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_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

yuklop

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About yuklop

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Southampton - UK
  1. I have an unbranded set of LRGB filters (perhaps old QHY filters, but this is far from certain). If the brand of filter isn't known, then the true transmission spectra also isn't known. So I measured them with some interesting results. Unbranded LRGB Now compare this with a Baader Blue filter: The Baader filter has much better IR suppression. It is B + IR Cut, compared to the unbranded filters which have high transmission in the IR for each of the RGB lines. The grey line in the LRGB graph is the L filter. This filter is a decent UV, IR cut. So I think if I use the colour filters with the L filter always in the optical path I could reproduce the effective IR cut of the more expensive branded filters. I also measured all my other filters and every one was interesting. You can get your filters professionally measured here: https://www.gerdneumann.net/english/service/spektrale-vermessung-ihrer-filter-spectral-scan-of-your-filters.html But they charge a frankly staggering €25 per filter! I can also measure your filters for you. PM and we can discuss, it certainly won't be €25 per filter! Dan
  2. Hmm, thanks for the reply. I think it is actually a star Gaia DR2 ... a magnitude 13 star thats crept into shot masquerading as one of Uranus moons. Damn. Still means I didn't capture all 5 of the possible moons. I will try again next time. :)
  3. Hi Folks, I had a go at imaging Uranus and its moons a few weeks back. I just got round to processing the data. Came out ok, if lacking any real detail in the planet. My puzzle is, when I came to figure out which moon is which with Stellarium, I found 4 of the moons match what I recorded, but one does not. I can easily imagine Miranda being lost in the planets glare, but then what is the bright dot directly above the planet. I can't see any stars in the area and I checked the magnitude isn't limited on the planetarium app. The video was shot on 09/12/19 at around 21:00. Kit was: LX200 classic, 2x focal extender, ASI224MC. Any help greatly appreciated. Thanks. Dan
  4. Hi All, I'm considering what software to use in an astrophotography workflow. So many options from free to very expensive. I made this little diagram to try and decide. I don't need no cost, but low cost is nice! Seems like everyone on Astrobin uses PixInsight. Of course there are much more comprehensive lists out there such as: Here I suppose this question is asked fairly often. Do you think the diagram is about right in terms of functionality? I expect I'll start with Stellarium, APT, Deep Sky Stacker and Startools as a low cost option. I guess this will work well, although I know Deep Sky Stacker and its a little long in the tooth now, so perhaps an upgrade to APP or PixInsight will happen soon enough. Any other cheaper stacking tools you would recommend? Many Thanks, Dan
  5. Thanks for the replies. I do use a dslr, which I took the ir filter out of. I think I'll just run some tests and see what the results are. I appreciate I would make things harder by using filters and taking more than one set of images at different focusses. I like the idea of splitting the channels up and processing the blue individually. If we get some clear nights soon, I'll give it a go and post the results.
  6. Dear all, I understand many posts have been written on similar topics. Nevertheless, I have been reading around and not seen this idea: Like many folk, I have a not so expensive f5 refractory. In my case a star travel 150. I like it and have taken a few images with a dslr I would even regard as ok. I would still like to do better. My feeling is that the focus point for red/green is good, just the blue that makes the brighter objects look bloated, and probably blurrs out some fine details. One idea is to use a yellow, wratten 12 filter, with it's transmission starting around 490nm for one set of images, and another, as yet unidentified blue/violet filter which the transmission ends at 490nm. What are your thoughts on this? It is just 2 sets of images per object, rather than the 3 of rgb narrowband, which should save time. Anyone tried it? Thanks, Dan.
  7. I have a ST150. I think its brilliant. The relatively large aperture allows pretty good visual work. It does have some CA but how intrusive this is depends on what you want to image. In my experience the moon is pretty good to look at however Jupiter and Saturn could be better. The CA does wash out some details on these 2. You can still clearly see the main stripes on the disc of jupiter and the rings around saturn with others reporting seeing the Cassini division. However this scope is not really designed for solar system stuff. It is a deep sky scope. With the faint objects the CA is not an issue. It can lead to bloated stars if they are very bright but this can be partially combated with filters. It also depends on how you image. I use a DSLR and get what I feel are pretty good results. But better results can be achieved with RGB imaging where I think each colour can be separately focussed thus avoiding CA all together. This is the next thing I want to try. Basically for any narrowband imaging this is as good as a multi-thousand pound triplet. I believe, bang for buck, this thing can't be beaten and is a great choice for something good for visual and photo. It's not that small though!
  8. As for W H Smiths. I used to work there a little while ago. There we magazine orders where you could order practically anything, whether smiths stocked it in-store or not and it would come for you and be put in a little cabinet to be picked up at your convenience. You would just go to the cabinet and collect the magazine and pay. You could order a one off or have it put back for you every issue and then cancel whenever you wanted. I'd be surprised if they had stopped this as it was a well used and liked service.
  9. Have a look at this thread. Coves the same topic. I have a Microsoft Lifecam Studio which can be fairly easily modded. Its pretty good. Can't do anything deep sky with it as there is limited exposure control. I think the philips can be modded for long exposures. But then again DSLRs are the way to go for deep sky. Or dedicated Astro CCDs. But they are expensive.
  10. I think saying a webcam is better than a dslr is not entirely accurate. I have both a Canon 500D and a Microsoft Lifecam Studio webcam. I use the DSLR much more. For DSO there is no contest, the DSLR wins hands down. For solar system its a little different as you want many frames taken quickly. For that purpose a webcam works well. A webcam also has a smaller chip size which looks at a smaller area of the sky so the object appears larger which is good for planets. That said, even on planets and the moon I use the DSLR and record video from it. So far I have found the "quality" of the recorded video to be higher than that from the webcam. As for motor, I *think* you can get away without for imaging planets as the exposure time is very short and alignment can be done later. It's pretty much a must for longer exposure deep sky stuff though.
  11. I don't think the HD-3000 would fit in the adapter. Its a different shape. You may be able to adapt it yourself though. Here is a link to some instructions for adaption. This method obviously works for the Lifecam Cinema but I have done it with a Lifecam Studio for a little extra resolution. One thing I will say is be REALLY careful not to get dust/dirt/paint on the sensor during the modification. It took me ages to satisfactorily clean mine!
  12. You are right. I can always stop it down. And I have a fringe killer. I guess the biggest problem is really the seeing off the balcony. I should find a decent dark sky site out of town. It is really just a hankering as I'm sure my current scope can perform better with a bit more skill etc... but I find I get that a lot with this hobby!
  13. Mmm. I can also suffer from aperture fever. I'd love a C9.25 but its a large thing. I guess I'd also like to be able to mount it side by side with the other scope then one can guide the other. That would be impossible with a C9.25! I also wonder whether the aperture would really gain me too much since most of my observing is done off a balcony in town. So the seeing/light pollution is generally pretty bad. I'll look out for a second hand C8 mind. If I can get one of those for under €500 it'd be a good buy! Perhaps a C6 is more realistic in that price range. cheers for replies.
  14. Dear All I have a 150mm f5 refractor which is great for deep sky but its having a hard time looking at the planets. So I was thinking of getting a second scope to view/photograph the planets/moon. I can't decide between a longer focal length refractor like here or a small Mak like a skymax 127. As far as I am aware they would both give better colour and larger views. So what would you take if the choice was yours?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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