bomberbaz

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.

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 manage 25 minutes before any noticeable drift then it would be excellent. Personally I would be happy at 10 minutes. Overall though it seems a good mount. Has anyone used or got one? Steve

Thank you kindly vlaiv, maybe I am doing a little better than I realised. I shall persevere. 👍

@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

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.

Yes you are and I am not going to change it! 👹 Sorry, not sorry 🤣 🤣

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.

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.

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. I was looking at unguided because I really don't want it to get too involved although @vlaiv has explained to me you need a very good unguided mount to get better EEVA results. So really I am asking is how does it actually work and which is giving the best stability / tracking for your cash.

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

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.

Oh and welcome to SGL

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

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.

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 everyone. Steve

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.

Thanks to you all @stash_old @roelb @vlaiv for your pictures and input. I think I will do nothing for now and try to learn skills better than I currently have. If you are managing such good images then with a bit of practice I should hopefully be able to improve my own results. It is things like this that confuse me vlaiv, one of the stated resolutions on the FLO page for the asi224 is this "1304×976 150fps / 64fps", which is nothing like 1.29"/px as you stated above. Is this a simple calculation to work out? Cheers all Steve

Ok thanks for that, I think I am getting a better idea of where you are coming from now. Still not 100% but understanding a little more. Do you think a read of every photon counts would help? That is a cracking image, although you also have star bloating which I get when I try DSO imaging, interesting. Which galaxy is it btw Vlaiv, fireworks?

Thanks for the reply Vlaiv. I wasn't thinking of replacing the 224mc, I was thinking of adding the 183 uncooled for the larger FOV also I thought it would be more sensitive than the 224 due in the main to having more pixels per area on sensor so overall being a little better for DSO's I have cheap reducer yes and I had considered it but wasn't sure how effective it would be overall. As confused as ever now 😂 (Nice work on the crescent btw) 👍

Hello everyone and hope your all well. I have a couple of questions regarding my existing ASI224MC and a possible new ZWO camera. I currently have a 224MC and i have so far enjoyed using it a very lot. I have played around with and got good lunar and planetary results with more limited success on DSO's. The other night I did some imaging of the ring nebula which I realise it a fairly easy target and then swung it around to the crescent nebula for another go at something more challenging but no matter what I did with gain or exposure it failed to show up. I was using a a 130 P-DS with the camera unguided on a WIFI GTI mount. Q1) Am I doing something wrong or is this camera not up to the crescent with this scope? Next I have been toying with the idea of buying something a little more powerful than the 224 which I also realise is something of an entry level camera so I was looking at the 178 version or 183 at a push. I don't really understand it when the information given start discussing some of the technical stats for camera's. Based upon (178 =6.4/3096*2080) or 183=20.18/5496*3672) the maths appears to give a pretty much same result with the same pixel size albeit with a larger overall sensor from the 183. Q2) Am I missing something on the comparisons? I know this is a 2 in 1 query and so would be grateful for answers on either or both depending on personal experiences. cheers all Steve

Yeah basically what they said ^^ I have a 127 mak and have had it up to quite high magnification on Mars and had some decent results on the back of it. However as Vlaiv says it is not an easy target, especially for a begginer. The moon is just coming up now and so try some moon viewing before going onto the more difficult targets. The moon can be great fun and I often spend a while on the moon before moving onto planets if conditions allow. Finally something which hasn't been mentioned, your 10mm eyepiece is not very good, you should consider changing to something better. My recommendation would normally be a 21-7 zoom eyepiece but keep the 25mm, they are pretty decent and a good spotter for your scope.

what did you use to take that picture michael, was it a large-ish SCT. It's a super image.

Someone has had a look at mine and added another spring but I haven't got it back to pass comment, I shall let you know what I fiind out.

Hiya, I have very bad astigmatism and so started using the TV dioptrix. However although according to the chart you haVe it should be way down to under 1mm, the truth is I don't notice any difference below 2.5mm exit pupil. I actually use my 10x30 bins (3mm exit pupil) without wearing glasses. So my spotter 30mm eyepiece is used with glasses and the one eyepiece that gets lots of use has the dioptrix more or less permanently stuck to it, this being the 17mm Nikon. The only other one that I use the dioptrix for is the Apm 24MM but that's an occasional use EP. So in short, the chart is to me a guide and not a rule. Each person will have their own tolerance of astigmatism and can change thins accordingly.

Pm sent