Lee_P

Thanks, Bortle 8 certainly makes things more challenging... Thanks, I should probably make an updated processing article soon... It was tough to get the colours looking interesting, I'm glad you like them. You can do it! This was under three weeks of imaging; it's still worthwhile even when we don't get properly dark skies.

Another image for my "crazy to try from a city using an OSC camera" collection! It's a 24-hour integration, gathered over 20 consecutive nights. Cloudy UK skies and the height of Summer are no obstacles for a dedicated astroimager 🤣 More info on my website here, and imaging details are below the picture. * June 2022 * Bristol, UK (Bortle 8 ) * Telescope: Askar FRA400 f/5.6 Quintuplet APO Astrograph * Camera: ZWO ASI 2600MC-PRO * Filter: Optolong L-eXtreme * Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G * Guide: William Optics 32mm; ZWO ASI 120MM Mini * Control: ASIAIR Plus, ZWO EAF * Software: PixInsight, Photoshop, Lightroom, Topaz DeNoiseAI * 720 x 120 seconds Total integration time: 24 hours By Lee Pullen

Congrats on first light, looking good!

Really good, especially given the short integration time 👍

Thanks Graham! Give it a go, I want to encourage more urban astrophotographers to image targets we're often told are impossible under our sky conditions! Mind you, I can definitely see how dark skies are a huge advantage with this target... Anyway, to answer your question, I use the exact same settings for all my targets: gain 100, 120-second subframes. Then as many subs as I can get, aiming for a total integration time in the region of 20 hours.

I've tried it on one image so far, just using its default settings, and found it to be excellent. Here's an extreme crop before / after example:

Good job!

Yes I agree, light pollution certainly makes things tougher, but it's surprising how many targets are actually within reach of city dwellers using modern technology and techniques. Please post it when you've finished processing, I for one would be interested to see the result!

Thanks, your Bortle 4 skies will certainly give you a smoother ride with this target!

Just building on this comment, I think that if you want a "fast" system (being able to gather data quickly), then I really recommend making your equipment set-up and pack-down times as speedy as possible. If it's quick and easy to set your kit up, you're more likely to actually do it and then gather data. This might seem like a tangent to the OP's queries about mono / OSC, but I'd argue that it can have a bigger impact on how fast you produce images. As a reference point, I use a DIY pier, small refractor and ASIAIR Plus; it takes under five minutes for me to get imaging, and in the last 12 months I've produced around 20 images with integration times in the range of 16 - 24 hours. And this is from cloudy South-West UK.

Yes you read that right, I tried imaging The Shark Nebula from my city-centre back garden using an OSC camera (and no filters). As you might imagine it was a real challenge (perhaps madness to even try!), and I had the mangle the data quite a lot during processing. So it's not a great picture on its own, and there's a lot wrong with it, but I hope it's interesting given the conditions it was taken under. Imaging info below, and there are more details on my website. * April to May 2022 * Bristol, UK (Bortle 8 ) * Telescope: Askar FRA400 f/5.6 Quintuplet APO Astrograph * Camera: ZWO ASI 2600MC-PRO * Filter: none * Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G * Guide: William Optics 32mm; ZWO ASI 120MM Mini * Control: ASIAIR Plus, ZWO EAF * Software: PixInsight, Lightroom * 600 x 120 seconds Total integration time: 20 hours By Lee Pullen

Thanks for this, I'll give it a go on my next image!

The Sky-Watcher Evostar-90/660 that vlaiv linked to is a good choice. I reviewed it here.

You don't convert JPEGs to FITS - FITS are much bigger files that contain lots of data. Plus, those JPEGs that your ASIAIR produces are just tiny preview files to accompany corresponding FITS files. Their quality is very poor, as you've already clocked. There should be FITS files in the folder along with the JPEGs. I can send you a screenshot to explain if that doesn't make sense!

I'm almost certain that you're looking at the JPEG previews. You actually want to be using the FITS files, loading them into astronomy processing software and then stacking them.

Congrats, that's a great camera! I recommend pairing it with a dual-band filter (such as an Optolong L-eXtreme) when imaging hydrogen-rich nebulae too. Good luck, and please do post your images so we can enjoy them 😀

I disagree, you can shoot fainter with longer integration times. These were all shot with a 72mm refractor from a Bortle 8 city centre. As for the original question, I'd probably go with a new mount as you're wanting a second set-up that will likely be heavier. If you were content to stick with your Z61ii then I might actually suggest a modern astrocamera, as then you can shoot short subs which takes pressure off your mount to perform. (Not sure if you can dither with your current set-up though; you want to be doing that, really). Also, many astrocameras can be cooled to specific temperatures, which means you can make libraries of calibration frames. Very useful!

Very nice!

As you'll already have a good camera and lenses for your wildlife and sports work, perhaps buy a good tracking mount suitable for astro work, and get experience using your existing kit? If you do that for a year you can learn the basics, and then be in a better position to plan your next steps.

Oh wow, that's quite something.

That was for a WiFi extender I used for my ASIAIR PRO. I don't use that anymore as I have an ASIAIR Plus.

I'm actually using a better one now; this one to be exact. It's very good.

For an example of a mains-powered set-up, check the section "Mount: Orion Sirius EQ-G on a pier" on my website here. (I plan to do a proper write up how I power everything when there's time). I have one cable trailing to a mains socket, set up when I'm imaging, and everything else lives permanently in a waterproof box. It's good, but not portable.

If you have access to mains power (i.e. you're imaging from home) then there are other options. If you'll be out in a field somewhere, then fair enough going for a battery!

Sorry, yes, I meant #4. Really they're all good though, choose whichever one you personally prefer You've inspired me to add this target to my hit list!