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_christmas_presents.thumb.jpg.587637e0d01baf4b6d21b73610610bbb.jpg

Milamber

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    1,971
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Milamber

  • Rank
    Banned User

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.astronomy-uk.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. you got the SAS, one of the best, friendliest and most active societies in the UK (possibly Europe) on your doorstep - maybe go see/meet them? Arthur
  2. The ISO depends on your camera... some handle higher better than others (eg. my D1x only goes up to 800, I can push past that but it's not pretty) and really it's a case of suck it and see. I would say go with the lowest you can get away with though... but sometimes you just have to dial in a big number and pray! Rotation on M42... well, the closer you get to the pole the more you will get, M42 is pretty safe in that respect - M81/82 on the other hand would be pushing things. By that I am talking about recovery as well as rotation, close to the pole there is less relative movement of the object but more actual rotation. Rotation of the image is harder to process away than linear issues. Arthur
  3. By tiling I think you mean a mosaic, that's an option but it does mean a lot of work just to get the frames to align and balance together. With the camera you are using, shooting in RAW, you can add a couple of stops or take a couple off for the trapezium area - that's the point of RAW really, the fact that you can pre-process the image yourself rather than let the firmware do it. I would go so far as to say *always* shoot RAW if you can, for the extra size files it is well worth it. To be honest, get a small fast refractor and a flattener and you would be surprised, with the SCT you are always going to be fighting against that f/10 when shooting big targets like this. Maybe going for smaller nebulae or even globulars would be better objects to point the Celestron at initially - M42 is a favourite though and you can always come back to it for a bit more data. Arthur
  4. Ah. Then you may want to consider one of the many models of focal reducer to the equation - you get a wider field and more light too (so maximising the shorter exposures). You have about 20% of the nebula there... it is rather big! Arthur
  5. Being nosy, what scope was that with? You have a very small filed there considering the sensor size - was it an SCT maybe? Arthur
  6. You're welcome Tony, always good to meet buyers - I know you will be well pleased with the scope as you get more time with it. Just the "C" word to learn now Arthur
  7. Ah - that comes to you as soon as you get a telescope with a manual! It all may seem overpowering but in a month I reckon you'll wonder why you ever had a problem. Arthur
  8. If there is anything you can't grab right away, ask! It's as true here as anywhere else - there's no such thing as a stupid question. Arthur
  9. The accepted wisdom is that under 6 inches there's not a great deal to worry about to be honest. Arthur
  10. EQ's awkward? Only if you put them in EQ mode. If they are a pain, flip them to 90 degrees and use them as Alt/Az until your confidence grows. DO NOT skip over an EQ-mounted scope that would otherwise be ideal just because it looks complicated. I would more likely say keep away from refractors. Anything in your price range will not be worth bending over to look through. Arthur
  11. Well, as things stand you would need it drilled to 25mm to fit over the existing arm... or just add another telescope.
  12. Hi again... it looks like it will out of retirement actually - or at least move back up the availability lists, if you are interested in one then talk to FLO. There is not actually a specified weight limit to tell the truth - that is a 25mm stainless bar through 90mm of solid aluminium, sitting on another 100mm of aluminium, so you can draw your own conclusions. I stated at the outset that the 25lb per side limit was sensible only because I knew the mount - on the supplied tripod - would be *stable* with that weight on one side with no counterweight. Balanced weight, in my opinion, would be a function of the tripod underneath and not the mount itself. Arthur PS - I like to think the Giro is along the lines of the AzTech
  13. Hi John - good to see you are happy with the mount... it will take an AR-6 on one side with no counterweight... An extension for the mount is very simple to arrange and I have made a few for customers... simply get a 4" aluminium tube the length you need to be extended by, get it turned flat both ends and then buy a length of M12 studding... up the middle into the base of the AzTech and a nut spun on the bottom of the tripod base. Simples. Made that way so customers had more options for extension rather than having to faff about with pins and stuff. Arthur
  14. Hi - I have a couple but they are not as comfortable as I had hoped. Make sure when you buy that yours are soft and do not have a manufaturing mould joint line around the rim where the rubber touches your face. My pair are very uncomforatable because of this - the SnS ones above look OK though. arthur
  15. Nice one Nick - I guesss that means you got a spare cell ready for the next one eh? Arthur
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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