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.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Aenima

  1. Aenima


    From the album: Venture in widefield.

    Cygnus area, slight nebulosity and milky way showing up.

    © Aenima

  2. Aenima

    ngc7000 crop

    From the album: Venture in widefield.

    Testing the D3100 on a emission nebula, quite a bit of h-a red for unmodded Dslr. Probably worth taking more care with capture and processing next time. 10x2min EQ5/D3100

    © Aenima

  3. Aenima


    From the album: Venture in widefield.

    Constellation: Cassiopeia Stationary tripod, 7x13sec D3100/55-200mm

    © Aenima

  4. Aenima


    Annnd another image to look back on and realise how bad it is. At first these bright large objects looked to be easy targets but since discovered they are much less forgiving of small errors in tracking and processing.
  5. Cheers! is it a modified tiff like once you save it its no longer original? or modified as in pixinsight uses slightly different tiff? not sure on the meaning there.... But thanks for the info - I mainly use tiff cos the whole fits compatibility issues bug me, and there's only a limited number of reasons to include that amount of information in a picture of stars. Regards Aenima
  6. Hehe, yes the updates are very much appreciated. Thanks. Aside from ps versus pi - I am neutral here - the price does seem a little high but considering the amount you pay for, say, a decent camera or coma corrector to improve your images , the software at the end of the process is equally capable and worth investing in. I'm lucky enough to have the Sky at night coverdisc copy of serif Photoplus 10 (early in 2012) which keeps on surprising me at its ability to replicate almost everything that expensive layerbased editors like PS can do, and all it cost me was the magazine price and a phonecall to retrieve my passcode! I have a mate who has the bells n whistles software including a 64bit system (only dual core though) and processing on that is only a slight improvement on my 32bit machine with serif's photoplus 10 running. Something tells me things will get a little more strained with pixinsight though and while i'm free most days to use the better machine I like to have my images on my own laptop and play about on it too. Maybe I can 'hop' over to another laptop for PI tasks and then back to my own for capture/guiding and storage etc.? From program to program 'hopping' is there a good and bad way to store/save images so that compression and compatibility problems are minimised? Again, thank you for all the input guys Regards Aenima
  7. Thats cool, let me know how you get on Regards Aenima
  8. Many thanks for the link - there is much at the other end of interest, and some very good pictures I think while deepskystacker is a very good and intuitive program and being freeware I can't thank the developer(s) enough for the time and effort spent on it, it does however have a limit for those who dont know enough about the technical side to get the best from the software and data - it has much more capability than I am currently getting from it, but perhaps pixinsight is similar in that way? I might not be able to figure it out, or use it well enough to take my images any further than what Ive managed in DSS - plus there may also be the limits imposed by my capture equipment : An aging 300d - this gives deepskystacker trouble in the form of noise and lines or patterns which end up in the images, can pixinsight cope with the older camera issues? and maybe the tracking or collimation problems also? Its more and more obvious as time goes by that my scope is in need of a coma-corrector, and then there is the tracking/guiding etc. which is dealt with by an interesting part of the PI toolbox, 'deconvolution' - is it really that good with star shapes and correcting problems caused by bad collimation? I think there are a few programs that use it, but none of them appear any easier to use. My set-up has more problems that need ironing out than my brain can get a grip on all at once so it's one step at a time right now. I appreciate the info on the pixinsight program and its pro's n con's, and am intending to gather a little more wherewithal prior to downloading the trial version - make the most of the time-limit, if possible on old and new data Thanks again. Regards Aenima
  9. Yeah, really good to see the right number of diffraction spikes Malc, and you can now continue observing and imaging again with none of the messing about with collimation or spidervanes etc. Great news. Regards Aenima
  10. Aenima

    wizard nebula

    From the album: The next step.

    Quite a difficult target apparently, as I spent ages capturing, and put time into processing but nowhere near what I was hoping for. Clearly this needs much longer subs and a coma corrector would help, plus much better processing skills. Maybe another time.

    © Aenima

  11. Has anyone had success on a dual core 64bit machine, with 2g ram? Its likely the most resource i'm gonna get for a while, if its not enough then its probably best to look for a better laptop first. Regards Aenima ps I havent used nebulosity so dont really follow the comparison but im guessing its another program that has very different styles to stacking or layer based stuff?
  12. Thanks for the info regarding 32bit systems. recently my laptop is more and more bogged down by the astro image storage and processing and its age is getting quite noticeable. My friend has a 64 bit dual core, with about 2 gig ram, which I would be able to use for pix insight - though it is old and less powerful than the software min requirements, I might get away with it by only using it for PI stuff while keeping the rest of my data and software on the older laptop, but I think the system will still struggle with the program. i know the best way to find out is the trial period download, but it's good to be prepared prior to starting so the trial isn't wasted. im very grateful for the responses and info posted here and will follow up after trying the program for the purpose of giving my opinion and sharing how I got on in case it helps other potential pixinsight users in the future. many thanks, regards Aenima
  13. Both fingers and a couple of toes crossed for luck, malc. Be great to see you post a picture with four spikes Regards Aenima
  14. Ah, slight size difference by look of it but not sure what the crop # factor means in terms of comparison to average chip size, I take it the 'crop' is related to the FOV and the edges of the image rather than the sensor itself (being cropped )). The full frame ones would be the more expensive types I'd imagine, as both the 300D and d3100 are budget models really - just quite a difference in age. HOT yes, very very very very. O.o Regards Aenima
  15. The non-vr model is slightly different in construction but not much, it came up at a good price at a good time, in great condition so I can live without VR Regards Aenima
  16. ANOTHER clear night..? The weather is unusually generous right now. :)

  17. The VR option is only on the 18-55mm which was part of the kit - the 55-200mm is the pre-VR version but still pretty similar, fast auto-focus sharp and lightweight I like it already. Cheers for the heads-up on the VR switch on tripods (mine will be used piggybacked on the EQ5), Regards Aenima
  18. Cheers Peter, appreciate the info and suggestions, I have used stellarium FOV but mostly to work out the 200p / canon 300D sensor fov, not sure how accurate it is as I dont recall specifying primefocus but its still quite a close match using the sensor specs and focal length (1000mm) but with the lenses - yet again - i'm much less familiar with the numbers involved. I keep reading that the d3100 - DX ? - has a smaller than normal chip, but the specsheet gives the size as bigger than the 300D sensor, maybe the canon has a smaller chip too? But yeah I now have the AF-S 55-200mm nikkor to go with the 18-55 AF-S (VR) kit lens that came with the d3100 so its quite a range covered with those two, when I figure out using a mini-bahtinov or focus mask for cameras the modded 300D can be used for nebulous areas. Thanks for the tips, Regards Aenima
  19. Thank you Moo Moo, I have one of those remotes for my 300D but have yet to receive the one I ordered from ebay for the Nikon. I like the idea of the decent prime lens but something like 50mm doesn't sound like it has much magnification to it. I have bought a cheap 135mm prime soligor but dont expect too much from it as it was very cheap, but worth a try. Probably the shorter focal lengths would work for capturing the milky way or whole constellations but I want to aim for a closer shot at the larger deep sky objects and stuff that my reflector is too powerful to frame nicely. Although its hard to judge the FOV even in a scope, which i'm used to so lenses give me extra trouble trying to figure it out. For the time being Im happy with my 18-55mm AF-S and 55-200mm AF-S as the camera works well with the CPU lenses, otherwise I'm just gonna experiment with some cheap n cheerful primes or old m42 lenses until I got a better idea of what I'm doing with this whole widefield thing.. Much appreciative for the advice btw. Regards Aenima
  20. I just find it confusing (o.O), along with most other things that cameras do 9 elements in groups of ...... yeah well, point is i'm still getting the hang of it so one of those 'for dummies' explanations will work nicely. I have found an auto focus 55-200mm version of the one I have now which together with normal daylight stuff will be a good start, and a random 135mm soligor prime lens cheap off ebay in case it does something the zooms dont (shrug) for just over a tenner anything it does will be a bonus Thanks for the tips and explanations guys, its funny how astrophoto is said to be difficult but I have no trouble with pictures of planets or objects light years away, but when I put a lens on and take it off bulb mode POOF goes any clue I might have about how the things work. Baby steps.... Regards Aenima
  21. OK, thanks. For some reason I assumed the focus modes were purely for the camera to figure out the autofocus. Otherwise, ive no idea what the settings do or how to use them, or even what difference the settings will make to the focus if they dont actually control the lens...(?) The way the sensor gathers light? or something..? Aenima ps. the infinity comment was someone else but thought you might know
  22. Can I ask if these focus settings are purely for auto-focus or does it change other things - sorry, very very new to the (non-scope photography) subject? Also, sorry again, but in the above mention of the lens stopping short of infinity focus in manual - how does autofocus make it go further? i mean wouldn't the lens turn as far as you want in manual mode? Thanks, Aenima
  23. Quite a bit better when stacked 4 or 5 high. Regards Aenima the dark bit is a roof.
  24. Thanks Callum, yes those stars look better - it might be picky of me but the way I judge the focus is to take a fast exposure of a star and zoom in the preview to see if its round, flared or ring shaped like unfocused telescope shows. But it doesnt seem to matter when zoomed back out again. The lens still cant quite reach sharpness on things like trees in the distance, but who wants pictures of trees anyway? Probably going to keep it, after the last session gave me some results I really like, thats the main thing. I appreciate the link, and suggested lens to look out for. Regards, Aenima
  25. Thank you. I'm wanting to try both to be honest, which is why the zooms appeal to me - they give flexibility to framing obects and if needed Zooming in on them. I did try my 28-100mm again last night but this time stopped the F number up (or is it down??) from fully open f5.6, to f8 and lowered ISO a few notches compensating by longer exposures and it made quite a difference. I also made sure to turn the focus ring to the end and let go of it carefully - its quite easy to turn - so it stayed where it was. I had been trying the back a bit thing, or just letting go caused it to 'settle' just short of the end. But the main thing was with the f/8 and longer exposures the stars looked round. Coma was present and it actually added to the 'donut' shape in extreme cases as the seagull 'wing' shape would kind of close on itself to make nearly a ring. Here's what I mean: If I had those star shapes in my telescope or camera attached to the scope it would indicate bad focus as well as coma due to the stars having dark dots in the middle. Out of focus stars are ring shaped, but with lenses i'm not sure if this is the case - the 'wings' of coma seem to give it a dark centre especially on close inspection. But pulling back the zoom and f/stop and exposing for longer reduces this effect by loads. Now I can't complain about this result! Slight crop but taken about 66mm/ISO400 and exposed for 3 mins approx. The coma and ring shapes dont seem to be noticeable at this f/length - I might be able to get pinpoint stars with a better lens but this certainly looks ok to my eyes Regards Aenima.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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