knobby

Done ... twice 🙂

A poor sky at night is better than no sky at night 🙂

If it's an older Altair GpCam you'll need an older version of Sharpcap for it to be recognised ...

Not sure on your mount but with an AZ-GTI you can use the Synscan pro app and phd2 over WiFi.

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

Never fully understood this stance.

Color is what it is - take an object and image of that object and look at them and if color is the same - it is proper color rendition, if it is not the same - color is off, simple as that.

Fact that we can't take Jupiter and place it next to our image of Jupiter does not change the fact that Jupiter has certain color and we should be able to capture it properly. Take two images of Jupiter and if you process color properly - they should look the same color wise - have same hue, same saturation, etc ...

We don't even have issue of lighting here - planets are always illuminated with same light source and we know spectrum of that light source.

 

I guess I was thinking more along the lines of different monitors / eyes, I'm sure every planetary image starts off fairly washed out till we adjust saturation etc. hence the personal taste bit.

Oooh, I'd check collimation first then. Looks very weird.

Interesting ... difficult to say without seeing it, no harm checking collimation though, I need to check mine too.

Nice result, the colour is down to personal taste I guess, I use auto colour in PS6 ... this is how your Saturn turns out.

I could be wrong but if you look at recent images of Mars it appears to have a phase ... its being side illuminated as it's so far after sunset, a bit like a 3/4 Moon.

Might be what you're seeing.

Not ideal but still doable, manged these when close to the Moon recently.

Last night's Saturn ...

More detail than I've managed ! But then your scopes bigger than my scope 😄

Sorry for your loss, but I'm sure he'll be chuffed you are making use of his (your) gear. As already said you need a diagonal between scope and eyepiece. Lovely equipment list there ! Your Dad chose well 👍🏼

Welcome Martin, it's great to see a new member posting positive / useful information.

Wishing you clear skies.

Sorry 🙂 this made me laugh ...

Might be worth a shout ! London too ... https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=164193

Or Chelmsford https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=164179 newer and cheaper !

Then look out for a mount ?

Hi Michael, love the framing on the Neowise shot !

Essex section is very quiet but does get busier when it gets dark earlier ... hopefully.

2 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Well, I was supposed to have moved to a new house by now together with obsy under dark(er) skies and all - but you know, this year has been tough on all I guess.

Build of my new house not started yet due to all this covid stuff - just some ground preparation works done. I took another project to be able to fund all of that so there is also lack of time for astronomy ... On top of all of that, I'm now in my 10th day of covid infection - luckily both wife and I have rather mild cases, still plenty of rest is needed (and self imposed quarantine as well).

 

So sorry ... @vlaivSending best wishes and virtual hugs from the UK to you and your wife

Try manual and set exposure gradually faster til details appear. 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/303607598518

Sorry mate, never easy saying goodbye but you'll always remember when you look up 👍🏼

On 23/07/2020 at 19:52, andrew s said:

I think it does hold up quite well . I will try to find the published research papers I read some years ago that supported this view. Do you know of any pubished evidence against it or have you perhaps studied it?

On comparing refractors and reflectors I think you need to look at why the best planetary images are from those terrible SCTs. Yes you need a larger reflector to give the same resolution as a refractor that's physics and well understood.  It is interesting aside to note P Lowell tended to stop down the 24" refractor for his observations.

On resolution, while the resolution limit is a convention it applies to reflectors and refractors alike. Physics limits what can be seen even if you don't  belive it. Small telescope have a more limited resolution than larger ones (assuming any central obstruction is accounted for correctly). There is no magic in optics.

I never claimed telescopes produced a pixelated image just used that as an example of where we tend to prefer small and sharp as to large and more blured. Just as you find a natural preferred magnification not too high and not too low.

So I have bitten back😜

Regards Andrew

PS I have tried to track down the papers I read years ago but it was in the age  of getting paper copies via the library! However, the Fried parameter is alive and well and the following might be worth a look.

https://www.telescope-optics.net/induced.htm

https://www.handprint.com/ASTRO/seeing1.html https://www.handprint.com/ASTRO/seeing2.html https://www.handprint.com/ASTRO/seeing3.html

and references their in.

Simple view here https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-equipment/beating-the-seeing/#:~:text=So will every other telescope,after bringing a telescope outdoors.

Most modern references concentrate on adaptive optics but the Fried parameter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_parameter )  still persists.

Really interesting read 👍🏼

Can you test the power supply / lead with a 12v bulb ? Be careful though ... Don't short anything.

Really no expert but my 2p worth ... looks like guide speed is too low ? takes a long time to correct errors.

Very nice !