Chris

Thanks for sharing such an incredible telescope experience. It really is a beast!

I enjoyed reading that, thanks Stu! All I can say is good old long focus achromats

A week or two back I attempted 5 minute unguided subs with the following rig - StellaMira 90 EDT with 0.8 Reducer Flattener, working at 432mm focal length, 2.29"/seconds with the Fuji XT1 onboard the iOptron GEM45 mount.

I marvelled that I could get 5 minute unguided subs, however after discussion with Vlaiv and others I plugged the subs into CCDInspector to check the FWHM readings and it turned out that there was a around 1-2 pixel width of wobble on the exposures because the FWHM was reading 5-6"/pixel. Still remarkable and the picture of the California nebula looked detailed to my eyes. 

This week I thought I would take this one step further and I ended up taking 8 x 8 minute unguided subs on the Monkey head Nebula in Orion. Again I was working at 2.29"/seconds and plugging the subs into CCD inspector revealed a very similar 6"/seconds average which matches iOptrons <7"/second claim for this mount.

With 8 minute exposures we must have completed at least one rotation of the mounts worm gear so in theory you could expose as long as you want with a short apo as long as you can accept 6"/seconds. To be fair the image looks detailed enough for social media to my eyes but you probably wouldn't get away with blowing it up for a print. 

Here is the FWHM chart for the 8 minute subs, plus a PNG of the Monkey Head nebula, and a short video documenting the night. 

Monkey head nebula with the StellaMira 90 EDT and 0.8 RF.

8 x 8 minute exposures with a stock Fuji XT1 camera and Optolong L-eNhance filter.  

Alnitak is always a problem child with this shot but you've captured some very nice detail in the HH and flame. Very nice! 

10 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Well done Chris.

I especially admire your positive can do attitude. And your vids, of course.

Keep it up 👍🏻

Hey Jeremy, thank you! I'm too addicted to stop  

2 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

Well done on your 10k. Quality posts too 👍

Thanks Michael, much obliged  

3 hours ago, John said:

Congratulations on both milestones Chris

Many thanks for all your contributions to SGL - please keep it up !

Many thanks John, and I'm sure I speak for all when I say likewise

2 hours ago, Saganite said:

Well done Chris and congratulations on all counts.  Here's to the next ten years...👍🍷

Thank you Steve  Cheers! 

2 hours ago, jock1958 said:

Congratulations Chris and thanks for all your wisdom and excellent videos! 

Cheers Jock, and we're all still leaning everyday which is of course one of the fun bits : )

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Well done and thanks from me too Chris. Some excellent videos and lots of great posts. Here’s to the next 10k! 👍👍

Much appreciated Stu, Cheers!  

1 hour ago, Pete Presland said:

Congratulations on both milestones Chris  🙂 

Thanks Pete! and I just noticed that it wont be long before you hit 30k!  

33 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

Congratulations, 10,000 posts in 10 years is very neat.
I see you would now be a 'Bright Giant', if they were still doing such things.

Cheers! Those designations were fun so it's a bit of a shame they went. Although, I did notice plenty of occasions where folks got the designation mixed up with  members name. 

41 minutes ago, RobertI said:

Fab Chris! Congratulations and glad we have your enthusiasm and experience here on SGL. I joined in October 2011 - must have been a good year for Astronomy.

Thanks Rob and likewise! Your posts are always wise and engaging.....no pressure though  

1 hour ago, F15Rules said:

Well done Chris, and congratulations also on your new role with FLO, hope it's been a good move for you!

Dave

Thanks Dave yes it really has been an good move, and I'm very lucky to be able to work within the astronomical community! I still need to pinch myself sometimes! 

I've just checked and I made my first post here on SGL in September 2011, and I'm about to make my 10,000th post as soon as I hit the enter key!

It's been 10 years of hanging out with a great bunch of folks. I joined the forum as an Astronomy graduate so thought I new it all at the time and quickly realised I knew very little . 

You lot have taught me a great deal over the years, and it's fair to say this forum has kept me sane through some challenging times!

So a big thank you from me! and I hope for many more years and posts on SGL.  

On 01/01/2022 at 11:34, glafnazur said:

Thanks Chris, I enjoyed that. I managed to get all 15 but I have an advantage as I've been quizmaster for the Derby & District Astronomical Society for a few years now and I've posed many of these questions myself at sometime  

15/15 is still impressive all the same  

Just a bit of fun to see in the new year, and wishing everyone clearer skies for 2022!

I would like to do more astronomy with my kids in 2022, I feel they're at a good age for it now and If it sparks something great, if not fair enough

Also, I should really continue my mirror grind project that has been shelved for a about 3 years so far!...  

35 minutes ago, tomato said:

SBIG were one of the pioneers, still have my ST-4 from their first production run, but you rarely see their cameras mentioned on SGL now.

We used SBIG cameras at Uni, circa 2000 ish, and I don't think they were new cameras then so they must have been making cameras in the 90's. 

I seem to recall a model with a second sensor on camera for guiding?...I don't think I dreamt that part. 

Anyone else got butterflies!? I think it will be ok unless there's lightning. 

I've always wondered why they didn't make a mono version so very welcome news. 

A mono ASI533, imagine how clean and sensitive that will be!   

2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Not sure what is happening - but whenever you attach a crop - it is always very small and not zoomed in

 

I'll leave it there I think. I won't subject you to the size of the 1600% crop!  

This is 800% according to GIMP. Probably in the ball park of your 400% but we're really pixel peeping now  

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

For some reason - that does not look like 100% zoom - it looks more like 100% zoom?

Here is what I get when zooming in to 400% on one of subs you attached above:

That is quite a bit of difference in zoom level.

Maybe software? I'm zooming to 400% in GIMP and cropping to the field of view before exporting.