Jump to content

Narrowband

Chibster86

New Members
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

43 profile views
  1. Hi Skyline! Sorry for resurrecting this thread. Your short review actually convinced me to get this scope truly fantastic images! which is why I'm very surprised at the amount of CA it's showing. Over a month in and with only a handful of clear skies here in the UK I haven't had much of a chance to get out. But still having the same problems. I managed to borrow a uv/ir cut filter and it's still showing CA at the level I would consider acceptable for an apochromatic. Considering the scope with its field flattener combined is almost the price of a redcat I'd rather wished id just brought the Redcat even with its shorter focal length. I know there's examples showing how to remove it. But i didn't purchase an achromat at the end of the day Would you possibly have any singluar light frames of M45 you could post for comparative uses? I've now decided to reach out to FLO to have the scope examined.
  2. Hmm. So I've taken everything off and rescrewed the skywatcher field flattener onto the scope then attached the camera. Gave a quick polar align (it's not perfect but it'll do.) on the GTi and aimed towards Orion. 30 seconds iso 800 but this time softened the focus just off the bahtinov centre the CA is still quite apparent but it is better Ignore the orange blur, that is a telegraph cable that BT decided to install 9 months ago. The second shot is a quick hop to ic434 to grab a single 30 second exposure to test the stars around there. They are better. I'll recheck the seven sisters again tomorrow.
  3. I did think that about the L3. Because both cameras are unmodified. I'd surely not that much benefit out from it surely? I'd really hate to think the level of CA on subs taken on a modded camera. And that's what I can't shift. Im Already cutting so much out and frankly the subs are awful. I'm not sure how to contact other members without a forum wide call to arms and some members doing a controlled experiment with the 62ed to gather some reference data to work from. That would be interesting though. But I genuinely think the scope does need to be checked. Im really struggling to try to ignore that there's a flaw with the elements here somewhere. Especially more so now that I have the field flattener for this scope. That should be giving more colour correction and I'm frankly seeing zero difference. Thanks for your opinion. Really appreciate it
  4. Thanks for your advice! And apologies I'm not sure why that was a jpg. I shoot always in Raw weird! But I can definitely see you've managed to reduce the ugliness considerably! That's incredible and gives me faith that even off a single exposure it's reducible with careful processing What program do you use for your post processing Photoshop? Siril does let me spilt the RGB. I use a similar process before whereby I have used the green channel for luminance on the Cygnus wall previously to great effect but I haven't had much joy with it to reduce star bloat. By meaning of a #8 yellow filter. Is that the same filter for planetary observing? I have a 1.25" for visual observing of mars pretty useless for the but if so would I combine that with the previously mentioned L3 it/cut filter?
  5. That's really informative thank you! I was going to ask as on FLO website as it actually suggests using a CLS filter on the astronomics L3 filter at the bottom. But the info sheet doesn't suppess blue as much as the L3 . Reading the reviews and the info on there is something I definitely need though so I appreciate that. So the below pics are M42 Orion with the 62ed with the SW rotator and FF and the wider one is an example of a 29 second sub at f2.8 with the Samyang for comparison taken in the same location. No star bloat. (Ignore the orangey tang on the bottom of the 62ed that's a telegraph cable) For post I'm not that Photoshop savvy sadly. Wish I was. I do everything in Siril as it tends to be quite intuitive. But I'll definitely look into some tutorials with Photoshop and camera raw.
  6. Yeah Im getting what you're saying. And I think Im guilty of being sucked into those rose tinted views. I honestly think there's a fair few content creators that stand up the astro community that do rose tint the difficulty level of the hobby and do hide the cons of scopes, The gear and worst of all, The work needed to turn several nights worth of data into the masterpieces you see at the end of a video. Coming from using a camera lens (especially the phenomenal lens Samyang 135mm f2) on a star tracker I've been able to not require the need to consider the smaller things such as filters and reduce the exposure time needed at f2.8 so I've come to expect that from a "capable scope" I think I've also fallen into the fallacy of new gear = better performance, for mounts yes very true. But scopes are a very different matter I'm determined to get something out of this scope though and a search on astrobin has shown it is a capable scope none the less. Just I need to buckle down, consider targets within its limitations and put more work in to get the results I'm looking for. I'm just glad that the scope isn't looking like it's defective and have to accept that it does have its limitations so appreciate your insight on that. By way of filters. I'll definitely consider looking into the L3 thank you. Is there a list of targets by "best" filter that I can look at? And can I pair that with a light pollution filter together as I am in a bortle 5/6 area?
  7. It's a shame a filter is needed to be used to correct what most reviews and skywatcher says about the scope. 2 ED lens for color correction isn't doing it's job. Something im struggling more considering I also image with a samyang 135 with a similar sort of lens and don't get anything such as this in any of my subs. That's why I'm struggling to brush it aside. I can agree it's definitely the hotter stars that it happens on as it's very well balanced for m31. Ill pull last night's M42 images shortly. Just to confirm as I have two unmodded cameras. An IR/UV filter can still be used? And can I use other filters alongside this?
  8. Yeah. The official one designed for the 62ed. Purchased it from FLO just before the weekend. I havent connected it directly without the FF because I originally used a M42 thread but I should be able to connect the new m48 thread t ring adapter direct to the telescope shouldn't I? I'll try that tonight and hopefully find a gap in the clouds. I am hesitant to think it's the FF though as both the old and the new produce the same effect and I can discount the cameras as they're perfect on the 135mm.
  9. Thank you! Heres a pic of ones before I purchased the SW field flattener with the astronomics M48 adapter. I haven't stacked any because I discounted them as any form of useable data. The images on the camera are identical to this one taken on the original Stella Mira field flattener on the 62ed. So you can get a general idea I'll post up the latest single subs alittle later when I'm back home Both my cameras (600d and 250d) are not modded and should still have the IR/UV cut filter attached. Therefore the filter wouldn't have that much of an impact? Or am I reading this incorrectly? What bothers me is no review I have read have mentioned about the scope suffering from chromatic aberration and shows crisp color corrected stars. But I most definitely not seeing this. So I'd like to discount any potential issue with the scope
  10. Hey folks! First time here because I'm at my wit's end. I've been amatuer imaging for about 2 years new. Mostly with camera and lens (50mm the 135mm etc) and finally decided to upgrade some gear to get serious into the hobby. Back in August I decided to buy the Evolux 62ed to go with the SWSA GTi. But I've had nothing but problems since and the disappointment is really grating me. Nothing like the reviews and various YouTube videos praising the scope. I first started with a cheaper Stella Mira field flattener because of budgeting issues and my first image showed very strong blue stars. I asked and researched and everything was pointing to the field flattener. I gave up for a few months until I could afford the official SW field rotator. Which I purchased last week. It turned up yesterday so I eagerly when out to a Crisp night sky last night. Reset up back up. Target: M42, Kept to a 19second exposure. Iso 800 on an unmodded canon 250D Only to find Blue stars.. again! I'm at a loss. None of the reviews state anything about the scope suffering from chromatic aberration and even more so with the 62ed lens when combined with the field flattener and state color corrected pinpoint stars when used together. Or should I contact FLO to have the scope checked? Perhaps a filter would resolve it? once I've downloaded the images off the camera I'll post them up
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.