Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews. +1
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Wow, that extra build quality sure adds to the cost. I can almost buy 2 player one cameras setups and keep one as a spare while the first is being repaired.   |
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I have used a ZWO 6200mc for two years and a ZWO 6200mm for one. Haven't had any tilt problems or any problems at all actually, The huge files are not much of a problem because storage is getting very affordable, and PS fast integration makes short work of the processing. 2" filters placed close to the sensor show very little vignetting, and that disappears with flats. I have unmounted filters on the 6200mm filter wheel and they have marginally less vignetting but not enough to put up with the bother of installing them. I gave my daughter my ZWO 294mc. Once you go full frame. You'll never go back. Except for specialty cameras, Planetary and such. Telescopes using the 6200s, 9.25 Edge, Askar 151PHQ, Tak 106 FSQ N and Red Cat 51. all work well with full frame. I do worry about service though should one fail. I read lots of bitching about ZWO service, but they may be folks that are just difficult to please.
Dale Bush
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.
There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone. I was referring to viability in terms of cost to benefit ratio, not to whether or not a Moravian could be used on a TOA. I would imagine a Moravian IMX 455 would work wonderfully, as it should given the premium it commands.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.
There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone.
I was referring to viability in terms of cost to benefit ratio, not to whether or not a Moravian could be used on a TOA. I would imagine a Moravian IMX 455 would work wonderfully, as it should given the premium it commands. If cost is the number one concern then the other products on the market are likely to be a better fit. If reliability is the number one concern then the premium options on the market are likely to be a better fit. Everyone wins though as there are plenty of options to choose from depending on what the priorities are for the system in use.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.
There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone.
I was referring to viability in terms of cost to benefit ratio, not to whether or not a Moravian could be used on a TOA. I would imagine a Moravian IMX 455 would work wonderfully, as it should given the premium it commands.
If cost is the number one concern then the other products on the market are likely to be a better fit. If reliability is the number one concern then the premium options on the market are likely to be a better fit. Everyone wins though as there are plenty of options to choose from depending on what the priorities are for the system in use. I agree there is a choice for everyone. But to be clear, there isn't enough evidence that a the Player One camera is less reliable. They just don't have the same track record as Moravian due to being a younger company. Whether that track record is worth the extra premium is the choice the buyer makes. It is not that cost is the number one concern, but rather cost-to-benefit ratio. As you mentioned earlier, if you are stationed in a very remote region and service is a major concern, you have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars on equipment, then that track record may deserve the premium. Otherwise it doesn't seem so for most other folks.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.
There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone.
I was referring to viability in terms of cost to benefit ratio, not to whether or not a Moravian could be used on a TOA. I would imagine a Moravian IMX 455 would work wonderfully, as it should given the premium it commands.
If cost is the number one concern then the other products on the market are likely to be a better fit. If reliability is the number one concern then the premium options on the market are likely to be a better fit. Everyone wins though as there are plenty of options to choose from depending on what the priorities are for the system in use.
I agree there is a choice for everyone. But to be clear, there isn't enough evidence that a the Player One camera is less reliable. They just don't have the same track record as Moravian due to being a younger company. Whether that track record is worth the extra premium is the choice the buyer makes.
It is not that cost is the number one concern, but rather cost-to-benefit ratio. As you mentioned earlier, if you are stationed in a very remote region and service is a major concern, you have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars on equipment, then that track record may deserve the premium. Otherwise it doesn't seem so for most other folks. Player One is a new company and that alone would cause some customers to shy away from them for now. There’s not enough data on their products to make a call either way in terms of their reliability. They are an unknown in that dept. Customers have other options with ZWO, QHY, Moravian, and soon FLI again. The cost to benefit ratio needs to include the reliability, support, warranty/replacement capability, and other factors that the premium manufacturers also have a proven track record on. I keep hearing a ratio being called out but all I see being included in this ratio is the chip and the price. At least in this discussion anyhow. We’ve sold a lot of Moravian systems to customers all across the spectrum of gear. The number one reason they want a premium camera is failure experiences with other brands that weren’t only impacting to their imaging systems directly but also these failure experiences were not managed well at all by the brand they were using, and in some cases were still unresolved after the new camera was up and running and collecting photons. Will Player One do a better job than others? Possibly, we’ll have to see how that shakes out. The other brands have extended amounts of time across both CCD and now CMOS technology providing customers with the right experiences to earn their loyalty. That matters quite a bit when customers are making decisions. If price was the ultimate driver in life, we’d all drive Hyundai or Kia cars, which obviously isn’t the case 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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Folks, I do not think the OP was interested in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on optics here. Clearly, he was cost conscious in his original post. The main reason Moravian / FLI was being mentioned is due to reported issues with tilt with ZWO sensors, an issue which seems to be easily addressed with other alternatives like PO without having to spend 2-3 times as much in terms of cost, and is likely not going to be an issue in the first place while imaging at f/7.6. We are not talking "cheapest" possible equipment here. That full frame sensor is still nearly $4k and is a state-of-the-art IMX455.
It is clear that Moravian/ FLI from the comments above are very reliable options given their track record for folks running things in Chile or Namibia. But for other folks that are running mid-range setups in the US, like the OP is trying to do, these other options like PO are far more viable, and so far seem to be reliable with good reviews.
There are a number of customers using Moravian cameras on the exact same rig the OP is discussing. In fact I just finished helping a customer setup a new C3 61000 Pro on a TOA130 with the 645 flattener on a telescope in the customers backyard observatory last week. I wouldn’t say Player One is any more viable than Moravian or vice versa. There’s good options on the market for everyone.
I was referring to viability in terms of cost to benefit ratio, not to whether or not a Moravian could be used on a TOA. I would imagine a Moravian IMX 455 would work wonderfully, as it should given the premium it commands.
If cost is the number one concern then the other products on the market are likely to be a better fit. If reliability is the number one concern then the premium options on the market are likely to be a better fit. Everyone wins though as there are plenty of options to choose from depending on what the priorities are for the system in use.
I agree there is a choice for everyone. But to be clear, there isn't enough evidence that a the Player One camera is less reliable. They just don't have the same track record as Moravian due to being a younger company. Whether that track record is worth the extra premium is the choice the buyer makes.
It is not that cost is the number one concern, but rather cost-to-benefit ratio. As you mentioned earlier, if you are stationed in a very remote region and service is a major concern, you have sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars on equipment, then that track record may deserve the premium. Otherwise it doesn't seem so for most other folks. Guys, Thanks for the insight and comments. I think I'm going to drop this thread for the time being. If any more insight about ff comes up I'll try check here. Seems like a new thread to discuss "premium vs prosumer vs value brands" could be its own thread and with all of us being in different financial situations and having different priorities and motives, I don't see that being of any value to me in this setting. Best and Clear Skies
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
I keep hearing a ratio being called out but all I see being included in this ratio is the chip and the price. At least in this discussion anyhow. It is the same chip, offering the same performance for nearly twice the cost, only due to perceived reliability. That's why we are questioning cost-to-benefit ratio here. Dark Matters Astrophotography:
If price was the ultimate driver in life, we’d all drive Hyundai or Kia cars, which obviously isn’t the case either. 😉 A better comparison is buying the same exact Audi with the same exact performance, one with standard warranty vs one extended warranty for twice the price. If the extended warranty made sense for everyone, we would be all getting it.  |
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already. Probably a dumb question by why do you actually need a shutter?
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already. A shutter will be optional.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
I keep hearing a ratio being called out but all I see being included in this ratio is the chip and the price. At least in this discussion anyhow.
It is the same chip, offering the same performance for nearly twice the cost, only due to perceived reliability. That's why we are questioning cost-to-benefit ratio here.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
If price was the ultimate driver in life, we’d all drive Hyundai or Kia cars, which obviously isn’t the case either. 😉
A better comparison is buying the same exact Audi with the same exact performance, one with standard warranty vs one extended warranty for twice the price. If the extended warranty made sense for everyone, we would be all getting it. The Audi comparison is way off the mark but perhaps a new thread would be the right place to break all of these differences down properly. Also who is “we” in the questioning of the cost to benefit ratio? I see you questioning it. 😉
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Tony Gondola:
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already.
Probably a dumb question by why do you actually need a shutter? In order to take dark frames remotely.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already.
A shutter will be optional. Interesting; that's the first I've heard of that. The datasheet says "Optional Shutter None" so that's what I was going by.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Kyle Goodwin:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already.
A shutter will be optional.
Interesting; that's the first I've heard of that. The datasheet says "Optional Shutter None" so that's what I was going by. In my discussion with FLI they mentioned the camera has a place for a shutter but they were operating under the assumption people would just use a dark filter. I’m going to send them a follow up note to get specifics on it. Bill
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Kyle Goodwin:
Tony Gondola:
Kyle Goodwin:
I don't understand why FLI is making their new premium camera without a mechanical shutter. I guess they're going to lean on larger filter wheels to use a dark filter as a shutter, but if I were buying a camera to send to Chile on a scope I can't use a flip flat practically I'm pretty sure a mechanical shutter would be a hard requirement. It's the #1 reason I'm considering a Moravian camera on my CDK that is only 2.5 hours away from me. Otherwise my PlayerOne has been bulletproof for me for a year now. If FLI's camera had a mechanical shutter I would probably have preordered one already.
Probably a dumb question by why do you actually need a shutter?
In order to take dark frames remotely. Ahhhh, got ya.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
I keep hearing a ratio being called out but all I see being included in this ratio is the chip and the price. At least in this discussion anyhow.
It is the same chip, offering the same performance for nearly twice the cost, only due to perceived reliability. That's why we are questioning cost-to-benefit ratio here.
Dark Matters Astrophotography:
If price was the ultimate driver in life, we’d all drive Hyundai or Kia cars, which obviously isn’t the case either. 😉
A better comparison is buying the same exact Audi with the same exact performance, one with standard warranty vs one extended warranty for twice the price. If the extended warranty made sense for everyone, we would be all getting it.
The Audi comparison is way off the mark but perhaps a new thread would be the right place to break all of these differences down properly.
Also who is “we” in the questioning of the cost to benefit ratio? I see you questioning it. 😉 Agree to disagree on the comparison. The we is referring to a few that agreed with my original comment on this thread, and frankly buyers in general that want to understand advantages vs disadvantages. I also agree this needs a different thread.
|
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.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
