Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

CraigT82

Members
  • Content Count

    2,279
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

CraigT82 last won the day on January 24

CraigT82 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,790 Excellent

3 Followers

About CraigT82

  • Rank
    Brown Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bristol
  1. We let's see... I posted earlier in the thread with the advice that actually helped the OP (along with one other), and also with the caveat that they really needed to focus on something very far away, as far away as they could see, and I chose the descriptor of "about a mile" just to reinforce that. I wasn't than trying to be accurate with the distance, seeing as we know next to nothing about the OPs scope setup or general observing situation.
  2. Hopefully see some Mars images takem with them rolling in soon!
  3. Where did I say or even imply there was no point? We have no idea what newt the OP has, or what focuser is fitted, or what adapters are in use. So the infinity focus point could be anywhere along the focuser travel. Being pedantic doesn't help anyone.
  4. Line up polaris in the polar scope then glue it back on with the pointer indicating your latitude.
  5. 5mm can be the difference between perfect focus and completely defocused.
  6. You don't use a diagonal with a newtonian, just the eyepiece directly in the focuser using the correct (for the scope) adapters if necessary. Also in daylight you want to be focusing on something at least a mile away really
  7. An EFW has just popped up in the for sale section
  8. Has to be operated by the computer. Firecapture controls it via ascom for me
  9. IR is anything from roughly 700nm upwards to millimetre wavelength, so you can capture IR (more specifically near IR) with any filter that passes above 700nm
  10. I used to use drawers but it was a faff in the dark. Got a ZWO EFW mini which is a godsend! I used the Baader 1.25" RGB CCD filters and have found them to be parfocal - not having to refocus between filters is another godsend
  11. I'm sure FLO would want to get to the bottom of the exact specs of the scopes they sell, so they can update the descriptions and allow their customers to make informed choices. If the 8" CC is reduced aperture I wonder if the same applies to the 6" and 10" CCs
  12. Would have been a very sensible mod for a long newt owner
  13. I think a 6" CC would be a very nice Lunar setup, although not a great leap up from the 4" frac in terms of resolution. I think the 8" version would be perfectly usable on the driven GP, as long as the focuser was motorised (and assuming it's within budget of course). I wouldn't be too afraid of exceeding mount manufacturers weight limits for lunar and planetary work, especially with short tube scopes... I've been happily doing it for years!
  14. Very nice Peter, well done. BTW good to see your 29th September shot featured on the BAA Mars blog
  15. I've got a comment on oversampling that I hope someone cleverer than me might have some thoughts on... I think the reason why you wouldn't want to oversample is that your image would be dimmer that at critical sampling and you would need to compensate by increasing exposure or gain which could be detrimental to the image. However if you can oversample whilst keeping the exposures still short enough to 'freeze' the seeing and keeping the gain at a reasonably low level, then by all means do it. Modern planetary cameras are so sensitive that this is entirely feasible in practice. As an example, my most recent imaging run on Mars, using a 290mono with 2.5x barlow (f/19 = 6.5x pixel size = significantly oversampled) I was using 5ms exposures and only 9% gain on all three channels. If I had sampled 'correctly' at f/9, the increased brightness meant I would have needed to either run the gain at near zero and/or or use very short exposures, which as I learned from Vlaiv not too long ago, is bad in terms of read noise. Any thoughts?!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.