tooth_dr

I use APT too. There is the option to change advanced settings but I don’t want to break anything.

Thank you! I bought the hitec astro Mount hub pro to control the focuser. It seems the problem lies with it. I have read the 180ed is very tolerant of temperature changes but I’ve yet to try it out.

There was high cloud / poor transparency when I collected the 180ed data on Xmas eve. And I’m not totally sure I’m exactly in focus. Still doing it by eye, and my focus step is 17um but my CFZ is 10um.

Fantastic. That’s stunning and now back on my list of ‘must dos’. Normally I dont like added diffraction spikes, but these ones are very realistic and add to the image.

I know what you mean. If you intend to go fully automated then that isn’t going to work. FWIW I have a stepper motor / moonlite Crayford on another scope, and whilst it’s a bit early to say (only had it 3 months), it seems accurate and reliable, and a different league to the SW focuser.

I ran both stacks in APP, did the lightest DPP stretch, and corrected LP. Same camera used for both data sets. I was going to combine my 2018 data with my 2019 data of M42, but instead I ended up just doing a comparison of the two. The ED80 data is a little cleaner but it's also got 10x the exposure, at 500 minutes versus 51 minutes. Both have virtually the same FL, at 510mm versus 500mm. Since I got the 180ed I havent really had a successful full night of imaging due to permacloud. Heres hoping for a good run in 2020. CS Adam.

The law of averages - I've had two and both were able to carry everything thrown at them. Although if the posters ED80 cant hold a Canon 1000d, then there is something very wrong with it.

I do have an issue with you suggesting that it is essential to upgrade your focuser to do AP. It's just incorrect and misleading to newcomers. I dont wish to derail the thread any further though, so I'll leave it that.

Lovely image. I actually didnt immediately notice the coma, as the trees draw the eye into the middle and to M45. It's only when I read the text I saw it. Doesnt detract.

Its cloudy and I’m off, so patience isn’t in abundance 😩

Just to wrap this up, I ran a cable to my house underground in an existing duct and brought it straight in beside a socket. I then connected this directly to a powerline adapter. This was a compromise as my wife didn’t want a cable run through the house into the router. I still get over 10 mps and it never drops out so I’m delighted. Thanks for all the input.

Thanks Ian. I left the part off with my chap but the original part he struggled to modify. So he’s making a new one. I’ve not heard anything for a couple of weeks though will give him a shout after the hols.

Anyone? No reply on the other thread, I posted on it too. cheers!

Thanks Carole. It printed out quite nicely in the magazine.

I finally got one! My HH image was published in it.

Thanks Richard for the comment. Yes the 360s of blue suffered from cloud too, causing halos around the brighter stars, most noticeable on Hatsya.

Apart from tightening the main Allen screw I didn’t do any other adjustment such as filing the drawtube flat etc. I had a 7 x 2” EFW which is no light thing either along with a 8mp Kodak CCD. I fitted a SW motor to mine, and never needed to use locking screw on the focuser.

I’m going to say no here, I think there is little wrong with the stock ed80 crayford focuser. It can handle a FR, EFW and CCD. It’s on the limit but ‘good enough’

That’s pretty impressive! You’ve done a fantastic job. I don’t mind the slightly less saturated version, but both look good.

Thanks! It was totally saturated in the 90s and 180s subs I took. I did get a few 20s subs (even they were quite saturated tbh) and the transitioning between core and outer regions didn’t work with my attempt at using masks, the centre became too coloured/saturated. If it ever clears I’ll get a few more subs and try again.

I seem to have a slight knack of getting carried away, plus I didnt have any colour data worth talking about (esp blue where all 6 minutes worth was poor due to cloud) which I think might be why it looks a little yellow. LRGB = 1 hour 15 minutes in 180s subs for L, and 20s+90s subs for RGB. I tried using the shorter subs to make the core better, but it all got too much so I abandoned that idea. L=51 minutes R=9 minutes G= 9 minutes B= 6 minutes Thanks for looking Adam.

Very nice Bob, you’ve done a great job.

Hi Ian Thanks for the comment. I started with new calibration data, and the image is a lot better. It's only 1 hour of luminance, so i cant expect too much, but I've done a better job reprocessing. Although background still looks bit yellowy. CS Adam

We had the same forecast Richard. Disappointed is an understatement. Thats a lovely image. It has tight stars and delicate nebulosity. I did image M42 just after B22. I took some new calibration data last night so I might try to process it later.

Nice job indeed. I removed a bit of the red background noise and it looks really decent. @alacant is right in that you should maybe try using ISO800.