Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_terminator_challenge.thumb.jpg.b7f10f594317507d0f40662231b0d9a8.jpg

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Managed to get out during a clear night last week and tried guiding with the refractor piggy backed on top of the RASA and also with the 60mm guider clamped onto the bottom dovetail of the OTA. I also cleaned up the residual adhesive on the tripod head and sanded the bottom plate of the Mesu down which resulted in a much larger contact area with the tripod head. The results are not really what I expected, but a lot better than before and guiding is more consistent. That being said, guiding with either the 60mm guider or the refractor still doesn’t produce round stars. The elongation is much smaller than before and looks like guiding is now actually correcting for most of it, but still not completely. Not sure why this is as the elongation direction and amount are now very similar in both guide and main images. The guided subs are now almost usable, but I’d still very much like to get as close to perfectly round stars and just don’t see this happening with the current guider. Therefore I’ve started designing an OAG using a right angle prism and will be using the bare CMOS board from a QHY5L-II-C camera to avoid obstructing the light path with either the camera body or the USB cable. I have most parts and it’s just a matter of finding a way to mount them. I won’t be troubleshooting this any longer as I’ve spent far too many clear nights on this and I now know that an OAG will certainly solve the problem. I really wanted to get to the bottom of this but it just seems like it’s not practical at the moment. Will update this thread once the OAG is complete Some examples of what elongation looks like now
  3. I think it is reasonable to say the cge-pro is now obsolete and replaced by the cgx. The equivalent capacity is the cgx-l. These things are pretty big, so I assume you are planning on mounting a pretty substatial scope on it? Here is a link to a good UK supplier if this is the one you really want. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-mounts/celestron-cgx-l-equatorial-mount-tripod.html Good luck with your choice. Gordon.
  4. I think that CEM120EC2 graphs are absolute encoder corrections - very unlikely related to actual seeing / star profile.
  5. Rodd

    M82 HaLRGB

    Yes indeed--very similar to viewing distance for printed images. A 6'x 8' mural may not look good if viewed from a few feet--but at 20 feet it may look really nice. For this image--the initial screen size is bigger than the size if you click on it once (prior to going to full resolution). I think that second size is the best one for this image. The size one sees when opening the forum page without clicking the image is a bit to large. Rodd
  6. I've just done exactly this, belt modded and re-greased my EQ6 this week. I used this grease https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B007WR38TY/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 The mount isn't high performance engine, you could probably use butter and it would be fine.
  7. Rodd

    M82 HaLRGB

    The challenge with shooting galaxies with refractors is finding the best presentation size. the original, while containing all the details that this one has, is very small. The focal length was 1,000mm. So enlarging to a point really benefits the image--perhaps I went a bit too far. Its new waters for me--I have always presented my images at normal size with no alteration (up or down). With this one I cropped early and processed, so there really isn't a pre-crop example of the same finish. that was probably a mistake in hindsight. I plan on getting some more lum and will make sure I save a full image. Rodd
  8. An old thread - but very relevant. Thanks for making it available - I'm making life difficult for myself by trying to adapt the final part of the process in Luminar rather than PS.
  9. Nice clear skies last night so did some testing, here are the results cobbled together in P'Shop, as can be seen unfortunately the RedCat is going to have to be returned. All 30secs ISO800 Canon 60Da on Star Adventurer Dave Canon 300mm WOZ61 RedCat still got little blue shuttlecocks across the whole image
  10. Can’t understand why they don’t use knobs in the first place. So easy and quick to pull the mount off. From WDS Ltd. They do the ends in black and grey as well. M6 x 25mm long thread. http://www.wdsltd.co.uk/product/3464/knurled-knob-traffic-red-thermoplastic-with-stainless-steel-screw-wds-8440/ And some M6 x 10mm long spacers. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Black-Nylon-SPACERS-Plastic-Standoff-Washers-M3-M4-M5-M6-M8-M10/143122929582?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=442076878651&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649
  11. Way overpriced. They pop up on astromart all the time for much less. The CGX would be a much better buy. Even the CGEM on sell now is a nice mount that many have used to get very nice images. The pro was just a bad design by Celestron.
  12. I might try this SharpCap Ascom dslr possibility https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/657429-how-to-use-sharpcap-with-a-dslr/ Louise
  13. I'll have to give that a try! Louise
  14. Gven the mass/inertia of the mount and scope, how could they respond that fast? What is being measured here? I suspect noise e.g. star scintillation. Regards Andrew
  15. This is from ZWO website on ASI1600MM Pro description page: I'm not sure that ASCOM drivers support ROI, but native ones do. For short exposures and ROI feature I would probably go with SharpCap or similar rather than full fledged capture app like SGP. Native drivers enable very high download rates. My ASI1600 in SGP needs about 1-1.5s per sub download - not sure why ist that because it should be able to deliver at least 14fps over USB3.0 - the way I use it. On 5 second exposures, 1s is 20% time waste - so using native drivers in the app that supports it certainly looks like better option.
  16. Having been involved in many group and society activities in other fields; the initial build is not the problem. The problem is keeping it all running and in use (see @Robd reply). As with many thinks the initial capital cost pales against the ongoing running costs - both in money and people power.
  17. OK. Having listened to everyone's advice, the current design looks like this: I have raised the height of the side walls to 1.5m, and put the necessary 1:40 rake on the roofline. Raised the pier height slightly to maintain reasonable horizons, which helps with the view to the North over the warmroom. I experimented with reducing the size of the warmroom to get better horizons, but within the agreed footprint, you don't gain much horizon and lose a lot of warmroom. Tan(theta) is not your friend. Added an outward opening narrow door to the rear of the warmroom and a sliding door between warmroom and telescope area. Simple hinged end flap that will in some way be locked to the roof and weatherproofed to stop rain getting in. Moved the rails up to just below the wall height to shorten side members of the roof structure. F H Brundle v-groove wheels now intended to go inside the rood frame so that the frame comes out to the edge of the rails allowing a cladding overlap to further weatherproof. Roof only just clears the expected position of current imaging scope, so if I go for a longer OTA, future remote operation could be a problem. I can always lower the side walls again once I have spoken to my metal frame fabricator friend. I plan the bulk of the cladding to be coated corrugated steel as with the @laser_jock99 build. Couple of specific questions: With F H Brundle v-groove wheels, do they come with a ball race, and what size of bolt should be used to secure them? I am planning to run ethernet to the observatory in the same trench as the power. I had assumed that common mode rejection would be good with cat6 and I could just bung it in the same trench, but I have read a number of comments from electrical engineers that you need 300mm separation. I am pretty sure nobody has mentioned that on this forum, so wondered what the practical experience was. We haven't got a lot of noisy stuff connected to the power so I had hoped everything would be pretty quiet. All advice and thoughts gratefully received!
  18. Taken a couple of images of it hoping for more to do a little animated GIF, it's not moving very quickly ATM so hopeful I'll get another go. Dave
  19. I've just bought a 150PDS, I'm sure I had one in 2012!!!
  20. Yes, it also seems to apply to normal photos taken in good lighting conditions, almost nothing seems to look at its best at a 1:1 crop. if I scoot my chair back a little any unevenness in the background (which may be real, there are always stars and dust on the edge of detectability) disappears.
  21. I'll do a proper reprocess of the second one then, and pay extra attention to the background.
  22. I am not sure that it does support ROI, at least I have never found that option on mine.
  23. There are lots of larger brighter deep space objects you will be able to see, for example M42, M45, M44 and the book suggested will be very helpful. Often objects are viewed in medium to low magnification so something like a Vixen vpl 30mm or GSO/revelation 32mm to give the lowest magnification for finding objects.
  24. Led street lights went up in my street and estate a couple of weeks ago. The lights are more directional and point more of their light down than slideways or up, but they are significantly brighter. My garage door now looks like car headlights are shining on it all the time, but the other side of the street away from the lamp post is much darker, or rather it just looks darker in comparison to the lit area. I've not had a chance to measure the effect through a scope since then but I don't need to do any testing to be able to say if you are in the line of sight of any of those new lights your night vision will be severely affected.
  25. And there you have your answer... I think... Cropping in to the image is going to exagerate the 'pixelation', which is what you are sort of suffering here. I use the term 'suffering', but I should be shot for doing so, this is a cracking image, let's not lose that fact in this discussion! I would be interested to see the uncropped original - my prediction is that it will look much less speckly at that size.
  26. Looking for one of these, such as the ADM 7", condition not important so long as it works. Thanks for looking. Steve
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.