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.



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/10/16 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    Both weather apps promised 6 hours of clear skies last but managed just over one before the clouds rolled in, and stayed! Managed to get two images that both need more data but both are acceptable, to my eyes anyway... M33 is 5 X 10 min, iso 1600, 72mm ED-R, 100D (modded). DSS and PS. The milky way includes NGC 7822 at top right and should also have M52 and the bubble, though I cant see them. 10 X 5.5 min, iso 800, 50mm 1.8 usm lens at F5, Canon 1200D (modded), DSS and PS.
  2. 5 points
  3. 3 points
    Even had the PST out for a session today. Hopefully someone will do this properly later!
  4. 3 points
    Kim has the right idea?. , Talking of a 12" on this post is just being a lightweight?.
  5. 3 points
    The trigger has been pulled ........!
  6. 3 points
    hay Guys, come on over to the lightside, we do loads of chatter there in the solar sec. clear skys ,charl.
  7. 3 points
    A 3" F5 is the cause of aperture fever, not the cure!.
  8. 2 points
    The Moon was a tricky find tonight at just 2 degrees altitude above the horizon - yes, it is there!! 385795Km from Earth, 64.5% illuminated, 9.63 days old. A single RAW Nikon D3200 shot with the x2 teleconverter and Tamron 70-300mm lens. A couple of hours later, I shot a 1 minute MOV video with the camera balanced on the lounge window sill, and got this. Tomorrow, DHL should be bringing me a Celestron 76mm Firstscope for my daughter. I'll be interested to see what I can get from that with the ASI120MM camera.
  9. 2 points
    I think DS imaging is thriving. I say this because I run a very small business, no more than a cottage industry, in which I offer facilities to all kinds of amateur astronomers and the take-up is mostly (but not entirely) from imagers. It was like that from day one, thirteen years ago. Well, that's me and my business. What about here on SGL? Yes, I think Barkis may have a point in implying that imaging has slipped a bit and Maximidius may have a point in suggesting a cause. Cause, effect? Hard to distinguish. Chicken and egg. Let me go off on a tangent which many will find predictable and yawnworthy, coming from me, but if you believe something (and I do) you should say it. There are too many people 'out there' advocating DSLR imaging. The arguments have been rehearsed to death but this is a predominantly UK forum and the UK is plagued by light pollution. The only high powered weapon against LP is narrowband and the only high powered way to do narrowband is with a mono camera. At the moment that probably means CCD but change is in the air. DSLRs are getting better, some are downright excellent in fast F ratios, but I strongly suspect that they lie behind an undercurrent of despair amongst UK imagers. Mind you, I haven't been back to the UK for a while (I've 'gone native!!!' It might be Monique's cooking...) so maybe it is also the weather. But we have one major magazine which strikes me as wedded to DSLR when that simply is not the way forward for many UK imagers. Don't beat me up over the price of the kit. I know what stuff costs and I can do nowt about it - but I recommend CCD. Voila. Go on, throw things at me!!! Olly
  10. 2 points
    My scope is out cooling as well. I just went outside with the binos to spot ISS for the first time. The moon is still very much present and there is a lot of wind. I am a bit reluctant to go sit outside for real yet. I'll do some telly watching first...
  11. 2 points
    Chris, I still have the Tak and yes, it is far superior to the Borg p, but not as portable as the Borg. I am trying to keep as small a kit as possible and the Borg is portable enough to fit in my backpack as you can see. I also have a Borg 90FL objective so I can swap between 71mm and 90mm - 71 at home for mostly lunar viewing and the 90 under dark skies, but I have a good mind to sell both the Tak and the 90FL as I am drawn to a compact kit. Everything is a compromise and I think I can accept optics which are pretty decent (vs simply flawless for my Tak) if I manage to get out more often in my back yard and enjoy the views. While this may sound "shocking", family, work, pets and life in general conspire to keep me away from the eyepiece (dentist this evening!!!) and therefore optimising my gear towards portability is paramount to me. But the Takahashi - oh my!
  12. 2 points
    Welcome to SGL Louise. Congrats on your first scope. My first bit of advice is to set it up in daylight to ensure it all works, then point it at a distant small object like a weather vane, pylon tip, or tip of a church spire a mile or two away - get it as close to the middle of the view as possible. Then make sure the finder scope points at exactly the thing with the object bang on the cross hairs. Most experienced folks can do this on a star or planet at night, but we all remember how impossible it was first time at night, and resorted to daytime finder alignment. You'll need to know how to find stuff - so your first step ought to be to download "Stellarium" and set it for your location. It's free planetarium software and will show you the night sky exactly as it is over your house. Familiarise yourself with the pole star, the meridian, and the ecliptic, and make sure you know where the cardinal points are. As for imaging - there's a lot to it - you're asking how a watch works when you need to concentrate on just telling the time lol. £20 will get you a copy of Making Every Photon Count - the imagers bible available at FLO (forum sponsor see link at top of any page). Meantime there's nothing to stop you holding your phone camera up to the eyepiece once you have a well focused view of the moon and see what you get just for fun. Hope that helps and have fun tonight.
  13. 2 points
    To be honest, for short time subs dont bother about cal.frames. But thats me. take at least 30 or more within 600 or 500 rule. (During your initial sessions) Do CC in PI and regular processing. 100% You will be happy seeing ur results Milkyway 30 frames @ 20 s with 1600 Iso (24 mm at 4.5) will get you something like this without cal.frames. CS Rush
  14. 2 points
    Light, lights and more lights. All darks/bias can be done after and flats also, if you are careful with the camera/lens and don't use sensor cleaning features and knock about any dust too much.
  15. 2 points
    Hi On my AVX facing east I usually get between +/- 2" to +/- 4" of guiding error but that's mostly due to imaging through an open window which gives lots of turbulence. If I guide through the window glass I get a much better performance but, of course, stars get distorted! I wish there was something as transparent as glass but without the refractive properties. The heq5 seems to perform better than the avx though that's through a smaller open window facing west where there is less overall lp. Naturally, I stick to shorter focal lengths Louise
  16. 2 points
    Regardless of the orientation puzzles, dust motes on your camera sensor are still the culprit.
  17. 2 points
    why dont they use a 50mm finder scope for the hubble, save them a lot of money, must email them
  18. 2 points
    When it comes to the Q module, think Mars. Cannot comment on blue bloat problems Olly mentioned when imaging, but does anyone want to image at f/10? However, on my trip to Nambia in June Mars (which had previously been disappointing in the stock FS-60) was transformed (though reaching an altitude of 86 deg altitude also helped) and I was amazed what a 6cm aperture was capable of showing of the red planet. FS-60Q ready to go in Namibia.
  19. 1 point
    As you might tell from the framing I was set up to catch a close-pass of the ISS tonight ... Note to self ... Remember to check CalSky next time to save yourself sitting around trying to capture an invisible pass ... 1000D + ED80Pro . 1/100s @ ISO 100 , 82/82 , PIPP , Reg 5.1 , Gimp 2.8.
  20. 1 point
    As I have hospital appointment in Morning ive just come in but I have had a brilliant 3 hours, highlight of the evening was NGC 7662 (snowball Neb) the ring looked brilliant and M92 beautiful cluster. going write a report it will be tomorrow now.
  21. 1 point
    Thanks gents. I do love a mosaic Aaron, can't wait until I pull my finger out and get a decent planetary cam, the mosaics won't stop then!!!
  22. 1 point
    If you aren't using super wide eyepieces. You can get away without a Paracor. I use the Televue Delos range (72°) with an f4 16" and find that the coma is not intrusive. With 82° or 100° it is needed. Look though a 20mm ES 100° without a Parracor and you could be forgiven for thinking that you had just engaged warp factor 8! If you do go wide, the Parracor MK 1 v2 or 3 will do you fine. The only time that it is worth re-mortgaging your soul and getting a Parracor Mk2 is if you have a case full of Ethos..... Either way. You will find life very hard work if you stick with 50° eyepieces. Sure, the image will be crisp. But star hopping will be a complete chore. 68° is the absolute minimum that I would consider for these scopes. Lastly, the SW 16" is a big heavy 16". Unless you can wheel it out of a shed / garage for home observing, I would look at some lighter weight options. My OOUK Solid Tube 16" is light and lives in my garage with a specially widened back door so that I can move the thing to its observing spot on a sack barrow. It just fits in a Landrover with the back seats down. My 10" is slung happily in the boot with the family luggage for a long weekend. As already noted. 4" the 16" is a massive jump. Maybe a pause at 10" would prepare you for the jump to 16" or 20".......... If I had gone straight in at 16", I would have given up by now. Your LP will negate a fair chunk of the big scope advantage on all but the best nights. But the best nights are fantastic! Good luck. Paul
  23. 1 point
    Refractors will reverse the image, but I thought the L shaped bit (diagonal) reversed it yet again. Sorry, been a while since I used a diagonal. You'll get a lot of reversing of things with telescopes, generally this doesn't matter except for things like the Moon that you can see with your own eyes. Some scopes also turn the image upside down. As stated above. Get used to your scope, get used to the sky. If you can manage a shot of the Moon through the eye piece by all means try, but anything else requires complicated routines, equipment and processing. Carole
  24. 1 point
    Great report, Damian. I do chuckle at the term "a bit of aperture" when referring to 22" of the stuff!!! Paul
  25. 1 point
    Vicky has shared the views through my scope many times already since I completed it, and was there all the way through construction with encouragement so you could say they are deserved views. Recording the views is something she has seen me do and developed her own way. All good stuff and great to see the excitement when anyone sees the views.
  26. 1 point
    As you say superb in full size. Dave
  27. 1 point
    Excellent Ca-K David, looks like you had the best of the weather today. Dave
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point
    When doing astrophotography under dark skies with just a camera (no telescope) and with time being a factor, would I be better off devoting time to subs/darks/flats/bias (doing bias indoors afterwards), or would I be better off just taking as many subs as possible? It'll be a rare chance for me to get under dark skies (assuming there's a clear night), so I'd like to know which option is likely to be the most productive.
  30. 1 point
    As mentioned set the finder and main scope up to each other. During the day aim the main scope at something distant, say 2 miles. Then carefully adjust the finder until it is centered on the same thing, then recheck the main is still on the object and if not repeat. You can expect to go round the cycle 2 or 3 times getting things a bit better each time round. Take your time, no point is rushing in as it does not help, coffee does. I would leave the acquisition of pictures out of it for now, Astrophotography is often (as already) referred to as "The Dark Side". Better to get a foot or two into the visual side first. There is in realistic terms a certain level of equipment needed but more relevantly a level of knowledge also. Simpest way to say it is you do not take a photo. You take say 20 and stack one on the other then you start processing. As said not quite the same as photography. So I suggest getting familiar with the visual, picking up bits of information on the AP side then further down the line deciding how you will approach AP. Not sure if any are accessable: http://www.astronomyclubs.co.uk/ Also not sure if all are still active.
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    This is the centre of The Wizard nebula, shot with my C11 at f10 and Atik 4000, all binned 2x2. Ha was easy, 8 x 900 seconds. S2 and O3 were each 11 X 900 seconds. All filters are Baader 7nm. I was very surprised by the appalling quality of the S2 and O3 - hence more subs to try and improve them, but they still looked very noisy. Probably strands of high cirrus didn’t help…. Following initial stretching, the actual narrow band image has had fairly limited processing - colour balancing and a bit of sharpening on some of the nebula edges. There are some artifacts (halos etc) left by star removal prior to processing which I couldn’t easily remove. The actual stars were shot in binned RGB - 8 X 60 seconds each, and added back to the processed narrowband image to try and retain star colour. I don’t think this was particularly successful, but I always find stars difficult with this scope. Although the image looks a bit garish, it’s false colour after all! Any criticism would be extremely helpful. Chris
  33. 1 point
    Best thing Alan is never to be tempted to look into someone else's Ethos to see what they are like. That way you will not get a taste for such eyepieces and bankrupt yourself. Stay away from the" Dark side "Ethos ?
  34. 1 point
    Maybe we can split the "imaging - deep sky" section into 2, one for showing off and one for the others. There are a lot of comments and replies and advice and encouragements on the "getting started with imaging", but at some point you figure out your balancing, PA, guiding, spacing, etc., but you're still far away from others' exquisite images, still you want to get some feedback for your work. You don't have an image to be published in many magazines, but you got started a while ago. And maybe you don't have a specific question. I can also put myself in the "tablet/phone" category when I don't reply that much and I just hit the "like" button. Does the above make sense to anyone and think it's a good idea? Regards, Alex
  35. 1 point
    I could not afford to talk that level of money presently, note the word presently!!
  36. 1 point
    I guess i'm post farming but hey ho To you both, What the hell, throw all caution to the wind..... Fair points buddy !!! I've often thought about solar imagery
  37. 1 point
    A very clear and concise response to the question, Jazza.
  38. 1 point
    I think there are many who would disagree that Binoculars are only good for a quick sweep around the sky. You only need to go to a big star party like Kelling and check out the number of astronomers with big bins (and in some cases I mean really big!) Last spring I was camped next to a gent who had just had an 6" pair custom made - A truly impressive instrument, but there are many who have more modest pairs nicely mounted as their primary instrument . My Helios 25x100's deliver beautiful wide-field views and I love seeing some of the larger DSO's in the context of their surrounding star fields. Don't get me wrong, I love my scopes but I also love my binoculars - particularly the big ones. They offer a different and complementary view of the night sky from scopes. They should not be written off as a handy gadget only suitable for a quick look around. They also make you learn your way around the night sky without the crutch of Go-To. Having said all that I'm currently contemplating the purchase of an 18" Dob - what can I say - I like big astro instruments
  39. 1 point
    A UV light is your friend for finding dust and other deposits, a cheap blue LED will do the job too. Alan
  40. 1 point
    hi steve i started using your driver a couple of weeks ago with sgpro it works great thanks mark
  41. 1 point
    Very well captured and nicely presented.
  42. 1 point
    There are some things you can do to help heat the house, I tend to cook in the evening as I'm normally home around 6-7, normally the residue heat from the oven if I leave the door open slightly (and hope the cat doesn't take an interest in climbing in) when its cooling is enough to stop the heating kicking in (thermostat being in the living room), same for when I use the tumble drier. I think that's just for when your super tight like me though lol.
  43. 1 point
    Are you using a reducer/flattener at all or other intermediate lens? Could be some specs on that..... Hth
  44. 1 point
    I am a visual only chap. So have no reason to be I this part of the forum, except that I really enjoy the images. The like button gets hit if I like it. I can add nothing technical. But if I were qualified, I would feel a bit uneasy about offering constructive advice unless the OP has specifically requested feedback. Paul
  45. 1 point
    No there is nothing on this object. There is one paper on it which will depend on how good your french is http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1974A%26A....33..113C&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf. It woudl appear to be some kind of compact emission line object. Teher are many galaxies out there and unless there is something of interest they won't get looked at. Zwicky thought it might be a star. Owen
  46. 1 point
    Hello A new image : Tycho at 100% : Clear skies. Luc Another image
  47. 1 point
    Taken on the 23rd sept stats on the page. Not sure about the processing, finding it difficult, still experimenting click for capture size Different processing full panes Yet another different process, cant seem to get it right God knows which is best
  48. 1 point
    This was with the Q attached. I'm very much an amateur so feel free to criticise I haven't used it for deep sky but then I think a wider fov would be better so I'd leave it off.
  49. 1 point
    Got some good seeing on the morning of the 23rd August Though by the time I switched cameras it was morning. shooting in daylight, which has made the dynamics a little more washed out. Still under good seeing I will take it, 40 plus degrees only, Click all for larger sizes. None has been upscaled Most of the shots are downsized from capture size, but there is a couple at full resolution, if I remember. Used a Altair IR 685 Filter great little filter this. Producing good results. First light on lunar with my ASI 290mm, Which has done well. plato Alpine Valley Virtually in daylight, Hence the brightness Eudoxus and Aristoteles This one is full capture size Downsized added contrast and sharpening
  50. 1 point
    Ok so I have looked at the DIY antenna described in the Sky at Night article and it looks fairly simple to build. I have also looked at a few other option that are ready made and not very expensive. My question is, I have seen a few antenna's which specify different amounts of gain. So how relevant is the gain number when using an antenna for receiving only. Does higher antenna gain make it more sensitive? Give it more range?
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
  • Create New...

Important Information

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