tooth_dr

Nice image, the camera serves well for both solar and deep sky imaging

The FOV and orientation is really well chosen, and I agree with all the comments, its excellent!!!!

Someone with better processing skills will be able to do that As Vlaiv points out it's imaging scale thats important. These were taken with a cameras of 5.4 and 5.6um pixels, so giving a resolution of 2.2"/px. I can guide comfortably at 1.1" RMS so that was a pretty good match

Thats a cracking Whale Mick, colour and processing is top notch! Dont take a break please, keeping knocking out these stunners.

Hi David I just wanted to drop in some images I've taken at 500ish mm FL, with either a ED80 or 180ED, its very possible. But a lot of them are pretty small, maybe just a case of choosing your targets sensibly. All the best Adam. M51: NGC3521: M63: Leo Triplets: M81 M82 NGC3077 Widefield around NGC3718: M106:

Thanks David I am really enjoying have a longer focal length to image with, and agree galaxies are incredible in every way! When it came to processing, I used software called Astro Pixel Processor. It will register different sized and scaled images to a reference image. In this case I wanted to keep the scale of the bigger scope. I loaded all my subs into the program, along with calibration data. I chose to register my RGB subs (taken with the ED) to the best LUM sub. So that LUM sub became the 'reference image' and so every other sub from both scopes was aligned to the stars in it. It took a few runs of the stacking software, with a few adjustments of the settings, and in the end omitting darks from the QHY9 as these added black speckles everywhere, I was able to register the data, and produce four aligned stacks: L R G B. It then all went downhill when I imported it to PS HTH. Adam

Here is my attempt at M94, all data collected on the 14th April 2020. I have a dual rig consisting of the following: Skywatcher 250PX 1200mm F4.7 with a QHY9 mono CCD, imaging at 0.93"/px Skywatcher ED80 520mm F6.3 with an ATIK 383L+ mono CCD, imaging at 2.13"/px I had the idea of collecting LUM with the 10" newt, and using the smaller 80mm refractor for RBG. Data as follows - Luminance: 45 x 300s Red: 15 x 600s Green: 9 x 600s Blue: 8 x 600s Data collected in SGPro, processed in APP and PS. I would appreciate any feedback. I couldn't get the colour as I wanted it, so it ended up a bit on the red side. LRGB is still a dark art to me. I have an issue with elongated stars pre-meridian in the 10" scope, which arent there post-flip. I might post a thread about this and try to get it sorted. There are also a few nasty reflections in different images I've taken, so I'll need to get that sorted out too. You can see one along the bottom of this image. My ED80 subs drift throughout the night - if I flick from the first to last image there is relative movement. I use an OAG on the 10" so flexure is obviously playing a role here - but it doesnt seem to affect the less demanding imaging scale of the ED80 so I'm not too bothered. I just really need to sort the pre-meridian stars in the 10". Thanks for looking Adam. St-avg-9000.0s-LNMWC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Red.fits St-avg-5400.0s-LNMWC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Green.fits St-avg-4800.0s-LNMWC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Blue.fits St-avg-13500.0s-LNMWC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Luminance.fits

Can you post the stack of 69 lights here, without any flats, just the lights, stacked in DSS? And then post the stacked flat that DSS saved 'MASTER FLAT' We can definitely get to the bottom of this for you.

My degradation was actually quite rapid, over 11 months, and my scope is stored in the case indoors in the living room. I have photos from May 2019. My scope is 2017 so a fairly recent problem. But it’s an easy cheap fix so no issues.

Exactly how my PhD graph looks too. I’ll report back too if I resolve it. Was planning on waiting for a moon lit night.

If you want to resolve this, you need to take steps to work out the issue. 1) try without flats - is the problem still there? 2) if problem is not there with current flats - take new flats 3) try again with flats - is the problem still there? Then let us know the result.

Drooool.

That's a good idea! I might do a few screen dumps and keep them in a folder.

Whipdry is 100% right. Getting mine to Northern Ireland from London was difficult enough. Luckily I was able to get friends to collect in person and drive home in the boot of their car wrapped in a few blankets. Way off topic though 😎 I’ve spoke to Lucas twice since buying it and he’s been more than courteous.

Superb, what a close up! An unusual part of the sky for us up north.

It could have been the seeing or anything at that point but this is very nice and looks better, more detail in the proms.

I wasnt getting at that lol, but I thought something was odd at 3FPS! Thats what I was getting on my old PC with my 178MC trying some solar the other day, so I just gave up on it and went back to a smaller sensor which gave me a better FPS.

Hello Jaspal. I'm not convinced it's sorted. I did choose a target across the meridian, manually choosing to move the scope, and PHD worked ok. I have just been getting up/staying up to do the MF, the weather was too clear and I didnt want to risk it failing all night. If we get less good clear spells I will experiment. With everything more or less working and the sky being clear I didnt want to create any issues investigating and changing settings.

Good to hear Paul, thats a great image, and I think it would be a waste for you to give up AP.

The flats can cause that colour issue

Looks like a really nice image, I think I would do as Niall says and try it without the flats.

Very nice images, super sharp! I was looking for some text on how you did it!! Maybe a trade secret?

That surface is so tactile! Do you think 500/3 = almost three minutes per video may result in blurring of the proms?

Thanks, good video. I don’t know the situation but i was surmising that this was the only option. Mesu Mounts aren’t packaged, so postage back to Holland would have been harder than flying out.

As a cynic, I would say it would have been cheaper and saver to travel to the customer, given that his mounts don’t come packaged, and the risk of mount damage in transit would have been too great. But it’s really good service none the less.