tooth_dr

I was concerned also re slowing down, good to know 👍🏼 @Davey-T would you share a link to a suitable SSD please.

Does anyone have any links to processing luminance data in APP and PS? Im using APP to stack and preprocess my RGB data, following some excellent advice from xiga, for the first time I’ve managed to produce some really good colour data. Before hand my colour data was overwhelmingly yellow. However I’m stuck on the luminance now. Are there any guides on processing luminance data? I’ve found a few tutorials on YouTube but they are more about stacking etc which I can do. Thanks in advance Adam

Great idea. Hope it works 👍🏼

Thanks. I can see how it would fit in easier around the body of the camera. I guess the 290 USB3 would be easier for me just to drop into my current setups as it all been designed around 12.5mm back focus of the ZWO sensors. I’d need a new spacers with the 8.5mm spacing on the mini. Or maybe there is enough travel in the finder guider lens to compensate, and the OAG comes with 1.25” barrel and attachments (but I prefer a screw connection for rigidity)

What sort of frame rate do you get? This would be a good option if it works effectively

Thanks Gina. That’s very interesting. I’m looking an improvement over my current 120MM. Is this finder guiding? I would have assumed the 120MC would be a step in opposite direction for me.

I thought I’d start a new topic. Looking advice on a guidecam that will double up as a h-alpha solar imaging camera. Imaging camera 5.4um pixels Guidecam to be used both with OAG (1200mm) and finderscope 9x50. Looking to image prominences etc via my 60mm lunt, native 500mm, using x3 Barlow. Thanks to xiga Wim and xplode for input already. I have £300ish, new or used I’m happy either way Thanks Adam

Would I be safer getting the USB3.0 290MM if I want it to double up as a solar camera? Are there any disadvantages to the round one other that costing more?

Sounds like we have the same problem! Will the guidecam bin ok being a CMOS? The brief time I tried my 178 binned I’m not sure it worked as intended with PHD2

Thanks for the advice. I would need the camera for 1) imaging with my 1200mm fl scope via the OAG, and 2) using with a 9x50 finderscope and approx 500mm fl. It's the ZWO OAG so I think small at 8mm x 8mm (although their blurb describes it as large!). I've been reading up on the 290 and the 174, and I appreciate the differences. So far the 120MM mostly finds stars, some times they are too dim and I have to move the target a little - say 1/4 of the FOV of the 120MM. This has presented one issue where I was trying to do a mosaic, and I couldnt get a star in a new panel so SGPro went into recovery mode. Is the 12mm OAG any thicker? I was saying to you that I have probably max 1mm spare inward travel, so the OAG could not be any thicker than the ZWO OAG at 16.5mm. Main reason for wanting a Lodestar is the reputation - there seem to be a large cohort of people who are very happy with it as a guide camera. I'm not a massive fan of ZWO stuff in general, although I've owned 3 x ZWO cameras, and will probably buy another at some point. I am now thinking, if I was to also use the guide camera for solar Ha imaging would that affect the choice? I was quite happy with the FOV of the 120MM for solar imaging, but it has terrible NRs that would not go away with flats. Thanks for the advice Adam

Excellent Peter, for 50 mins there isnt much more you could hope for ufortunately! If you get another 7 hours it you will see a huge improvement on the background noise, I found 8 hours my sweet spot with a DSLR on an ED80.

Thanks again. I have sold off two astro items in the past two days, so on the look out for a used Lodestar X2. I missed Rays, but hadnt the cash at the time. My wife has rightly put a curtailment on any 'big' astro purchases, so I'm selling off some unused stuff instead.

Great Job Vin. I like the annotated image too, lots of background stuff. The 178MC looks to be pretty decent.

Thank-you Wim. That looks lovely, such warm colours and nice looking stars. I wonder is that yellow dust millions and millions of stars? The guiding drops to 0.4 for periods, but typically sits at 0.6-0.7 so I wonder is that just the seeing that causing that? Maybe that's as good as it gets.

I spotted this last night when imaging, 1:19am. Anyone else pick it up?

Lovely Mark, nice detail down to the core. Adam.

I wonder is there an advantage to capturing at 2x2. I find it takes less exposure to get the same signal, so would that mean x2 as much SNR?

@wimvb @Xplode @Laurin Dave Last night I was heading to bed after watching a film, I looked out and it was partially clear, so I decided to take the opportunity to set up and test out the fan theory. It was 00:39 when I started. M51 was just past meridian and that part of the sky was clear, so I went for it. As luck would have it, a bright satellite passed through my 3rd sub of 120s. In this image, I only had the QHY9 on, and the ATIK and all associated gear were turned off. The QHY9 is attached to the 250PX. There doesn't appear to be any oscillations like before. Guiding was similar to previous nights, perhaps slightly better. It was also very calm last night. I immediately turned on the Atik so that the fan was running, and sat for an hour waiting for another satellite. Two very dim ones did pass, but I don't know how useful they are. I then turned off the Atik and left just the QHY to run the rest of the night. I got some good tight data on M51, tight compared to the first night I tried it anyway(!) Any input again appreciated. Guide log attached also, if any one can input on that also I would be grateful. There was patchy cloud, but outside of that, it appeared to be guiding well, with periods of 0.4-0.6 RMS. ATIK OFF: ATIK ON: ATIK ON: Last nights stack of data 2 hours 44 minutes lum: PHD2_GuideLog_2020-04-30_092644.txt

Thanks @Xiga amazing what can be done with the data. There is definitely more detail in this one, compared to the previous processing you done.

Actually just found this diagram, 15.55mm. I think this is right because the newer QHY9 has screw holes on the side, mine doesn't, and this image shows it with no screw holes. The images with 17.3mm have screw holes for the leads http://www.y-tomita.co.jp/ccd/qhyccd/qhy9.html

@xiga apologies I never checked that link before tagging you. 1). I always warm and cool over 10 minutes, and probably would leave it in a cooler part of the house after that. I warm mine to ambient which could be 5 degrees, then leave it at that temp in the obs. 2). Yes I was going by the mechanical drawing rather than the text. It could be that I'm out 2.3mm but my stars look ok at the edge of the field. You could try both. It's actually clear, so that's a bonus!

Stunning image David, one of the nicest M106 + NGC4217 I've seen on here. The noise is very well controlled and the background is really nice.

I googled ‘mesu Steve Richards’ and it is the first result 👍🏼 https://stargazerslounge.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=235759

Thanks Dave. It could be the imaging camera fan. The QHY9 camera is particularly smooth, but the Atik is noisier. The Atik is on the ED80, and the QHY9 on the 10". It was clear I could try turning off the Atik, and image only with the QHY9, and then just hope I capture a satellite

Does this help any? Two frames taken on dual rig of M101. 10" 300s 1200mm ED80 600s 522mm I can see a larger oscillation that is visible in both, and a smaller oscillation within that larger oscillation in the 10" scope. This implies mechanical rather than thermal as its affecting both scopes equally? The 10" and ED80 cameras are not lined up, the angle is close to 90 degrees difference. I can see the elongation of stars in the two mages is at 90 degrees to each other. I do get drift in my ED80 (not guided), which I assume is differential flexure (to be dealt with another time). *EDIT I'm not sure these were taken at an identical time, as I cant see two of the trails in Lum that are present in the blue channel. But the main bright trail lines up pretty well.