Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

chops

Members
  • Posts

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chops

  1. As you both point out, I’ve yet to understand what defines this as a cohesive structure, rather than an improbable, albeit pleasant, coincidence. However UCLAN’s Alexia Lopez is also quoted thus: “Lots of people are excited but, having said that, you do get this attitude in cosmology that you don’t generally find elsewhere in science,” and “Good science should be about pushing back and testing our fundamental assumptions but there are clearly people who want to protect the Standard Model.”. (Source: FT) Fighting talk. I like it. Joining the Hercules Borealis Corona Wall (10Bn LY) and Great Arc (3Bn LY) we shall wait to see the detail in her peer reviewed scientific paper, presumably out 2025 at the glacial pace academia appears forced to follow.
  2. Thanks Vlaiv, I’d not heard of Laniakea before. What you’re suggesting suggests it’s more a phenomena caused by humans projecting our desire to perceive order - in the same way as pareidolia (seeing faces) works, and our construct of asterisms of stars as artificial shapes (plough, Orion the hunter etc), albeit on a cosmic scale. However, to my eye, the Laniakea and component superclusters have little to no symmetry, when compared with the diagram of the galaxy ‘big ring’ above. Presumably their science is rigorous above to exclude the likelihood that the arrangement is chance, and it has been therefore determined without doubt that the ring is in fact that - something with the order that we so desperately seek.
  3. Caught a passing article about a ring of galaxies which defies the the Standard Model of cosmology - very interested in the perspective of SGL’s hive mind of cosmologists, physicists and astronomers. The BBC article referenced a PHD student at the University of Lancaster, who identifies large scale structures such as galaxy alignments . However the latest body shouldn’t exist, because it appears to break the standard model’s theoretical limit on the size of a body in the universe - 1.2 billion light years, and its standard distribution of matter. The ‘Big Ring’ of galaxies is 1.3Bn light years diameter, and suggests a less even distribution. The ring sits in Bootes, close to the region of Alkaid, the outermost star of the plough / Ursa Major, and M101 Pinwheel Galaxy (image from UofLanc below). It’s well beyond my Ken what holds bodies such as this in place, gravitational forces one assumes. … Probably should read the article now (link below) but likely someone else here already understands the concepts and can help describe in laymen’s terms for us simpletons% https://www.uclan.ac.uk/news/big-ring-in-the-sky pic from Uni of Lancs article
  4. I read this weekend of one of APM's 6x30s having a 9.3 degree FOV, plus TS-Optics seems to have a very similar model. I'm unsure whether FLO sell 6x30s but they're also on sale at a German retailer to the UK for 167EUR. Nikon 8x30 also have a 8.8 degree FoV, so very wide AFOV (mag x True FoV) of 70 degrees if I've understood correctly (?). Plus there's the Helios 2x40 Star Field 2x with Angular Field of View: 24° (Actual Field of View: 445m@1000m) at FLO, although they sell other Hawkes, including the 8x32 (129m at 1000 metres /7.35°TFOV / 58.8° AFOV ) it doesn't include the 7x32 So, price / performance from the list below and I'd go Hawke every time Nikon EII 8x30 = 70.4° (are these still available new - some on Amazon for £630?) Opticron Savannah 8x30 7.51° = 60° (£109 FLO) Hawke Endurance ED 8x32 = 58.8° (£239 at FLO ) Hawke Endurance ED marine 7x32 = 58.1° (£240-250 similar sites - not yet on FLO's site) APM and TS optics 6x30s = 55.8° (£170) Helios 2x40 Star Field 24° = 48° (£89 at FLO) Hope this helps you too
  5. A few from Cornwall, where the skies this winter have rarely been clear and consequently exposures rather on the short side. Additionally I’ve had a couple of technical problems but, for now, variously unprocessed or processed on the iPhone: M1, NGC2244, M78, M42, moon, whirlpool galaxy, western veil nebula, andromeda galaxy, pleiades. clear skies!
  6. Much has been written about the Hawkes, and I own their Sapphire 8x25 (which rivals, but doesn't match the venerable 90s Swarovski Habicht 10x25B). The Hawkes are wonderful for the price and so, when I recently spotted a display cabinet full of 'em in a Penzance's Perfect Photos, tried a few and settled on these 7x32 for £260, as something high quality, transportable, slightly different and very easy to handhold on target. These binoculars are great for daytime and night: the usual bino of choice for astro is well... frankly, whatever's closest. But, if planning a session, typically a Helios Stellar II 10x50 (hand / chest or monopod mounted), Opticron Adventurer T WP 10x50, or Helios Apollo 15x70 (parallelogram mount). Also owned and reviewed (then gifted) the Budget Helios Naturesport Plus, Weathermaster III and Fieldmaster here. Yes, binoviewers in the scopes too. Compared with all of these, they're lighter and smaller and more robust. With the exception of the Apollo 15x70, they're better quality and with a better image too. They're also easy to hold for an extended period, being close to the body. They have foldable objective lens caps, included eyepiece caps, floating (or normal) neckstrap, and a solid semi rigid carry case. I expect they'll last a lifetime. One reason to buy them was the utility of a more widefield bino. I've seen people with 2x (and wanted a 4x or 5x, but these aren't easily available), hence the purchase of their excellent Endurance 7x32 'Marine' (which will also be useful for their stated watery purpose), with BAK-4 roof prism, nice large, heavily knurled focus adjuster atop for cold fingers, and a good solid dioptre adjuster. They're waterproof (IP67) too and feel robust and solid (weighing 545g). Quoted as Field of View 8.3° / Apparent Field of View 58° (435ft @1000yds / 145m @1000yds) it's plenty wide. Certainly enough to get all of Orion's belt, and his sword in too. Easily. Sweeping through the milky way and through star clusters is superb. The Hercules double cluster's sparkling, Auriga's M36 and M36 clusters are great. Could have sworn I could see IC405 (Flaming Star nebula) , something I didn't expect to see. They have limited Coma, great contrast and resolution. Great colour, no fringing. Cons? Planets are miniscule, the moon is small and the inter pupil distance needs to be set accurately for me (i.e. the hinge to adjust distance for eye position) as exit pupil (4.6mm) and eye relief (17mm) feels startingly large, so perhaps getting harder as eyes age. but easier than others with specs (don't usually bother). Not as sharp to the edge as more expensive models, but really very good for the price. Link here to manufacturer site: HAWKE UK | Endurance ED Marine 7x32 Binocular (hawkeoptics.com) Comprehensive (non astro) review here: Hawke Endurance ED Marine 7x32 Binoculars Review (bestbinocularsreviews.com) Field of View from astronomy.tools
  7. This reply may resurrect a rather old thread, but I’ve owned the Helios Stellar II 10x50 for a while and, whilst they’re great, I recently bought some lighter Opticron Adventurer T WP 10x50 on the back of the master of binos, Steve Tonkin (@binocularsky) reviews. The Stellar II has significantly higher contrast, a brighter and generally much more pleasant and immersive viewing than the Opticron. They are, however, heavier to handhold and mine has a sloppy right hand diopter / focussing adjuster which has always felt wrong, perhaps collimation problem too. Even with these downsides, they’re far better. The Opticron are significantly smaller, lighter and far easier to carry (see image), as well as being far cheaper. They’re superb value, even if not giving such high quality, crisp, views as the Helios. However - for the best views, a pair of Helios Apollo 15x70 on a parallelogram mount cannot be beaten. For portability, a high quality 10x25. Afraid no easy answer but, in the middle of all of these for price and performance, the Stellar II 10x50 are great. I once reviewed some of Helios’ £50-£80 binos in depth Cheaper 10x50 Helios Astro binocular review and the Naturesport Plus (£79 at the time) beat the others easily. However these Opticron Adenturer T WP at £84 are better than the Helios Naturesport and, for £84 from FLO, a bargain. I just wish I’d bitten the bullet years ago and bought the higher end Helios Lightquest 10x50. If anything like the Apollo 15x70 they’ll be amazing.
  8. I found the eyepiece extenders made a big difference to the scope’s usability; they were recommended by HighburyMark when I wrote my first (very positive) impressions of the SS60. I hope something helps you here - I find it a cracking, inexpensive, Ha scope.
  9. Rusted, thank you so much for your input. I’ll take everything on board and give that a bash - plus try running my previous results through ImPPG to see what’s there too. Fingers crossed for some autumn sunshine. clesr skies to you.
  10. Many thanks Kitsunegari, I’ll read a little more about those cameras - I’ve been so impressed with the 183MC for general imaging (planetary, solar, dso) when compared with a digital SLR, I’ve no doubt I’ll pretty soon want something more specialised and it sounds as though a monochrome like the 290 and 174 is the way forward. I’ve some way to go to improve results including increasing frame rate further - I took some poor lunar video this weekend and a faster monochrome capture would be far superior too, presumably easier to stack fewer of the better captures.
  11. I remain impressed with the Daystar Scout SS60. I've also finally tried to bring out some detail from the images. Daystar Solar Scout SS60, ASI183MC. Sharpcap - 1000 frames at 4ms with 350 gain. (.ser format, RGB24 colourspace). Probably overprocessed in Photoshop - because I don't know what I'm doing: HDR toning, levels, unsharp mask and increase brightness and contrast. Many not be technically good, but I'm happy wioth the results so far. Any pointers gratefully accepted.
  12. Thanks Geoff, I couldn’t achieve focus with the 1.6x Barlow adapter supplied, so I shall have another try with other lens options, although the joy of having the entire disc in view will have been lost, it’d be much better than nothing for sure.
  13. Here's a summary of some lessons I've learned, following an earlier topic in which two experienced members kindly gave some of their hard earned advice (the topic's linked here and called "Disc and prominence - Daystar Scout SS60-DS 17th March 2021 from Cornwall, UK (plus a request for your help please"): I've a reasonable amount of dark / night time astronomy and limited experience with a decent astrophoto camera (but only within the past few months moved to the ASI183MC from an SLR), so some of the below may be obvious to anyone with a modicum of experience, plus of course has parallels with dark astrophotography, but I thought worth noting here in case it's of help to you too. Timing - mid morning's good: when the sun's not yet created a heat haze in the atmosphere, but is still high enough above the horizon not to have too much atmosphere's to look through (just like night time astrophotgraphy). Seeing makes a big difference - just as at night, look out for high haze and turbulence Focus remains important, but finding it is easier than at night Use Firecap or Sharpcap, instead of ASI Studio Don't use AVI video: using .SER files correlated with better results for me (and plain still captures didn't yield the best results either) Keep exposures short (with this setup showing most of the disk, but not quite all, mine typically 35-40ms for surface and 70-90ms to give more prominence detail) Set Gain low (I leave at zero / 0 for now) I set Gamma at 50, but don't know what others use I've yet to determine the best video length - experienced people talk of 1000 frames, but I think I've used about 500 so far, over about 30-60 seconds of capture). Wish I'd captuured the screen, to show you. Be selective - use a small portion of your video frames. I've been using 10%-25% when seeing is good, experienced members have recommended <10% for better quality Autostakkert select Surface mode (because the whole disc doesn't quite fit in with this camera / scope combination). If a new camera / setup allows whole disc it'll be approximate polar alignment is OK for videos, don't let the disc drift to the edge of the fram When getting Autostakkert alignment, set AP size to 104 or 200 I need to learn GIMP. Use Colour > Levels (to stretch, in a similar way to DSO work) is useful, as is the Brightness / Contrast settings plus, as here, crudely joining two images of proms and surface layers. In the interim, the iPhone adjustments can give a pleasing result - here I've increased saturation and contrast more easily than I find in Photoshop or GIMP. I've yet to work out how to debayer properly, to get rid of the square artefacts. Result attached: a very crude two layer (not blended, just placed) with the background image exposed for prominences, the top layer plonked on with surface detail. Minimal processing in GIMP and iPhone. Also the prominences were a little overexposed, but I wanted to yank out some of the shapes quickly and easily. Other results with lower exposures, pushed harder, have yielded better prominence detail overall. What can you add to this list, to help others?
  14. I find a binoviewer a revelation and viewing much more natural - night or day, but it's too uncomfortable for sustained use when the erecting prism can't be used, so these will be tempting when I can justify it in future. However some of the reviews on Cloudy nights aren't wholly complimentary, hence trying a Orion Premium Linear Binoviewer on the Daystar Scout SS60 first would be rather good. Fingers crossed star parties can start up again this year.
  15. Goodness, a zero backfocus Binoviewer... thanks @catburglar - it looks like an amazingly useful bit of kit... would love to turn the Dobson into a binoview too... but ... I've *only just* bought the WO binoviewer.. so don't feel I can justify £430 ... you first! Please do post up if anyone owns the Orion Premium Linear BinoViewer for Telescopes
  16. @Highburymark thanks for the eyepiece extender tip. It arrived yesterday and I tried it this morning with the Televue 32mm Plossl. Significant improvement and much more comfortable. I still found myself reaching for the old (Taiwan model) Meade Super Plossl 4000 26mm which works well and, of course, wishing desperately that the Binoviewer would work with a diagonal and the SS60. I still also prefer the views through an Explore Scientific 62 degree 24mm... but there’s no doubt the Televue 32 is sharper and has more contrast. The pic shows white light ETX125 and the SS60 with the above config, plus another in straight through binoviewer mode. Now what would be perfect is the SS60, diagonal, 2 x Tv32, 1 x eyepiece extender and 1 x dioptrix to correct astigmatism. Here’s hoping!
  17. Has anyone managed to get a binoviewer working with a Daystar Scout SA60? Apologies in resurrection of an old thread but, similar to your experiences, I’ve only managed a ‘straight through’ configuration: with a William Optics Binoviewer and WO dielectric diagonal and the SS60, I can’t reach focus and, by goodness, the view is so much more pleasant through binoviewers, but as @Geoff Lister says above, literally a pain in the neck and difficult when aligning in a direct plane to the sun. Plus the concern about eyepieces or binoviewer dropping out of the scout unless the knurled nuts are roared up tight... all makes it much simpler to use a single eyepiece with a diagonal. But, by thunder, I wish I could binoview with a diagonal. Any joy anyone?
  18. @Highburymark thank you, it’s great to hear. Re your sleeving down, I saw an interesting post here, or cloudy nights of someone using a rubber cup of some sort to shim down the objective lens to increase the focal ratio to good effect. If I find it, I’ll post it up. You’re right, the proms on this scope are great; I have little to compare it to, but there’s less surface detail than I can see in the prominences. That said, image attached (that I’ve pushed quite hard), from the same AVI which produced the proms above, that shows a little detail, but I can’t push the magnification much at all with the scope, without hitting the limits quickly... I guess that’s the advantage of a full Quark vs the Daystar... but absolutely no complaints for the price and accessibility of the Scout SS60.
  19. @Highburymark many thanks, that makes sense. I wonder why Televue don’t simply include a longer fold up rubber eyecup, which would achieve the same thing for many of us wondering whether we’ve been sold a pup. Yes, contrast is undoubtedly better than the Meade Plossl I’ve been using and sharpness noticeably better too, but without lifting my eye another few mm off the eyepiece (which makes it useless for solar viewing because of stray sunlight) it’s nothing like as useable as the cheaper eyepieces. I’ve been looking at a Dioptrix, which I assume will achieve a similar effect to the eye guard extender. ps whilst it’s not visual observing, here’s an image from a stack of frames showing that lovely prominence - and the reason I’m including it is because I can see this detail with the eye whilst using the scope (albeit nothing like so highly magnified) and so I believe it’s a fair representation of the capabilities of the SS60 for observing.
  20. Thanks Nigella, I’ll try sharpcap too. I’m amazed at the detail seen from this little and (relatively) inexpensive Ha scope. Viewing a changing prominence is a true pleasure (not that much was visible today) and the detail from some of these stacked frames almost reflects what it’s like to observe (strangely, the other way around from DSO viewing).
  21. Thanks again to you both. I've downloaded FireCapture and will use that next time the sun's out (I used a binoviewer for a short while at lunch today). I also found another AVI I'd taken and tried again with that. The 200 point size, for whatever reason, doesn't work - but 104 does. Results attached for interest ('conv' / AutoStakkert sharpened version, although it appears output both this and the un-postprocessed version to). Next task: improving the attached (un-postprocessed / enhanced) image using ImPPG (or GIMP) and debayering it... any hints please? : -D
  22. Thanks @Nigella BryantNigella, I'll try that. I also took a couple of AVIs at the same time and here's that result of that stacked with the previous settings (as per image). It's not processed at all other than, I assume, Autostakkert placing 'conv' in the file name means that AutoStakkert has sharpened it (there's two versions output - one without this appended 'conv' and it's not as sharp as the attached). Sorry to ask so many questions, but it's great to have the masters available to answer to us newbs. Do you debayer in ImPPG and what are the setting do you'd recommend on something like this please? Also, do you know what @Kitsunegari means by chanke stack size to 8%? Is this reducing 'frame percentage to stack' from default 50% to 8% in an attempt to select only the highest quality frames?
  23. @Kitsunegari and @Nigella Bryant thank you so very much for helping; does it matter that I'm stacking PNGs, not AVIs and that polar alignment is poor? The 334 source images, of about 60Mb each, were captured in groups of 33, over 7 minutes. Polar alignment was only approximate, so the disc (partial disc) drifted across the screen during those 7 minutes. Changing Autostakkert to suggested settings gives a slightly different effect now (please see attached pictures, showing both settings and resultant image) , but I suspect it's still not yet what I should be aiming for : -D Your advice is hugely appreciated, but am I essentially asking something of AutoStakkert that it cannot do? I note that Surface Stabilisation result is !#@Anchor, is this indicitive of a problem?
  24. @Nigella Bryant, Mog, do you happen to know what I've done wrong here please? It seems to have been caused by poor tracking, across 300 images over about 8 minutes, but I assumed that AutoStakkert's planetary mode would correct for this movement, aligning the disc, in the same way that deep sky stacking works. I've tried with and without the 'double stack reference' option, but this makes no difference.
  25. Thanks for the report, M46 and M47 both fit into the 4 degree field of view of the apollo 15x70s: it was fabulously clear last night and I had a similarly wondrous experience to you, except half a bottle of brandy made the monopod wobble a bit...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.