Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

laser_jock99

Members
  • Posts

    6,210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by laser_jock99

  1. What make of scope is that- looks very well constructed?
  2. Yep- nice 2" monorail focuser on these scopes. http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p4762_GSO-6--Imaging-Newton---150mm-Oeffnung-f-4---2--MONORAIL.html Not logs- but a bucket full bricks suspended below the tripod. I thought this was standard proceedure for imagers?
  3. .....enough of these 'fracs & Dobs. Let's see some proper scopes! My collection (so far....) 6" GSO F4 Newt 8" Cape Newise F5 Newt 8" GSO F4 Newt 10" GSO F4 Newt 12" GSO F4 Newt
  4. A badly mounted Newtonian that can't do AP.
  5. My Equinox ED120 & Starwave ED80 getting a rare outing.....
  6. Another good, easy test for evaluating a dark sky site is to look at the night time clouds. If they are illuminated from underneath by local light pollution sources then the sky will not be as dark as it could be. In the ideal situation clouds will appear as black shapes against a fairly bright night sky. This video from my observing site sort of illustrates the point- the clouds are noticably darker than the sky behind them, indicating low local light pollution. From the same site really high clouds (~35,000 feet) actually pick up light pollution from towns 60-80 miles further south. This contrail drifting through M8 and M20 in Sagitarius is clearly illuminated by distant sodium street lights.
  7. What you require is a low profile M48 to Nikon mount adaptor like this http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p6527_TS-Optic-ultrashort-Adapter-from-M48-to-Canon-EOS-EF-Bayonet---only-1-mm-optical-l.html ....but for Nikon. I found one but can't for life of me find a link for it! EDIT- the other possibility is a coma corrector with longer back focus distance like the Baader RCC 1 Newtonian Coma Corrector http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p6527_TS-Optic-ultrashort-Adapter-from-M48-to-Canon-EOS-EF-Bayonet---only-1-mm-optical-l.html
  8. Simply stunning, so much going on there I could study it for ages. If I had any criticism it would be a very minor one- the 'enhanced detail' areas like M42 don't seem to 'match' or seemlessly blend with the rest of image. It's like looking through a misted window with a few tantalizingly mist free bits! I guess there are no plans to image the whole area in detail and make a 4000 hour version!
  9. Spurious reflections are always a possibility with bright stars like Alnitak in the field of view (or even just out of it). The line could be from one of the other Belt Stars?
  10. If you get a Baader MPCC make sure it has been machined correctly. I had to send one back after I (eventually) realised it wasn't sitting orthoganally in the 2" holder when clamped up due to poor machining.......
  11. My old 60mm Tasco (and me some 25 years ago!)
  12. Newts are great IMHO- but there's no getting around the fact they need collimating before an imaging run. It needs to be do done but should not be more onerous a task than checking the focus with a Bahtinov mask for example,
  13. Never thought I'd hear Olly extolling the virtues of a humble Newt !
  14. Excellent job- should save on set up time. I use my outdoor pier as much (if not more) than the main obsy.
  15. Consider also the GSO 6" F4 at only 580mm long it's shorter than the 130PDS. Plus you get a wider FOV (600mm fl) and reduced exposure times.
  16. Unlikely with an APS-C sized sensor! Cropping in PS is the answer. The corrected image circle of the ASA Keller coma corrector is 'only' 20mm sadly, not sure about my Baader MPCC III?
  17. Any detail on this one? I'm so tempted by the 130PDS but I already have the TS 150 F4 . Can I justify another 6" Newt.......
  18. There's no explaination in there as to why flats should be at the same ISO as the other calibration & light frames? Personnally I'd go for a lower ISO for the flats as techincally there should be less camera generated noise - though in reallity it probably doesn't make a lot of difference as more flats will average noise out. If like me you're frequently tempted to shoot at ISO 3200 or higher- then definately turn the camera gain down for the flats.
  19. Olly's image is Barnard's Loop in Orion (plus a few other objects) . A standard 50mm camera lens will take it in- compared to Olly's image my own effort of Barnards Loop is not worthy of posting.... So I'll post an 80mm camera lens widefield shot of Cygnus instead! Single 15 minute sub I think? Full size link. http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/laser_jock99/ASTRONOMICAL/DSCF7898_1024_zpsa33bf5b6.jpg~original
  20. Some of the best wide field images are taken with camera lenses- indeed many deep sky objects and comets are too big in the sky to shoot with a telescope and lend themselves better to camera lenses.
  21. Good progress - looks like a quality job.
  22. It's definitely a mod worth doing on these F4 scopes. The collimation stability gain is well worth the low cost of the components. Why on earth the manufacturers don't ship the scopes like this baffles me? It doesn't cost any more than standard the springs would......
  23. Seems like the exact same problem I'm having with the MPCC III and GSO 150mm F4 scope. It took me an age to figure out what was going on- but last session I noticed on tightening the thumbscrew the deflection of the coma corrector. Is there a thread detailing your solution?
×
×
  • 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.