tooth_dr

Thanks @Helen I just bought the 4 piece one for travelling. My current 3 piece Manfrotto doesnt fit in my case without removing the legs.

Hi thanks for having a go at the data. Using 180mm at F2.8 really helps to gather the data fast. I really hope to do mosaics with this scope, just need to get onto SGPro, as currently not finging it that intuitive. Lots of windows, and not knowing whether these can be closed or have to be left open.

Thanks Ciaran for taking a look at this. You have a great deal of processing skills, and achieved a better result in no doubt just a few minutes. I'll look into that inverted blurred mask. Currently I'm doing a DDP stretch in APP, and before I even import it into PS, the stars are probably already larger than necessary.

My ST80 didn’t come with rings (came with EQ1) so I bolted it directly to a vixen dovetail and then attached that to the ED80 rings.

Lovely lovely lovely. The water takes it to a new level.

I notice there is a guide ring on the dew shield of the ST80. This is never going to be stable. A wee bit of reconfiguration will be needed. I don’t think it will balanced like that either.

What a brilliant setup for starting out. Pretty much ideal. How much or little do you know? Familiar with autoguiding? What software do you know?

Thanks Giorgio. It’s Bortle 4 and North where I shot this would be my darkest part of the sky.

Thanks Geoff. Yes sorry, Tak 180ed and Atik 383L+

Raw stacked fits attached. St-avg-1500.0s-MSC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Blue.fits St-avg-1500.0s-MSC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Green.fits St-avg-1500.0s-MSC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Red.fits St-avg-1800.0s-MSC_1_3.0_none-x_1.0_LZ3-NS-full-qua-add-sc_BWMV_nor-AAD-RE-noMBB-Lum.fits

I don’t think the seeing was great initially but it did really settle down and I was guiding at 0.6 or less RMS. The scope has a built in CC, designed for the scope so I don’t think that’s to blame. Focus was also ok, I think! Would over exposing give this effect? Is 300s at F2.8 too much even? I should post the raw stacked data to see if it’s a step in my processing.

Thanks Alan. I think the fast scope helps. What scope are you using?

I have another ccd but it also has 5.4um pixels. I have a DSLR with 4.3um pixels but I’m a little reluctant to go back to dslr

Thanks Adrian. I’m still struggling to get smaller stars. The ED80 was giving me nicer stars. I don’t know what to try differently, as focal length and guiding accuracy hasn’t changed. Maybe I’m over exposing at 300s

No chance of a long session due to weather forecast, so did a vertical plan and ran off 300s subs of L , R , B, G. In the end I had 105 minutes of subs in total - 6 lum, 5 red, 5 green, 5 blue. I didnt have any flats with the ATIK. Manually flattening them has resulted in the green channel being brighter in the middle. I'll get more flats for next time. Here is the effort:

I agree with Martin, it looks really nice and not pushed too hard. The background is smoooooth.

David, is it in your darks and flats too? If a dead column is 1px wide would you even see it? I’ve several on each of my KAF8300 which calibrate out with bias.

I am making a circular base too. I was thinking not to go too close to the circular diameter of the dome to allow some meat for the bolts into the floor.

2 months later it is still sitting in the same place. I cant believe it's two months since I got it! The weather and dark nights have halted any work, so I've just put it on hold until Spring. I seen your thread, and will be following it to.

That actually works really well as a close up. Nice one Steve.

The night my observatory roof blew off I packed it in for 7 years, then about 2.5 years ago a bereavement made me get my finger out and get it rebuilt, and I enjoy it again

I can relate to that. Very frustrating indeed

Thanks Ian, I would appreciate it if you can find it. I dont think it can physically be any shorter, if you see my photo above. There are quite a few thin ones, but they are male Nikon to M42. I need the female Nikon side/

Cheers David. Those are for connecting an m42 lens to a Nikon body. I did look at those and nearly impulse bought it. No I’m going from Nikon lens to m42 body. The photo below shows that my adapter is about as small as is possible, without fouling the lens itself

Thanks Ian. Surprised as in big or small? This is my current configuration. I have it at 46.5mm and was going to test it tonight on street lights 5 miles away. Can you believe we have heavy fog this evening of all things!! Agonisingly close