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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_supernovae_remnants_winners.thumb.jpg.a13d54fa405efa94ed30e7abd590ee55.jpg

Petergoodhew

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    518
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Petergoodhew last won the day on January 13 2018

Petergoodhew had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,141 Excellent

2 Followers

About Petergoodhew

  • Rank
    Proto Star

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    London
  1. Yes. Well done yet again Steve and Barry. Well deserved recognition of such skilful imaging and processing. Looking forward to to the hat-trick! Peter
  2. This is a new one for me. It's very attractive. Excellent image capture and processing Alan. I'm going to have to add this one to my "to do" list! Peter
  3. The second version is a big improvement
  4. Petergoodhew

    M104

    Nice one Rodd. It does look rather lonely on a wide-field image - but there are distant friends lurking around. It reminds me of a flying saucer!
  5. Thanks to you both. I'm contemplating an SX AO for two reasons: 1. I'm just setting up a Celestron C11 here at home, in part for planetary/lunar (for which the AO will of course be useless), but also to leverage the 2880 focal length to try to capture small planetary nebulae in narrowband (the light pollution here is dreadful). But I also have pretty bad seeing in London - so the theory is that AO might help address that. The 10Micron seems to track perfectly unguided. 2. I'm setting up a triple rig at e-Eye in Spain, including 2 APM TMB 152 Refractors. Almost everyone I know with dual rigs has hit differential flexure issues - especially with long tubes and heavy cameras. I've heard of an SX AO being a solution to flexure on the slave scope (the primary scope having an OAG just in case it's needed). It's early days - I hope to start testing the rig next week - but as it's a remote robotic rig I'm trying to anticipate every possible problem and corresponding solutions.
  6. Please guys there's no need for any apologies. Unwittingly this is helpful because I'm currently using CCD cameras for both scenarios.
  7. Martin, primarily the sheer choice of models, such as ASI1600MM vs ASI183MM vs ASI178MM etc etc. I read that some of these are only suitable for short focal lengths (whereas my need is for long focal lengths) and yet I see amazing images using them on Astrobin produced on long focal length scopes.
  8. Thanks for all of the comments. I can narrow down the choice to mono, and cooled (to mimimise noise). I actually have two potential uses: 1. For planetary, lunar and small deep-sky objects (planetary nebulae) on a Celestron C11 and so long focal length (2880mm). A small sensor would be fine except for lunar mosaics where a larger sensor would help. 2. As an alternative to a CCD Camera on a 1200mm focal length refractor which is part of a multi-rig setup if I cannot overcome issues of differential flexure (which seems to be an issue on most multi-rigs). My thinking is that CMOS gives me very short exposures and thus reducing the impact of any flexure.
  9. does anyone have experience of the SX AO that they can share?
  10. I find the choice of cooled CMOS cameras perplexing. Can anyone offer advice as to how to choose which one?
  11. I normally do 20 - some would argue for more.
  12. You were right not to be convinced Olly. I was also getting FWHM of 2.3 on the Star71 - but that doesn't explain the softness, nor does poor focus. Careless clumsy processing is the explanation! Have reprocessed the luminance from scratch. I think this is an improvement.
  13. Thanks VLAV. Well spotted! I check it out. Peter
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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