ollypenrice

I think that's one reason why it's so good at describing the universe. However, it strikes me that maths's ability describe the universe is really a very deep mystery, one which should never be underestimated. Is it powerful because the universe is 'mathematical' or is it powerful because we can understand mathematical descriptions? (Or some of us can and some of those people are kind enough to translate those explanations for me.🤣) And would we even be able to interact with a non-mathematical universe? Can a non-mathematical entity interact with a mathematical environment? Perhaps it can't, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Olly PS I'm perfectly sober. Just not very bright.

The case for starting with a daytime camera for astrophotography has never been weaker than it is today. Just be sure you really want to go that way rather than for a cooled CMOS astro camera. Dual use may be very important to you but, if it isn't, CMOS astro cameras are more affordable than ever. Olly

It would be interesting to come back to this thread in 25 years because, if we look back 25 years, I don't think the premium scopes would have such a hard time distinguishing themselves. That's because the budget scopes have improved so spectacularly. Digital imaging has raised the bar in terms of expectation, imagers wanting faster F ratios, wider corrected fields, better and more extended colour correction and load-bearing focusers. But, for a visual observer, how much better than a Skywatcher ED100 is it possible for any 4 inch refractor to be? There is, quite simply, not much room for improvement. A little, yes. Similarly, by how much can a Takahashi six inch be better than an Esprit 6 inch? £5K versus £13K. 25 years from now, will the Tak-equivalent products be reduced to the product-for-product's-sake end of the market now occupied by Questar? Questar don't make telescopes, they make 'collectibles.' Olly

Ah, now there you have the perfect excuse for pride! No question about that. There's a big difference between a daughter and a telescope... lly

Confession: I've always struggled with the word pride. I never use it and would not admit to it even if I felt it! Well, there is one exception to 'never.' I had a student once who overcame difficulties, not of their own making, and I feel an irrational pride in that student and always will. I could empathize with 'Embarrassment of ownership' for sure, but certainly not with 'Pride of ownership.' The very idea makes me want to hide under the sink! Olly

That's a crafty idea. Olly

Good background and good colour are critical on an image like this and you have them. Olly

The Questar is surely made for the astronomical equivalent of the jewelry market, no? I doubt anyone buys them to use, though having bought them, they may use them. It seems to me that it's an exercise in design and that its appeal lies there. It happens to be a telescope, if you like, but it could be a watch... Olly

Some people certainly just desire expensive, well-made stuff for its own sake, and we live in a world in which this is encouraged. How else would we explain the existence of the Rolex watch? While I disapprove of this, or like to think I do 😁, I'm mighty glad that these people feed the second hand market with premium kit at prices I can afford. One thing I know I don't do is buy them to impress, since I find myself embarrassed by them and am always quick to point out that all my 'luxury items' were second hand. Why do I have a Tak FSQ106N and a TEC140? - Because they take better pictures. They just do. (Especially on large format cameras and in natural colour imaging.) - They say that I'm serious about what I offer. I won't dwell on this because it is essentially commercial but you'll see my point. - They last longer and don't fall to bits in commercial use. (Some scopes do. Trust me. I've had several.) Visually, are they worth it? Neurologists now consider the eye to be part of the brain, meaning that the eye has an intimacy with the self unparalleled by any other part of the body. Tiny increments in quality touch on this intimacy and are of huge, even paramount, importance to some. I'm one of those people. My specs are always clean, my motorcycle visor likewise and both are scrapped if scratched. My car has a clean windscreen. Bad optics are abominable! It's a curse. 🤣 Olly Note on the TEC140: this was most certainly a 'budget premium refractor' when introduced, let's remember. It was way cheaper than Tak or AP. The fact that this has been forgotten indicates that it's reputation has risen on merit. That's rather nice, I think.

Thanks for this great info. Olly

I seem to think my 10 inch didn't have a removable arm so I spread the forks slightly with a scissor jack (recommended on the net but don't go mad!!!) to slide out the tube. Don't try it single handed, though, as I did. Far better to have two or even three people standing by. Tube and fork were fine. Olly

You'd need supernatural seeing to image at 0.67"PP and a guide RMS of half that, so about 0.3 arcsecs. This is possible with premium mounts but a good EQ6 runs around 0.5. Again, that's a good one. I would use the guide trace and not the round stars test since equally bad tracking on both axes will give round stars! Pixels are becoming so small these days that many of us are finding that binning them is the only way to get a sane sampling rate. With CMOS cameras that means software binning after capture. I image small targets with a TEC 140 refractor and Atik 460 CCD giving about 0.9"PP, but Vlaiv has given a convincing demonstration (on my data) that this is still over sampled. I like the images but could get away with less than the TEC's 1 metre FL. Examples: https://www.astrobin.com/full/419975/0/ https://www.astrobin.com/full/342334/0/ Olly

That's very kind of you Malcolm, and a big help. Thanks. Olly

Handset control of my 14 inch LX200 GPS is not giving workable Go To so I was thinking about controlling it via a PC planetarium to see if that worked better. Anyone doing this? If so, what planetarium do you use and do you have any tips on the setup, cables etc? Thanks, Olly

If you want to go all the way, these are the volumes you need: https://www.amazon.com/Night-Sky-Observers-Guide-Vol/dp/0943396581 https://www.amazon.com/Observers-Kepple-George-Robert-Hardcover/dp/B010WF4B34 However, they cover many objects which require a large aperture at a very dark site so they may be overkill. Wonderful books, though, and well bound, which is important. Olly

Filters which behave as you describe are interferomtric and reflect the wavelengths not wanted. The cheaper filters work by absorption and are not as good. I think that if you look at natural daylight through your filters, while excluding ambient light from getting to the back surface, you'll see the colour you'd expect to see. Obviously, don't look at the sun. They should be good filters. Olly

The combination of Kodak 11 meg chip and Takahashi FSQ106 probably has more APODS than any other single pairing. It works at 3.5 arcsecs per pixel. You're fine. Olly

Dear boy, it cuts the nose off the wine! Unthinkable!! lly

The golden rule of camping is to remember that any fool can be uncomfortable. Even on six week long cycle tours my camping was in comfort. Good mountain tent, the right clothes, Thermarest mat and seat-converter and (very important) a glass drinking vessel for the wine! lly

Tal 115 Newtonian. Olly

Looking out into space at any one moment is like looking at a random crowd of people. You'll see everything from small babies, via toddlers to adolescents, the middle aged and the elderly. Olly

I tried to learn one of those 'bottom to top' languages but it was an uphill struggle... With an unfamiliar OSC camera, and stacking in AstroArt, it's a matter of seconds to try all the Bayer permutations. The right one is pretty obvious. (That's how I discovered that the Veil is really turquoise and orange.) lly

Do you need to take them in this software? Why not simply do them manually with just the camera? Use the camera histogram to find exposure settings which put the histogram peak about a third of the way between left and right and shoot a set. As long as the files are shot in the same format as was used for the lights I can't see what difference it would make. Software has an irritating habit of thinking it knows more about what you want to do than you do. Olly

Certainly, over time - but probably over timescales far beyond a human lifespan. Examples: The Pleiades are drifting through a region of gas and dust, lighting it with their own emission which will move as they do. Planetary nebulae often show a greenish outer shell of doubly ionized oxygen (greenish-blue) which forms first, with an inner region of reddish ionized hydrogen forming later. When do you catch this process? Sooner or later? That will decide what you see. As galaxies age they run out of material to create new stars, so they redden. You'll often see spiral galaxies showing Walter Baader's distinction between old 'Population 2' red stars in their central bulge with hot, young blue stars in their spiral arms.... ...but old, evolved elliptical galaxies, possible created in galaxy mergers, have only the old, evolved red stars... So changes in form and colour are a routine part of the evolution of the universe but a human life is trivially short in this context. Even so, I think such evolution can sometimes be photographed. Olly

I had one like yours, bought on a trip to the USA, and still have another. Very useful. A nice simple 'quick reference and computer-free' device to get you orientated with none of that infuriating clicking, dragging, updating and general faffing associated with IT planetaria. Of course the IT planetaria are great for detailed stuff but if you want to sit down in the afternoon and look ahead, grab a planisphere and the appropriate volume of https://www.ebay.fr/itm/The-Night-Sky-Observers-Guide-Autumn-Winter-1-de-Livre-/124991170710?var=0&mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=709-53476-19255-0&campid=5338666530&toolid=10044&customid=CjwKCAiAv_KMBhAzEiwAs-rX1GsANBjGX_hm5nc6ul6pa4GBwW_nfV30EqcSfnAbZZddv0MtO1R_pRoCFfcQAvD_BwE&gclid=CjwKCAiAv_KMBhAzEiwAs-rX1GsANBjGX_hm5nc6ul6pa4GBwW_nfV30EqcSfnAbZZddv0MtO1R_pRoCFfcQAvD_BwE ...and enjoy your afternoon. While doing so you can put your smartphone where it belongs - in a bucket of water! lly