tooth_dr

2/3 the way there now 😍

I dont use Siril, is this possible in other software?

@lock042 Is a dark flat detrimental to the final image, or is it useless because the bias does the same thing and therefore it is redundant?

Definitely holding up very well! Looks very good for 1 hour

Not sure, but agree def less artifacts. My example was done on a stretched TIFF out of APP

It's been while since I've used it, and I thin StarXTerminator has probably has some improvements over the past couple of months. Has anyone else noticed any differences? 72 minutes of Ha on the Cave Nebula:

I just came back in for another look at it, and the details - like waves - is quite phenomenal.

Very very nice Damian. The 3nm filter doing the business then!

Stunning Dave! Stands well on it's own even it is only half, but cant wait to see the rest of it.

Great image Rodd. Hold up very well on closer inspection

You may have missed Lukes last thread, space is paramount The inverter ring is a good shout to minimise space loss

Personally I’d cut off the extra threads with a hacksaw

I just wanted to finalise my experience with the new CMOS filters. I had some problems with a) Oiii not passing any Oiii when I had the high speed ultra-narrowband version b) haloes in the normal ultra-narrowband version Ha and Oiii. As FLO are kindly refunding me all I've lost is about 30 hours of imaging time. To be honest it all feels a bit silly complaining about filters/haloes in the grand scheme of things with everything that is going on around us, but I feel a bit peeved off so I'll just summarise briefly here for interests sake. the ultra fast version of the filters are really designed for F2, not the range (as advertised) regarding no Oiii passing - the pre-shifting of the Oiii filter is temperature dependent, so any lab tests carried out at say 20 degrees that show they dont pass Oiii are not relevant to the temp filters are used at - see HERE . Also these filters are 'designed' for F2 the haloes are a result of my focal reducer I can return the filters to be tested by an experienced astrophotographer(!) on a RASA I should learn to process out the haloes, and my reluctance to learn to do so is the reason I have haloes if I can afford Chroma, go and buy Chroma I think I still have another 15 or so Baader filters I've bought over the past 3-4 years, but I think I will look elsewhere from now on.

I did a similar shot on M31, 30 x 120s gain 100, the colour was good so I don’t see anything wrong with your exposure times. For my flats I am for 27000 ADUs, and as said above, actual flats exposure time doesn’t seem to matter. Mine vary from 0.8s to 20s. Maybe your sky conditions and the moon haven’t helped. Would you mind posting the stack?

Obviously there is a take home message here, but was this actually written in memoires or just some random meme someone created on the internet?

Very striking image Adrian, with a real 3d feel to it!

Really nicely done, I do like this a lot with the smokey greys and smouldering red underneath

Nightmare! I’d try holding the camera downwards and pushing against a hard rubber surface and turning it that way.

This questions pops up now and again! I've read the previous threads and was really just wondering if after choosing either the 3nm or 5nm, did anyone have any input or issues with their choices? I'm going to be using it with an APM 150/650 @F4.65 and a QHY268M. I just bought the 3nm Oiii version which has proven halo-free although I havent imaged with it yet properly, just some test shots. Is the 3nm Ha truly moon-proof?

I'm going to say that this is entirely possible, in fact 100% it works, because at one point I used an Atik 383L+, EFW, OAG and MPCC with a range of SW newts (200, 250, 300), only one of which was the PDS version, the others were the visual versions. Firstly regarding your measurements above: the backfocus of the camera is 17.5mm, and if you are using the M48 threads then the backfocus you need to the MPCC shoulder is 57.5mm. You have some sort of additional adapter between the OAG and the MPCC, I cant really tell what is going on with that photo. I'm not sure how simply swapping from a SW flattener to an MPCC added 25mm to your back focus? Looking at the photo, you have 40mm space to use up between the camera face and the MPCC to get the correct backfocus. If your OAG + FW measure more than 40mm then you need to address this separately, and this is nothing to do with focuser. Based on the photo above I cant see how you are over 85mm from the CC, unless of course you are measuring from the end of the CC rather than the shoulder, or measure the distance to the CCD plane incorrecly. This is my set up - ignore the fact it's a QHY9 - this is the same camera as the Atik 383L, but I just dont have a photo of that to post. You can see I went one further and added a Baader clicklock - this actually takes up about 10mm more that the standard focuser, and I still was able to get enough inward travel. You havent posted what brand of 200mm scope you are using, but certainly if it's one of the main stream cheap ones like my SWs, then all of the above is relevant.

I do miss not being able to check the sky live, and finding random meteor shots like yours. I also like the timelapse feature when the MW is visible.

Very good. I need to get my camera out and physically suss it out.

Do you have a thread on your camera? I've given up my 120MM as an ASC due to huge noise, and I really miss the Oculus that I had to give back. I have a 178MM cooled that I had planned to use for solar, but I could use it over the winter as an ASC.

That's a pretty reasonable idea, I'll aim for at least 5 dithers in total.

Cheers Dave. Just need to work out the order. I'm taking 2 minute subs with the OSC, and it is the main system that does plate solving and dithering, and the other scope does 5 minute NB subs. So with dithering at it's current configured, even if I do every fifth sub, I'm going to lose half of my NB subs.