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_beauty_night_skies.thumb.jpg.2711ade15e31d01524e7dc52d15c4217.jpg

nmoushon

Members
  • Content Count

    1,857
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

311 Excellent

4 Followers

About nmoushon

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
  1. Check out a new thread HERE over on CN. Getting some very interesting results. Its looking to be very comparative to the 8300 ccd sensor and even beating it in some aspects. Me personally I would rather go with the 1600 over the 8300. But once you start getting to better sensor than the 8300 the 1600 drops off pretty quick. But this is just the beginning of a CMOS era.
  2. Anything. If you are getting guiding soon use this time to practice. Spend some time on any type of target you think you would like and get at least 4-6hrs of data on it. Then practice processing. You will only need better processing skills with longer subs. Just pull up stellarium and pick something that will be easy to find and image.
  3. I think dan might be bring up the point that you can make a master file for your darks, bias, flats that will really really help cut down on the size and time for DSS to stack. This would be to stack them separately without any lights to create a single file. Kind of like how you where wanting to do it in your OP for lights. It works for these and not lights because they your are not trying to pull data out of them but to take the anomalies/unwanted parts out of the lights.
  4. I was saying which was better. Sorry for any confusion.
  5. Put each night in its own group (lights, darks, bias, flats). So you will have 5 groups before you start stacking. DSS will stack each group separately then combine then.
  6. Part of me says it should matter and part of me says it should.... When I think about that it should I compare it to looking through the EP. When I compare looking through my ED80 and 9.25"HD, even with tracking on, the object in my EP in my SCT will eventually drift out of view. It takes a while but I can notice. Maybe my PA is off but it can't be that bad. But when I think that it shouldn't I compare it to a tire. If you take a point at the center and take any two point along the same line(one at the edge and one at the middle) the move at the same rate all the way around the tire. Now both those require a constant movement and guiding is not a constant movement since it corrects for any errors. I agree with a point in vlaiv suggestion and that it depends on the mount. So if you taking guiding out of the equation and human error and have a 100% perfect PA then theoretically you would not need guiding at any FL and would have perfect stars at any FL and any exposure length. So I would lean more towards that it doesnt matter in theory but with different mounts and guiding it might actually help to have different speeds...but I dont know how to confirm or deny that. Or it could be that my anologies are a complete cluster *#)@* and I'm just making thing more confusing lol. Edit: Added more to clarify.
  7. After doing AP for several years I have made the switch to observing full time. I have been enjoying getting use to the change and seeing everything I imaged the past show up in the EP. But now that I have gone through the winter and we are not heading into galaxy season the number of objects that are bright enough to pass through my horrid LP as slimming very fast. I was looking at getting a filter to help cut the LP but noticed there are A LOT of different filters for observing and not sure which is best. My budget only allows for me to buy 1 filter so I know that some filter will allow for better viewing of certain objects more than others but I will just have to compromise. I'm not picky on brands and that it has to be the best quality or for certain wavelengths. I'm just looking for a good over all filter that will help be cut through my LP. Any suggestions and experiences are greatly welcomed. Thanks. Edit: Oh and to note my current scope I'm using the most for observing is my 9.25"HD with a .63x reducer and 2" EPs not sure if that makes any difference but might as well make it known.
  8. Not sure what your question is. Are you asking about is that scope works well with a DSLR?
  9. I love my Equinox ED80 for both visual and AP. Great views and well corrected. But for visual only its going to be very underwhelming for you since you are comparing it to your 200mm newt. Both scopes will be just because of aperture loss. Have you looked at the new achros at all? The newer ones are very well corrected for the most part and offer a lot more aperture for the price. Are you replacing your Newt because you are tired of traveling with it because of how large it is or are you trying to lighten the weight on your mount?
  10. I totally read right over where you said you took some short one. Sorry about that. I guess it looks even brighter than normal on my screen. Maybe because its just in Ha that it seems so bright and once (if) you do other filters it will be just fine.
  11. My first thought would be to go smaller pix camera but as pipnina said a barlow could possibly do a similar job. If your intent is to use it for small targets like galaxies and PNs I think it could work. Just as long as the barlow plays nice with the rest of the optics. If you dont want to go that route then I would at least give moving the camera a try. It might disrupt your set up for a while but at least you wont be out any money. I think from there you would have a better judgement as to what you would need to do (new camera or new scope).
  12. You have gotten some really sharp resolution in the nebulae! You have also dont superb in controlling the core even though you use 10min exposures. Great image! I will add a bit of critic though if you dont mind :)... I think if you threw in some short subs for the core and masked those in I think you would be able to pull out even greater contrast for the outer edges while sharpening up the center trap.
  13. Fantastic set of galaxies! Great detail for the short subs and horrid LP.
  14. I thought you got a new one...I guess not though. Where you testing one maybe? Maybe my brain is just to confused. Olly's image is exactly why I love galaxies! Just hope one day I can get something even remotely comparable to that.
  15. Hey! No galaxy bashing. They are my favorite objects to image. I'm sure your new Avalon mount could hold a very nice long focal length scope you could switch out your itty bitty little one for lol Just kidding. I love yours and Olly's wide fov shots. The mosaics you two put together are stunning. Can't wait to see how this one comes together....if Olly doesnt find another target to get sidetracked on lol.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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