Mal22

Very helpful thanks! “Smaller camera sensor size does not provide zoom” was what I particularly needed to hear. Very clear. It’ll have to be more focal length. I’ve captured a fair few targets with the 294 and I’ve never noticed a red/green swirl pattern, so I’m guessing mine doesn’t, or I just haven’t realised it does!

Hello, I have a question that I’m sure plenty of people on here will be able to answer, and explain, with ease… hopefully… If I were to take 10 hours of images of M51 with a WO Zenithstar 73 and a ZWO ASI294MC pro, and if I also took 10 hours with the Z73 but with a ZWO ASI585 MC Pro, would the tighter FOV on the 585 result in more “detail” in the galaxy than cropping the 294 image to the same FOV when processing? Assuming conditions were exactly the same for both. The 294 is obviously the superior camera, but would the tighter FOV on the 585 make it a better option for smaller targets, like galaxies? I already own the 294, by the way, so the point of the question is really whether I’d gain much (for galaxy photography) by adding the 585 to my armoury. I should clarify in advance that I don’t have enough room currently to store a new longer focal length scope, which I appreciate would be the better solution… Below is the difference in FOV, and the key specs for each camera. What should I be focusing on to figure out the answer to my questions above? Thanks for the help! ASI294MC Pro Stats ASI585 MC Pro stats

What about when a kind neighbour decides to help out the young couple with the newborn by putting the bins out for them on collection day? 😳

Wonderful! Such a special moment captured forever.

Firstly congratulations on the arrival of Alice! I myself became a dad for the first time ten months ago, at the age of 37, and it’s a wonderful (but exhausting) ride - hence why I’m up at 2am now on a cloudy night reading your post! Has becoming a parent affected my astrophotography? Definitely. I too thought that the nocturnal hobby and baby might go hand in hand nicely, but in reality it usually doesn’t go that way. I’ve found now that unless I have a pretty much nailed on clear night forecast all night then I wont go through the effort of setting up, and even then sometimes I’m just too tired when it gets to the night - especially with the late summer darkness. And that’s just the capturing! Finding the time between work and baby to process is a whole other thing. But, the stars, planets, galaxies and my rig will still be there when baby is a bit older, so for now I’m happy to scale back the Astro for a few years and take the seldom opportunities when they come, and when I have the energy. By the way I too was sceptical about smart telescopes, but eventually conceded and got a Seestar for the ultra convenience to plonk it outside and sate my cravings. But it’s just not the right bit of kit for me and barely begins to scratch the itch. It is, I should clarify, a brilliant bit of kit, but an enthusiastic car racer wouldn’t spend years honing their skills and building their perfect car to then have it self drive. I thought I might feel that way. And I did. Anyway, let’s see if I can get baby back in the crib now and steal a couple of hours sleep…

Great job! Which PI tools do you use for the colour details? I’m currently processing my own M51 data but can’t get a result I’m happy with. Thanks

I use this website which is pretty reliable https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/outdoorsports/seeing/london_united-kingdom_2643743 I also use Cloudy Nights and if the two concur, happy days

Thank you, very helpful response! So my misguided assumption was that using a Barlow would ultimately yield more detail in the galaxy, but clearly that’s not the case? 20 hours with a 2x Barlow would get no more detail and resolution than 10 hours without. That settles it then. No Barlow. I’m in the UK too which it seems is just one big permanent cloud now anyway so a decision to double the necessary imaging time would have needed real justification…

Hi everyone, Now that we’re in galaxy season I’m weighing up whether or not to add my 2x Barlow lens to the imaging train to get a bit more up close and personal with the likes of M51, M101 and M81 + 82. What are the considerations in doing so? I know that it will double the F ratio and therefore I would need twice as much imaging time, but is that a worthwhile trade off to get a closer up image? Or is sticking with the non-Barlow field of view and going for a closer crop when processing a better approach? I tend to get good guiding over long exposures (with guide scope/camera) with good stars so I think that will still be ok. My set up is a WO Zenithstar 73 and ZWO ASI294MC Pro. Below is the current FOV on M51 without a Barlow, and an image I did with this set up last summer (before I knew how to use PixInsight properly…) Thanks for any advice!

Agreed. If for whatever reason someone has an issue with someone’s question or post - think it, say it out loud if you need to, shout it at the wall. But don’t type it.

Yep. I’ve seen blue stuff before, and this is it. @gorann great image!

Really helpful, thanks! Funnily enough over the last few days I’ve been searching for an updated PI workflow incorporating the AI tools, and THIS video is exactly what I’d been looking for. Perfect, thanks!

Excellent image! And very delicately processed. You should be very pleased with this. What have you been using to learn PixInsight? I’ve been at it for about 6 months now and steadily getting there, but still a lot to learn and I can’t quite achieve what I’m aspiring to. Mostly YouTube tutorials so far and recently bought Warren A Keller’s book Inside PixInsight, which is good and easy to follow. What’s been working for you? Inevitably, I think I’ll end up buying the Adam Block videos as everyone says they’re a game changer….

Depending on where the objects you’re observing are in relation to the meridian line, a mount may go round the houses rather than “as the crow flies” to avoid the scope crashing into the mount during tracking. Clever mounts will also flip automatically during a tracking session when the object gets close to the meridian line, if “Meridian flip” is enabled in settings. And collisions do happen! I smashed the thermometer on my WO Z73 focus knob because I’d accidentally disabled meridian flip and it grinded into the mount for goodness knows how long… it could have been a lot worse! However, I will defer to brighter minds than mine on this particular instance, as given the time of your post yesterday and the objects in question, I don’t think the meridian line will have been a factor…

Well this is just ridiculous… An absolutely incredible image. So much to see and so much depth. Wonderful stuff.

It is deep space imaging where you would take lots of exposures, hours and hours worth, and stack them together, which certainly does take a long time. For planets, the wobbly atmosphere and rotation is more of a challenge. I’ve not used a DSLR so can’t comment in relation to that process. I use a dedicated astronomy camera to take a short video, maybe 3 to 5 mins depending on the speed a particular planet spins. That video will consist of thousands of frames, so we then use software to select a percentage of the frames where the atmosphere was least wobbly, this might only be 20%, but could be less or more. The software then stacks those selected frames together to produce a clearer image, but it is a far quicker process than stacking deep space object images, just a few minutes.

Outstanding image!

Here is the difference between the 102 and the 127 using a 10mm eyepiece for Saturn, Jupiter and the Moon. The outside circle is how much it will fill the view on the 102, and the inside the 127.

I should add, that unfortunately there is little to no value in astronomy through a window, open or closed. If the window is closed then viewing through glass will heavily distort the view, and if the window is open then the heat waves escaping out of the window into the cooler air will make for very wobbly moon/planets etc, like they are underwater.

Second this. @Lung you say that the children are unlikely to want to spend too much time outside at night, and that budget isn’t a big concern. The Seestar S50 means you can plonk it outside with minimal (almost no) set up, and then sit inside with the children, controlling it with and displaying it on your phone/tablet screen. It will align itself and find objects in the sky, that you pick from a list of what’s in view that night. and it comes with a built in light pollution filter.

Agree entirely with this. It’s not just that those who are more experienced forget how difficult it is starting out, I also think that perspective on cost also goes out the window. Yes, a lot of us have rigs that cost thousands of pounds, and we’ve gotten used to it eating up our wallets, but I constantly see responses to new starters along the lines of “well, if you’re spending £120, I’d recommend saving up more and going for this £400 dob instead which is much better”. Anyone new to a hobby needs a bit of instant gratification in the early days to “catch the buzz”. The Starsense Explorer seems like a very sensible choice with that in mind.

Yes mine was last night

The sky cleared nicely for me around 8pm and I saw at least 10 in the space of 40 minutes, before cloud returned and my 5 month old boy awoke (presumably with fomo for the meteor shower…) Some really bright ones too and three in one minute! Mostly in the region of Taurus and Perseus.

I’m still fairly new to this but I liked the 12 hour Heart Nebula I did a couple of months ago. I’m told I should make the reds more vibrant, but this has a nice natural feel to me.

Ah, thanks I stand corrected! Useful to know!