Jump to content

stargazine_ep34_banner.thumb.jpg.28dd32d9305c7de9b6591e6bf6600b27.jpg

bomberbaz

Members
  • Content Count

    3,734
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bomberbaz

  1. Thanks for that, just tried it and it does work without using the menu. Just use the relevent exe. file and it runs.
  2. I tend to use this software for planetary, find it easier than sharpcap. Anyway, fresh install of windows yesterday and when I install the software, it runs for a second then shuts down before I can do anything. I have tried troubleshooting but even in compatibility mode it won't run. Anybody else come across this. TIA Steve
  3. Very good forecast for tomorrow morning although very cold so hopefully well settled skies. So all being well I shall give it a bash and see what's going on.
  4. I am aware of rotating the camera and also about the settings in stellarium but something didn't seem right. I will look again tonight with bins, visual through scope and then with camera to see if I can replicate what I think is happening. Sorry for vagueness but now i am not sure myself. regards
  5. Hello all. I have a SW 130 P-DS and I am using a ZWO 224mc camera to do some basic unguided EV type imaging. (I am really enjoying it too) Anyway, on stellarium when I use the ocular (eyepiece) view to look at an object it shows an view as I would expect, rotated 180 degrees. However when I click on the image sensor frame it shows it unrotated, that is to say how it is seen in the sky, is this right. I would have expected to have an image exactly the same as my eye see's it, rotated 180 degrees. Am I missing something here. EDIT. Come to think of it, the moon was unrot
  6. Thanks for that freddie, some good results there from a few of the contributors, especially @paulobao from Portugal. Also found the thread from @robbieince and his efforts were even more amazing with his Kielder deep field result. Wonder what gear he used, couldn't find that information on report other than camera. KDF report here KDF Report @Davey-T makes a good point, with the advances in modern cameras such as the ZWO 6200 model and a decent apertured ota might be able to yield some good results. Dark, settled skies the key here though. Doubt my outfit would yield anything,
  7. Hello all. I wondered if anyone has ever had a bash at doing something similar to the Hubble deep space image. I realise we don't have anything like the equipment / resolution etc that Hubble has, but would be interested to see what anyone's similar efforts were like.
  8. Following on from earlier discussions and taking on board comments and information given I have got some new and in my eyes, much improved results. I paid particular notice to using the histogram in getting my exposure/gain settings right although I struggled with the mount accuracy earlier on. Other than M82 I didn't try to process too much other than equalising colours, I really am a novice on processing and thinnk I need to spend time watching some videos. As well as the Moon which appears slightly out of focus, we have M31, M34, M81 and best of M82. EDIT. Added the TIF
  9. How do you mean more of an effort, is it getting a bit heavy setting up. I used to have one and grew tired of it, partially due to the weight but also the whole goto aspect. I now use push to for the big dob but still use goto for other aspects of astronomy.
  10. I haven't seen this mount before but on the surface of it, it does sound a very well priced, well thought out and hopefully well constructed bit of kit. Sky-Watcher EQM-35 PRO Go-To Modular Astronomy Mount | First Light Optics It carries slightly more than the EQ5 for imaging (7kg over 6.5kg) and has modified gearing in RA to improve accuracy although they both state within 1 arc-min. The sky at night review makes good reading although I do realise these tend to be glammed up a little Sky-Watcher_EQM-35_review_Sky_at_NightReview.pdf (firstlightoptics.com) That said, if it does
  11. Thank you kindly vlaiv, maybe I am doing a little better than I realised. I shall persevere.
  12. @michael.h.f.wilkinson your results there are kind of what I had in mind my friend, if I could get anywhere near that I would be more than happy. Your holding out a little hope for me, thanks. I have attached my Ring but as A TIF file. Only a stack of 15 x 10 seconds taken in a very windy back garden and when there was a significant amount of wispy cloud in the sky. I know it is pretty poor but it does hold out hope for me. The part processed is just RGB tweaking as it was rather red. Were you using the Pro version of the camera's incidentally? ring part processed.TIF
  13. I was simply wanting to grab some basic images of deep sky objects from my back garden with a short stint of getting the required data without going down the all guided, mega processing, several hours worth of capturing etc and all that malarkey associated with full on imaging. This has always been my intention. And to be fair, other than the star bloating I was very happy with my first bash at M57 the other night.
  14. Yes you are and I am not going to change it! Sorry, not sorry
  15. Ok I just read a little about super pixel debayer. I think I would have to look at a lot of tutorials for both that and also binning as I have never really tried that either.
  16. I have already flashed my Gti Wifi and have it on a wedge so that's a start I understand binning but what is super pixel debayer, is this something available on standard capture software or is it a physical thing added to your capturing gear.
  17. This is more a curiosity query than purchasing at this moment in time but it's good to know these things. There are loads of mounts out there ranging from a few hundred quid for an EQ3 Pro goto to 10micron GM 4000 HPS II at £22K I have only used basic goto and don't get fully understand these mounts where I have read they turn the encoder system off and let it track on it's motor or something akin to that. Someone can hopefully explain better than I just did ! Weight wise I have a 127 mak for planetary eeva (3kg) and my 130 p-ds (4kg). I also have a good solid steel tripod.
  18. I am taking you mean the 533 pro Steve, I have looked at that but then I probably end up getting a better mount to improve tracking and stability, maybe a new OTA etc. Thinks I will up my skills on a 224 and consider options later down the line but thanks for the pointer. Steve
  19. Don't bother with the point North align method, it isn't as accurate as a two star align. As @Peter Drew mentioned the moon is not a good object to align from. Few tips; Try to level your mount as near as possible, this really helps and then a two star align using stars that are around mid height (45 degree's ish, give or take 20 degrees) in the sky and use stars that are at least 90 degrees apart. At this time of the year I use Capella and Vega. Nice n bright, well placed and easy to find.
  20. I found these on amazon, there are smaller versions available that should fit a 1.25 eyepiece. Most are powered usb from a small powertank. https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=Lens+Heater+Warmer+Dew+Heater&i=electronics&ref=nb_sb_noss
  21. Where can I get my hand on replacement eyeguards anyone. I have looked online but cannot find a UK dealer of such. They are for my 2" Nikons and need to be 48mm fitting. The current ones are the low profile ones that came with the EP's and since changing dobs I don't get on with them quite the same as I did before.
  22. Sorry @vlaiv it was my error. I do own a 127 mak but also the 130 P-DS which is what I am referring too in this thread. Thanks you very much for all the information, you and the others have been really helpful. I think my expectations were as I thought, greater than the camera's abilities although judging by some of the images on here, not by as much as I had originally thought. I think if I do go up in camera quality then a better mount will be needed and probably guiding. This is a whole new thing for me and not something I am looking to take on at present. Thanks again eve
  23. Super explanation @vlaiv that really does help make things a lot clearer to me. So my bloated star M57 image was down to the fact I am using the 127 P-DS on a relatively basic model mount unguided. I actually thought it was down to having too much brightness or exposure but now this all makes sense. So if I am right using a 0.5 reducer increases this to 2.4"/px (I used the calculator and have bookmarked it) which will reduce but not remove the bloating and at the same time shortens exposure times as a result of reduced F ratio.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.