jimbo747

I can see at least 3 cat faces in that image, possibly as many as 6.

I think if the object was bang on north, and you took shots for several hours you probably would get that, aim at polaris or something. I noticed after I uploaded that the image has rotated - must be DSS that does this? The camera shots are in portrait due to how I connect camera to mount so all subs are in portrait, stacked image before any PS is in landscape.

Ok, I've attached 3 cropped images, 2 of which from a sub, and 1 from the final processed image to show difference. 1 raw image is what I'd call an 'average' frame, its what at least half of the subs looked like, one is the 'best' frame showing the least amount of streaking. The image has rotated quite a bit in between taking the first frame and the last, presumably because of its position in the sky, maybe that is what helped DSS reduce streaks in the final image. Again, in the final image, only curves, levels and a rough alignment of the histogram were done. Edit - Forgot to add, FL was probably around 180/190mm as I couldn't focus at 200m, had to wind back a tiny bit to get focus. 1) least amount of streaking 2) 'Average' sub 3) final image

Took my first image for over a year, and first ever with my modded DSLR. Moving house and cleared shed as far as my telescope and it just so happened to be a clear night. Dumbell nebula and some cluster at the bottom of the image. Stars look bloated because 1) its a full spectrum mod and I have no IR or UV filter 2) its a cheap £30 200m zoom lens 3) I'm rubbish at processing, did some levels and curves tweaks. Used SLT alt az mount. 1 hours worth of 60s exposures. The image is completely uncropped and the mount kept the nebula bang in the middle for 2 hours - never managed this level of accuracy before. No calibration frames of any kind, vignetting reduced in photoshop. Now the image isn't anything special, but the reason I post is interestingly, most (90%) of the images when the object was high in the sky showed star streaks, however I think thanks to kappa sigma it averaged them out giving them a far more round look compared to any single raw file. I took 2 hours worth and stacked 50% thinking the image would be ruined, maybe I could try adding more of the remaining 50%. When I'm setup at new house and can see far more of the sky I'll try some 90s-120s subs and see how DSS fairs.

Is the barlow so you can achieve focus on the 130? I've been using the SLT mount with a cheapo travelscope 70 and canon 1100d and have good fun with it. With a £2000+ setup you expect to get good images, with a £200 one, you don't and if you manage to get something then its a bonus! I've got young kids so I'd never have time to get out a heq5 and polar align etc, I have 30 mins to an hour at most.

Been reading this thread with interest after I found out the mount can be controlled without the hand set. Has anyone been able to confirm if the mount can be programmed in an EQ settings? Might be able to get hold of one cheaply and was thinking of adding on my travelscope 70 with DSLR for some basic wide field photography. If not, how does the tracking compare to say an SLT alt az mount?

Even so, for 20s thats amazing! You used your 6.3 FR right?

I managed this with my Mak on its standard SLT mount and a webcam. DSO imaging at the extreme budget end! About 50x10s exposures, 0 gain, some fiddling in photoshop

Here is my very first DSO, and 3rd ever image. 5 minutes worth of 10s exposures. Some fiddling in photoshop but I don't really know what I'm doing. Celestron 127 MAK on standard alt az mount £10 0.5x focal reducer £5 PS3 eye camera, very badly focused

2 hours later and she still not asleep. Sky looks nice and clear though from the window. Can you give a 3 year old nytol and caol ila?

Some of these are amazing for a first go. Im planning on attempting my first DSO tpnight if my daughter ever gets to sleep. Was gonna shoot orion but I reckon the clouds have rolled in or wife will start nagging for me to go to sleep!

Can't believe I've missed this thread. Quite possibly the finest image taken from the ground I've seen, and rivals many that the hubble managed. Have spent a good half hour studying it instead of working and will be looking at it again later!