
  • BOTH scopes drooping differently when cantilevered. Point the scope due south so the counterweight bar is horizontal.. there is a tendency for the tube to droop a bit further round in hour angle. Try holding a gallon of beer sideways at arms length
  • OR it is the tube/mirrors of the big scope flopping , which gets worse with lowering altitude

Flexure from cantilever droop and tube flop  are both proportional to hour angle AND declination, which makes pinning it down difficult.  However, it does nicely explain why the problem changed during the imaging run as the gravity vector on the OTAs changed.

You said , I think, the main scope is an RC, so I would go for one of the mirrors flopping, possibly the secondary. One thing I used to do on the Newtonian was put in a laser collimator and shock myself by seeing how much the return spot moved around as you pointed the scope at different parts of the sky - I don't know if that sort of thing is possible with your scope, but it is a useful daytime test.
Tak Sky 90, Atik 490, Homemade Mount, OAG, Lodestar

The Curdridge Observatory

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Hi Tom,

ok considering the rain outside, I did some tests indoor:

1) polarscope alignment: laser dot on a wall, polarscope at that, rotating it (I did the same on my old mount and never had a problem): rotation of the laser is very minimal if any to be honest, is almost perfectly centred. As Chris suggested as well, to have that error in 300 or 480 secs if it was the polarscope it should be way off I think. Also I think it should show for everything? I might be wrong.

2) I did the Glatter test rotating the scope in all the possible positions, it stays exactly there without any movement. I even tried knocking gently on the secondary or primary, it doesn't move (to move the primary I have to literally grab the focuser and move it with some force

The weird thing is that M101 and NGC7331 are in very different positions, and yet only in those I got the error. Also another curious thing, pointing at other objects high near Zenith (Ring Nebula for example that I used as a test for collimation) the scope was tracking perfectly across 300 secs.

I suppose it might a mix of maybe something that was loose (I tightened everything up) joined maybe with being at limit of guiding efficiency with my actual Orion 50mm that was good for the widefield 750mm achromat scope but not with this 1350mm RC (in theory Orion says is good for guiding up to 1500mm..but I suspect they over state maybe and being at limit it shows its limits in more demanding situations that before, with a much shorter telescope, were anyway ok?).

The OAG as I said with my full frame would mean to put the prism just in the middle of the frame to keep good stars, and as we know often the guide stars are not really in the centre...and that would be another obstruction in the light path of the small RC6.

What do you guys think?

I'll obviously try again as soon as sky is clear (could be tomorrow/Thursday), but I'm thinking if in the meantime the Altair Astro 60mm miniguider, that is 220mm focal length (my actual Orion finder is 162mm) might make things better with some added precision? It has tube rings, Chris says he doesn't like that in terms of stability...I would not want to do worse then now :)

To be honest I tried even now moving things, the scope and finderscope and guidecam seem really very tight together...weird...excluding mirrors problems (from my test with Glatter) and polarscope alignment, the only things remaining are indeed guiding scale too big between imaging and guiding, or some other flexture I can't see and that happens random in different positions but not always..?

AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Tonight I'll do some tests tweaking guide parameters now that I rechecked and re-balanced everything. I'll also try soon guiding with my WO 66.

My question is: because I have a good quality BARLOW 2X, could I try focusing my starshoot guider with the barlow to get to a 320mm focal length? Obviously light gathering is not ideal but it might be a good test to see IF guiding on a longer focal length helps with the guiding problems I get sometimes?
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Online chris.bailey

  • Administrator
  • Galactic Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 9519
  • If at last you do succeed, don't try again
    • Rosemount Observatory
No problem guiding with a barlow in place AS LONG AS there is no movement in how it all hooks up. Barlows normally rely on push fit compression fittings and these should be avoided anywhere in the imaging trains if at all possible.

Chris
LX200|ZS70|FSQ85|FLT110|Altair DF250RC|EQ6 Pro(Rowan Belt Mod)|ParamountMX
ATIK383L+/EFW2/OAG|Lodestar|Baader 36mm LRGBHaSIIOIII
Starlight Express SXVRH16/ONAG/FW|Lodestar X2|Baader 2" Filters
Starlight Express SXVRH814/ONAG/FW|LodestarX2|Baader 2" Filters
Lunt LS60PTBF1200|DMK41|Quark Chromo
Samyang 135mm f1.8

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Ok, understood :)

I'll have now couple of nights of tests after I tightened up everything now and sorted out all cables on new mount to avoid any pull, and will try indeed changing parameters during guiding as I think it might be enough.

Then next week I'll try as well guiding with my WO66 using very stable dovetail clamping system to make it rigidly attached to the scope. I've seen same configuration on an RC8 working perfectly.

And I'll also try the barlow. I'm sure I'll come out with some better result.

I'm also waiting for an Astro Tech 2FF field flattener to improve even more the field on my full frame. I'm never going to illuminate it all but it should improve it a bit more (other users reporting improvement with full frame: ie less sensitive to collimation).
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Nice clear skies...and tests going on on M101, where I always had problems since I bought the 6 RC (probably because before I was using a 750mm focal length and so much less sensitive).

Same problem was on EQ5 and now on HEQ5, both with Orion Miniguider.

First test changing a bit parameters



and this is usual result (crop 1:1)



And then changing some parameters



and result is almost the same (if not worse)



Everything is well tight...I'll try now another target, M13, to see if the graph is the same and how is final result. Calibration takes always 20 to 25 steps, not a problem, excursion doesn't seem a lot on graph...but never had this problem, so not sure how to evaluate it precisely.

Will post more tests once done.
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Uhmmm as suspected....this graph looks much WORSE (also the target window)



and still the final image (crop 1:1) is perfect



It doesn't make much sense logically...if a movement of 1.5" up/down is bad in one position, cannot be good in the other...unless the problem is NOT that movement, and so the guiding, but something else.

This second test is M13, previous one was m101...in theory the latter is in a much comfortable position (lower on horizon) than m13 (higher), both on West...and yet such different results not connected at all with guiding graph...  :scared:
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline Nomis Elfactem

  • Administrator
  • Galactic Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 12932
    • The View From A Room
How long are each of the subs Rufus ?  Periodic error is a possible suspect (although it should be guided out with the correct settings !)

S.
Simon

Scopes: Astro-Tech AT-111EDT Triplet, TS65ED Quad, Orion ST80, Modded PST-90 Solar Scope, PST Cak (on loan)
Cameras: SXVF H694, Atik 16ic, Canon EOS 600d, DMK41, DMK21, QHY 5L-II (mono & colour)
Accessories: SX USB Filter Wheel, SX OAG, Baader LRGB Ha SI OII Filters, SharpSky Focuser
Mount: EQ6 (EQMOD), SW Star Adventurer, plus a lot (and I mean a lot) of other bits and pieces

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
These are all 300s.

If it was periodic error then yes it should be corrected, I always guided successfully with my old 750mm refractor, I tweaked a lot my settings to guide well with that one, I'm trying doing the same here...but longer focal length surely is more demanding :)

If it was PEC also I should see it in all positions, while indeed it seems to get worse when objects are lower in horizon...

I tried pointing again to m101 and running some more tests now, trying to smooth out guide playing around with the Aggr and Hyst, and also calming down a bit DEC corrections..seems smoother, if clouds allow I might get a long enough exposure to see results..
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

Offline rofus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Astrophotography between a song and an album
    • The Ski.es Astrophotography Gallery
Going on with tests, I tweaked a bit guiding to be a bit less aggressive:



I always used a heavy 150 achromat on an EQ5, so the heaviness and the short focal length forced/allowed me to have an aggressive guiding to keep all nice, and it worked.

Now with this long focal length of the RC6, and the much higher resolution of the new full frame camera, considering also the scale of almost 7 between imager and guider, I figure out I need to be more smooth..and observing corrections it looked indeed a bit mad, while now reducing general aggressiveness as in screenshot above, it looks much better for example around M57 (300 seconds subs always, crop 1:1):



It shows that indeed the graph doesn't really match what will be final image...

A similar graph back again on the problematic M101 with same settings:



shows an ending result that ends up anyway with stars trailing:




At this point I'm lost. It doesn't make much sense unless indeed is the mirror/whatever inside the RC...or could still be a problem solved with a longer focal length guiding to reduce the scale between imager and guiding?

If it's a problem, another one, about the mirror, to be honest I start thinking back about refractors..don't know what else to try to understand where the problem lies here :)

Only other test I can do is either with a Barlow or waiting for the clamps to use my WO 66 400mm focal as guider and see if that improves situation..keeping the error within 1/2" on that scale , if possible, should make final result much better in theory.
AA 8" RC + AT Flattener, SW Esprit 100 + SW Flattener, Daystar Quark Chromosphere
Canon 6D modded, Nikon D750 unmodded, ASI174MM-COOL, SX Lodestar X2, ASI120MM
Canon & Nikon various prime lens
SW HEQ5 Rowan Belt Mod, AA 60mm Guidescope, Astrotrac, SW Star Adventurer
Mac 15" Retina Parallels: EQMOD, PHD2, SGP, PlateSolve2, BYN, CDC, Pixinsight, Photoshop
William Optics binos, Baader Hyperion eyepieces, Meade & Celestron binoculars
http://theski.es

 

ukbuysellRemote Imaging from AustraliaSharpSkyblank APTUKAI on Facebook
Powered by SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines LLC
DarkBreak by DzinerStudio. Theme modified by The UKAI Team

Page created in 0.158 seconds with 38 queries.
TinyPortal © 2005-2012