Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

stargazine_ep24_banner.thumb.jpg.56e65b9c9549c15ed3f06e146fc5f5f1.jpg

Paul and Chrissy

Members
  • Content Count

    145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

71 Excellent

1 Follower

About Paul and Chrissy

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Camping. Astrophotography. Car mechanics. Traveling through Europe.
  • Location
    Hertfordshire

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    chrisatheathpark@yahoo.com
  1. Hi Stu Thought long and hard about your recommendations on going for a better f ratio. Plumped for the Grand Tourismo 71 f5.9. Thanks for the nudge in the right direction. I think this is going to work much better for me . A much more versatile scope for my needs.
  2. Hi Joejaguar That was a hefty discount. Where did you get it from. The normal prices are really a bit out of my budget, but if someone is doing a good discount it could be a good option. cheers Paul
  3. Hi Dave I should have added. I do have a TAK TSA102 f8 that I would use at home. The Star 71 would be as a travelling wide field scope. The Quark does have a powerful 4.3barlow built into it that would bring the focal length to about 1500mm with the WO. How do you find the Star 71s for Astro photography. Cheers Paul
  4. Hi Everyone I want to get into Solar viewing and photography with a Daystar Quark. This seems to be the most economical way with the advantage of using a telescope that can also be used for Astro work as well. I am thinking of getting a William Optics Star 71ii f4.9. 350mm as it’s very portable. Has anyone used this combination that can give me an idea of how successful it would be. Any other suggestions would be appreciated. I don’t want to make the wrong choice and waste a ton of wedge.(£) if there are better options. cheers Paul
  5. Paul and Chrissy

    Equipment

    Photographs of my kit past and present
  6. The original comments were about the HEQ5. I should think using my little pulley and weight mod would work really well on an HEQ5. Balance it as close as you can first, and then slip the weight on. No need to worry about what side of the mount you are on, or. meridian flips. You can add or remove washers to give the amount of bias you want.
  7. It does have magnetic tension, but my guiding is more consistent when the weight is in place. All gearing assemblies will still have play, not just in the meshing of the gears. The fact that the worm/motor unit moves in and out to engage/disengage will inherently have tolerance to move. If you can keep a controllable consistent pressure on the driven side of the gears it will run smoother and have less flex in the gearing unit as a whole. I don’t get so much variation in guiding when I have to flip to the other side of the mount. I suppose the bottom line is l like modifying things to make then run to their optimum.
  8. Hi. l use an alternative to balancing east heavy. Every time you have to do a meridian flip, you have to readjust your counterbalance weight, which can be a pain to get exact. What I do is balance as neutral as possible and then add a weight on a pulley. See image below. The advantage, is that the pressure is always the same even when you flip to the other side of the mount. The gears will always be in constant mesh. Just another way of doing it.
  9. Thanks for all the input guys. It looks like longer subs of 5 to 6 minutes is the way to go. Using more darks I thinks is obviously going to help in cleaning things up, but longer subs to grab more photons seems to be the main route to solve the problem. Learnt a new trick though. Don’t always use Exposure and Gamma when converting from 32bit to 16bit. Try them all, and see which one gives the best results. Maybe everybody does that anyway, but l can’t remember seeing any video using anything other than Exposure and Gamma. Out of interest, do we really need to convert to 16bit. ?
  10. Working on the darks library as we speak, (or write). Cheers
  11. Hi used 5 darks. No bias or flats. l have just hit upon an interesting phenomenon. I normally convert in photoshop the DSS auto save down to 16bit using Exposure & Gamma. Thought I would try another option, Equalize & Histogram. Amazing. It just appeared. Do you think I could still do with longer exposures though. Check out the two results below using the two 16bit conversions. cheers ABF99BE7-7894-48B3-843E-C133D99E374E.tiff DBD8DC4A-7CA0-4B46-8372-74AE287AE424.tiff
  12. Hi Everyone Tried a new target last night, Bode’s Galaxy. The results were terrible. I think I have under exposed drastically. Could barely make out any detail in the galaxy. I did 42subs at 180secs. with a 102mm F8 refractor, and an Atik 490EX and CLS CCD filter. Any advice would be appreciated. Should I do more subs, or longer subs. Maybe 360secs. I thought Bode’s was quite bright. Had excellent results running 180sec subs on M42. The centre gets blown out, but the gas clouds are super clear. any thoughts. Cheers. Paul
  13. Excellent results for 2500mm. Ordered a CEM60 myself. Non EC. Just waiting for it to arrive. They seem to be in high demand. Waited more than 2 months so far for mine. I have read the manual 3 times while waiting. Can’t wait for it to arrive.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.