alan potts

I don't have the CEM 25 but the CEM 60, I'm impressed with the finish and attention to detail which I feel will be to the same level on the CEM25 model, a cut above the finish on my AZ EQ 6.

Alan

Is this the right room for an argument? Lovely capture though I may have seen this somewhere before.

Alan

15 hours ago, Laurin Dave said:

That’s very nice Alan.. wondering whether your low black level is causing you to lose some of the Nebulosity.  Maybe a closer crop and less clipping would show more?

Dave

I may well try to add to the amount of subs, I only really tried it because I thought it would be something that may well be a problem from England, though Francis managed it pretty well. There are some nasty blotches from dust if I lift the background and I preferred not to show it, for sure this has lost some of the fainter stuff. I will try to add to it tonight as weather is set clear for a few more days. It is a target that I can only get onto for about 90 mins due to trees. Tried some more Flats and Dark Flats last night, I don't really see where I am going wrong there. Not a problem I have had before.

Alan

I have to confess I didn't know this was the Helix nebular, well you learn something every day.  the guide wasn't very good this low and the stars ar a bit out of shape, I could try to edit the subs and add some more captures to the stack.

Alan

15 hours ago, astro mick said:

The Helix is really nice Alan,and with proper flats it would lift it no end.

Mick.

I seem to be having problems with flats Mick, don't really know why either, after all they are not that difficult. I am not sure how much of a focus movement means you have to replace, I took these the night after so maybe the day warming up moved focus just a tad but by evening had gone back , expansion and contraction, is that how it works. I haven't moved the camera at all. Just used the white T shirt and light table at 1 second, though before i used 2 seconds, what's the best way?

Will try the Helix, er when I remember where it is.

Alan

I have only just stopped using a 40D, decent camera and easy to use, you can get some nice captures with one.

This is taken with a 40D, 3 hours of mixed exposures.

Alan

It's an interesting image Mick and different to anything else I have seen of late. I don't really understand how to do this narrow band imaging though I am strongly considering buying a duel band filter to bang on my 071 so I will get a little of the effect. These Astrodon filters are mindblowingly expensive and must be good as I have never seen any secondhand. I do rather like your firery cave tilte and capture.

Alan

1 hour ago, fwm891 said:

Nice Alan - Certainly can be seen from the UK (just) - my effort on same earlier this year:

Mixed process APP + PI

 

That's really nice Francis and when I know how low it is here you can only just be above the horizon, your guide looks decent to, I didn't check my subs, some are not very good and used all of them. So much like the Ring isn't it?

Alan

1 hour ago, Filroden said:

It’s nice and subtly processed. You’ve kept it looking natural. 

My only feedback is your smaller stars are square.

I actually wonder if they are indeed stars or some hot pixels that for whatever reason have found there way into the frame, see what you mean though. can't say I noticed when I processed it. Then it could be very low down guiding, not great are they.

I had a closer look at the subs and some are poor and not guided very well in opposing directions but because i have just shot this for mainly UK based people to see I used all the frames, not very easy getting anything this low as I am sure you know Ken, never mind must try harder.

Alan 

Took a shot or two of this, 12 in truth, as it is something that may not be possible from England as it only reaches about 22 degrees above the horizon here and maybe gets over looked, it would also appear my Flats are not taking out the dust and fluff, maybe need redoing. So this is 12 times 4 minute subs on 071 through 805mm APO with Hutech flattener. I have made the sky darker to hide the dust bunnies so I know about that.

I am surprised it came out as well as it has for such a short exposure and as it was so low in the sky.

Feel free to offer advice or just trash it.

Alan

4 minutes ago, Alan White said:

Funnily, the line from @alan potts is a dilemma I am having in another thread.
Is the Paracorr 1 still god chaps?
Not enough funds for a 2 at this time.

Alan,

I did a comparison review in the equipment section about 3 years ago as I had both at the same time. In brief the PC 2 is better but there is not a lot in it, PC2 was better with the Ethos rang as when the PC 1 was marketed the Ethos didn't exist, still very good I would say. The trouble is I think there was actually 3 paracorrs from TV and I had the very first, never been able to substantiate that though.

Alan

13 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Thanks Alan, I will try this- what a difference the Paracorr makes.

I have always said why pay TeleVue money and then put up with coma.

Alan

Match made in heaven, 21mm E and the paracorr. Don't be afraid of going away from the markings for various eyepieces, I actually feel the 31mm Nagler is better a little away from where they say.

Alan

10 minutes ago, Ibbo! said:

Thanks.

Stick with it Alan the more you do the better it gets .

I am only joking really, still learning the new CEM 60 mount and 071 and 183MC, you get better results than the Canon but I find processing a tad different, I'll get there. I also get a bit fed up on one subject matter all night, still it keeps me out of trouble.

Alan.

My son just saw it and said, a word I cannot use follow by your getting very good daddy😎.

Alan

Lovely image Steve works so well in mono, sort of makes want to delete the 3 hours I did with my Canon, which didn't pass muster compared with this. Must try harder.

Alan

3 minutes ago, Rodd said:

When I get home I will post the uncropped version of the HH.  Its MUCH WORSE than Dave's.  I would try more shorter subs, but I do not want to deal with a 1,000 subs.  Been there, done that.  One of the abilities of this camera is to be able to use 10 sec subs in Ha and render a decent stack---but my sky is not conducive to that approach, so the number of subs grows unmanageable. 

Rodd

Not understand it fully I see this almost stops you including a bright star in frame, I too would not wish to take 100's of subs, though some do. One to look out for though sort of pleased mine are not affected. Just wondering how you can really do the HH with out having Alnitak, though you did a nice take on it in my view.

Alan

Good point Alan, careful please Ladies and Gents.

Alan

Great capture, can you believe I aligned on this last night and focused but only a 2 second exposure, so I imagine it would not have been visible, for sure with 4x4 binning of 071, if Halley's had been there I doubt I would see it.

Alan

I did this the other night on a recognisance run and clearly only got part of it, this is a lovely wide field shot of what must be a fairly large object.

Alan

Beautiful image that you have taken there, if you find Olly's post can you put a link on here I couldn't find it.

Alan

11 minutes ago, Gina said:

Too low here too.   May give it a go next year but not sure I can improve on my image from a few years ago.  That latest image is lovely   The earlier one is nice too but I agree that the center is a bit overblown.

Gina, yes the centre is burnt out really, I may have another go at it as I still have the data, I actually just improved the one from the other night getting that hazy layer out of it, I need to get some better Grad tools too, I tend to make my own in PS but they don't seem to work so well now. I feel it is also me needing to get more use to processing data from the 071 and 183, the old Canon seemed so easy.

Alan

I see it now, that would annoy me.

Alnitak is always a little wotsit to deal with in the HH, I was given a way by Olly to remove the various halo's it creates and it worked fairly well. There was a technique by one of the Mod's, Rob but I could never follow it though it appeared to work very well indeed.

Alan

7 hours ago, assouptro said:

Great start with the new mount.

How do you like it so far? I have been following your progress with interest. 

Thanks for sharing 

Bryan

I am pleased with the mount though I have found it a little hard to set the clutches just right, very much a hit and miss affair from what I see. If they are not just so you tend to get a horrible noise and slip, harmless by all accounts but annoying.

Guiding in general with the exact same scope and guide camera is better but maybe not as good as I thought it may be, one member suggested go for a OAG to nail the guiding, I do have one. It is true I have jumped around the sky a fair bit  and imaging low down I don't see it as any better than than AZ EQ 6 was. However higher in the sky last night I was down to 0.22 Sec in DEC and 0.30 in RA, for long periods too, it only came off the rails a bit with very high passing con trails, even then it only dropped to about .7 sec and mainly in RA. Sometimes the AZ wasn't any better than that all night.

I have resisted touching too much as I tend to create my own problems. My next step it to include on the mount a duel rig with either a 70mmED or the 77ED ll Borg that I have as well as the bigger APO. either one was intended to carry the 183MC as camera. On a different matter I am still struggling a little with exact focus using APT though I tend to get reasonable results taking my time, I also feel the i5 laptop could be better as it seems to lock up from time to time. Maybe it's time to get a proper desk top in there with bigger RAM and faster processor.

Alan

Rodd if you have the time can you post something showing this micro lensing you talk about so I can hope to understand it, I have only OSC cameras in the shape of 183 and 071, are they affected too?

Alan