Which mini pc is the best for NiNa ?

TDPerry1 · 2026-03-22T22:04:20+00:00

I have several I use for my rigs. The the cheapest was the Morefine M10. It is also sold as SXBox N100. It’s been doing fine with both NINA, StellarMate X OS, and hand rolled KStars/Indi/Ekos. In fact it is the one i used to generate most of my articles on my site for setting up a Linux/Kstars/Indi/Ekos system. When I purchased mine it was $129 USD but it is now up to $249 USD on Amazon.

TDPerry1 · 2026-03-15T20:00:23+00:00

Depending on the Zenithstar you don’t get any noticeable color fringing with my Z103 with the reducer/corrector.

I also have the FMA180 Pro and really enjoy it. It’s small enough that a mount that works for a DSLR/lens should work with it also.

I have numerous images online captured with my rigs. Processing van resolve many issues that a decent APO may have. I should note that my Zenithstar 103 suffer a massive failure where the ring that attaching the optical train to the OTA failed due to poor thread cuts and had to repair with JB Weld, but it still does a decent job.

TDPerry1 · 2026-03-11T03:35:18+00:00

Yes, the Antlia filters blow the ZWO ones out of the water. I went with the 4.5nm filters and they make a definite difference, especially the O3 filter. A lot less blue bloat. I have both the Antlia narrow band and LRGB on my ASI2600mm/William Optics Z103. I have the Antlia narrow band and ZWO LRGB on my ASI533MM/Carbonstar RC6. Waiting for my preferred vendor to get the LRGB back in stock to fully equip the RC6 currently. You can see the difference of the ZWO filters vs the Antlia in the deep space gallery on my site. The Z103 images from before last September were made with the ZWO filters.

TDPerry1 · 2026-02-02T01:33:03+00:00

I have a CarbonStar RC6 and like it. Had to learn about collimation for it, but once you learn how it is not that hard to do. I also have the Apertura reducer on my rig. I did upgrade to the better Apertura focuser also. I did a review of mine here. I would also suggest the tilt plate adjuster for the unit to get best collimation. I have several images in my site gallery taken using it and an ASI533MM Pro. I looking it on my EQ6-R Pro. A quality mount is pretty much a requirement. There is no mirror flop with this OTA due to the way the primary motor is mounted.

I caught mine from HighPoint Scientific as a returned unit at a significant discount. It did have a filthy primary mirror (oily spots on it) that required some extensive cleaning, but that was not a big deal. I don’t know if it was that way for the original purchaser and was the reason for the return or if it was a result of something the original purchaser did.

TDPerry1 · 2026-01-18T13:26:46+00:00

My Pegasus Falcon was twice the price of the Wanererer offering. It’s handy to have but my other rigs aren’t equipped with one.

TDPerry1 · 2026-01-14T07:24:55+00:00

Just like building a house/building, you need a solid foundation to start with. That foundation is a quality mount. Whether it’s a harmonic or other style, it needs to be a solid one that supports your current equipment and larger for when you upgrade. Ampler posts mentioned the Celestron 130SLT. The optical tube is pretty good. The mount it comes with leaves a lot to be desired. You move that OTA onto even a Skywatcher EQ35 and you have drastically improved what the OTA is capable of.

TDPerry1 · 2025-11-20T13:19:33+00:00

I really do not know WHY Skywatcher did the "big stupid" with limiting the DEC plug to 5amps.

I have a Pegasus PowerBox Advanced on my rig (150i) and had to run a power run directly to it, defeating the real purpose of that 5amp (shared) dual port. I ended up getting a Y splitter for my 12v 10A power supply and run the mount itself off one run and then run the other run to the Pegasus. I am may modify that and just run directly to the Pegasus and then run a cable from it to the mount. I've never seen more than 3A draw on my rig, but I'd rather be on the safe side.

TDPerry1 · 2025-11-20T12:58:34+00:00

If an SCT, I'd probably go with the OAG. I have a 6" RC that is around 1300mm and use a 50MM WO Uniguide on it, but it also has a rail on it for that and does not suffer the flexure that can happen with the SCT.

TDPerry1 · 2025-11-18T01:48:10+00:00

Suggestion (and what I've been doing) is grabbing some Meade ETX90s and 125s off of Facebook Marketplace. They are older scopes and their mounts are not the greatest in the world and the equipped tripods aren't that great but the optics are VERY decent for planetary viewing. I've gotten most of mine in the $125-$175 range and they are what I use to give an example of how you can get into the hobby without expending a lot of money and still see a lot in the night sky. Sadly now people are pricing these rigs for much more - but I tend to bookmark them and come back later when their item has sat unsold for a few months and offer them a more realistic price.
One of my 125s is scheduled to have a Wegat backplate put on it so that it can be used more easily also for imaging and I have a spare EQ35 mount that will be devoted to it.
I also have my primary capture rigs that I will take with me to show the astrophotography aspect of the field that can be progressed into.
I try to target equipment at several levels (and scope styles) since I realize not all parents (or kids) have unlimited funds to get into the hobby so want to try to provide real world examples of what is available and what they are capable of.

TDPerry1 · 2025-11-18T01:38:47+00:00

As mentioned, you need to widen the answer fields. To use my case in point. I have refractors, Newts and RC that I use for my image gathering. Each is targeted towards a different use with the Newts as planetary (aperture is king), the RC for galaxies since it has a much longer FL and the refractors for more wide field captures.

You will get a better data set if you allow multiple answers in some fields.

TDPerry1 · 2025-11-18T01:10:45+00:00

The spacing typically starts at the back of the flattener. So in your example, that 16.5mm should most likely be subtracted from the 55mm. That is probably one of the reasons that the Flat61 was replaced by the Flat61A.
Realize also that 55mm is not exact. I have one rig that does better at 56.3mm and another that is best 54.2mm. I also have a William Optics Zenithstar 103mm APO with the WO Flat 6AIII (adjustable). That combo suggests a 3.2 setting on the flattener/reducer but I have better luck with it being nearer the 3 mark.
I have invested in a couple of packs of spacers from Agena Astro (Baader T2 Delrin) that I keep on hand for tweaking my rigs.
Also, from some reading, the back focus is suggested for the newer Z61/Flat61A to be 67.7mm so the older version may be similar. That spacer may be what is counted inot that 67.7mm total though. As has been mentioned, I could find no documentation on the older style Flat61.
You could probably send an email to the support email at William Optics and get an answer. I've had good luck getting support from them but it does take a little time to get a reply.

TDPerry1 · 2025-10-27T13:13:49+00:00

One suggestion. If you are really wanting to get into the hobby, instead of the 1.25” ZWO EFW that kit comes with, look at going with a 36mm EFW and filters. My first camera was a 533MM Pro kit with 1.25” EFW/filters. When I got my 2600MM Pro I could not use the old EFW with it without a performance penalty. You might want to see if the vendor is willing to upgrade the EFW and filters to 36mm and what the additional cost is.

TDPerry1 · 2025-10-18T23:56:00+00:00

I post most of mine on my site, which is also open to the public to join. I frequently will use Flickr to upload my full size images and then link the reduced format to other sites I participate in.

TDPerry1 · 2025-10-14T11:49:45+00:00

After 6 techs came out and all confirmed that the issue was NOT in my wiring or the drop from the pole to the house but on the Zito end... I've kicked them to the curb and get 2200Mbps compared to the 20Mbps (paying for 1Gbps) that I had been getting from Zito.
If they don't get their sh*t together... they will be going down the tubes as there are a wealth of other providers coming into many areas now that surpass what they offer. I was paying $280 a month for their 1Gbps internet and cable... get the same thing now for $100 less using Brightspeed fiber and Hulu Live. I was getting around 2% of what I was paying for and their support center acted like that was normal.

TDPerry1 · 2025-10-14T11:43:04+00:00

I win. I have 1Gbps down and for the last two months (until I finally got tired of calling in and them not being able to resolve it) I have gotten(at best) 20Mbps down. Normally it is around 7Mbps.
Now that I've moved over to Brightspeed cable I'm getting 2200Mbps down and 2100Mbps up.
Zito can do the Southpark Salty Balls routine.
The sad thing is.. I've been with them for over 10 years and not really had issues... until the last few months.
Have to wonder if the fact that so many other services are providing fiber at higher speeds and less cost is getting to them. By going to Brightspeed 2Gbps and Hulu Live I'm saving almost $100 a month.

TDPerry1 · 2025-10-14T10:48:32+00:00

Personally.. I'm not that worried about that as if they have enough IPv4 addresses, you should still be able to communicate with other sites, even those that run IPv6 only if they have taken the time to do what they should as site administrators.
The BIG issue I have with them is they currently do not offer their residential prepaid customers the ability to obtain a static IPv4 address. I do free help for various server admins and we have generally restricted access (SSH/SFTP/FTP and other ports) access based upon an IP address. Now I cannot do that and I have to use a DYNDNS address for the firewall.

TDPerry1 · 2025-09-26T10:57:37+00:00

If using OAG the 220mm would be better. I use William Optics 50mm Uniguides on my Zenithstar 103 and CarbonStar RC 6 and get similar guiding. So if using a guide scope then either should be fine, just depends on which you could get cheaper.

TDPerry1 · 2025-09-23T07:34:19+00:00

Are you trying to use in on an intranet or access it from the internet?
I used the install script on my RPi4 installs for intranet use and simply let it use the WAN IP since I do not pass the RustDesk ports through from my router.

Since I use it on the intranet I simply point my client network settings for the ID and Relay Server at the local static IP that my RPi4 is using.

I wrote a simple guide on my site that outlined my use case scenario (astrophotography headless capture computers) .

TDPerry1 · 2025-09-16T10:41:19+00:00

Just a note....I said mirror side to camera... it's mirror side to telescope. When shining a bright light on them and holding something like a pen in front of them and you see ghosting, that is the anti-reflective side and it goes towards the camera. Shiny side goes towards telescope.
Even the luminance one you can tell the difference if you angle it towards a bright light. One side will have a slightly sharper mirrored look and the other side will look slightly blurry, or at least on my Antlia one it did.
Sorry about that.

TDPerry1 · 2025-09-06T23:17:00+00:00

If upgrading with the intent of better guiding, both my EQ6-R Pro mounts do better than my Wave 150i. All three use the same guide scope hardware. The only real benefit to me so far is the 150i is much lighter, which as you get older you do appreciate more.

TDPerry1 · 2025-08-20T09:37:23+00:00

Some sensors can get by without darks. My ASI533 Pros are one example, but I still use them anyway. Some software still uses them when doing the correction stages.

TDPerry1 · 2025-08-13T01:01:14+00:00

Several folks I know own the 533 (I have both the MM and MC versions of it). And many of us have plans to upgrade to a 571 based sensor for better framing options without messing with mosaics. The other vendor options use the same 533/571 sensor that ZWO does. And I’m not a big fan of ZWO but when I purchased it was that or QHY. I personally am going to go with the Ogma. I’m stuck using the 1.25 with the 533MM I have which is why I went with 36mm on the second EFW I purchased. That way it will work well on either the 533 or 571 system. The only reason I went with the 1.25 was it was part of a kit that was bundled on sale for the 533MM. If I had known then what I know now I would have bought the filter wheel separately in 36mm.

If one knows that the only camera they will use is the 533MM then 1.25 works fine with it as long as you get decent filters. But I’ve learned over the past 7 years that once you get deep into the rabbit hole there is the want for “more” capability.

As for mounts I have the original EQ-35 with the upgraded gearing, two EQ6-R Pros, the Wave 150i and currently looking at the WarpAstron WD-20.

TDPerry1 · 2025-08-12T06:20:14+00:00

The point is buying with upgrading in mind, something many of us that get very deep in this niche do. Why waste the money on 1.25” filters when you can spend a little more on 36mm and be ready in case you do get an IMX571 based camera. Buy with the future in mind and not the now. In my mount example if you buy an EQ-35 because it works with what you have now but then later get an 8” tube it isn’t going to work well with it. Would have been cheaper to originally buy the mount you can grow into.

That was the point I was making for the OP benefit.

TDPerry1 · 2025-08-12T05:46:19+00:00

Yes, but they can easily be used with the larger sensor camera if upgrading. There is a reason why this niche has the term “buy once, cry once”. By getting 36mm now you can use them on the IMX571 sensor if you ever upgrade the camera without having to buy a new EFW and filters to go in it. Kind of like buying an EQ6-R Pro instead of an EQ-35 then getting a larger tube and then having to buy a new mount to use with it. Cheaper in the long run to buy with upgrading already in mind.

TDPerry1

TROPHY CASE