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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


MartinFransson last won the day on December 9 2016

MartinFransson had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,058 Excellent

1 Follower

About MartinFransson

  • Rank
    Proto Star

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. So, I got a new (used) scope a few weeks back and have started testing it now. I think I need to fiddle a bit with the spacing but it looks OK (not perfect). I gathered a few hours of O3 and combined it with some older O3 and Ha from my Sigma 500mm tele lens. This is 45*5 minutes of Ha and 111*5 minutes of O3. ZWO ASI 1600MM-Cool with Astrodon 3nm filters. Sigma 500/4,5 EX DG HSM lens TS Optics Photoline 80mm f/6 triplet
  2. That is nothing short of breathtaking! Excellent job, very impressive!
  3. Could it be a collimation issue? I noticed that my images has a darker edge, suggesting something blocking the light path. I then started thinking that maybe the secondary should be centered when looking down the focuser? It was not. I then made some adjustments, trying to move the secondary to a more centered position and the adjusted the mirrors so that the laser dot is centered in the marking on the primary mirror and that the reflected dot "dissappears" in the hole on the laser collimator. This is what the camera see now, if I take a photo down the focuser. Looks OK or am I totally off? The camera lens looks centered on the cross formed by the spider vanes but the central marking on the primary (faintly visible ring) is not. Is that correct? Maybe I´ll start a new thread since this has gone from CCDinspector to collimation... P.S. The black, flat thing blocking the light to the right is the focuser tube.
  4. Just for comparison - here is the same scope/camera as in the first post, but with Astrodon 3nm Ha-filter. Less spacing issue it would seem?
  5. And here is a sub from my Sigma 500mm tele lens. Does it look OK or are there issues here too?
  6. I have problem when using my Skywatcher 150-PDS newtonian and my ASI1600MM-Cool. I know I have some tilt but I think there is also an issue with the spacing. Could someone help me evaluate these CCD-inspector results? Do I need to add spacing or should it be less? The images where taken using the Zwo Lum-filter. When using an Astrodon 3nm Ha filter (thicker), how should the spacing be altererd then?
  7. Got Image Of The Day at Astrobin.com with this one today
  8. But for Lum you still get the problem with fat stars I guess? Since you cant focus the different wavelengths separately.
  9. It is a very nice image! Yeah, astrophotography becomes even more addicitive with a cooled camera pulling out lots of clean data
  10. What I meant was something like this. Hope you don´t mind! Of course this doesn´t look prefect since I only had the 8-bit data to use as an example, I just wanted to show the shape of the curve. You can see the two sampled points, where I altered the curve.
  11. No, please don´t go pitch black for the background! I really don´t like that either. I try to stay above 25,25,25 for RGB values. I think for me it is more of overstretching it or maybe you could just try some local contrast enhancement without touching the stars? For example a curves layer where you bring the dark nebulosity and the bright nebulosity closer together, without touching the darkest background or the brightest highlights... kind of hard to explain in text
  12. That´s an excellent image! The detail is awesome! I see you found the same problems as I did - the amount of O3 and S2 in this region And you also use the same filters as I do - Astrodon 3nm for Ha and O3 and Baader 7nm for S2. I had the exact same problems with star sizes and halos on the S2 data. I also had problems with haze in quite a lot of my O3 subs so I actually made two stacks. One with the cleanest data for better star shapes and one with all the data for the faint nebulosity. I then made a starless version of the full dataset and blended it into the stack with better stars.
  13. That looks great! If I may be just a little bit picky (which I only am if the image is great to begin with ) I think it´s pushed just a bit too hard. I would have preferred a slightly darker image and maybe with the added bonus of less prominent stars. But I fully understand the urge to push it as far as possible since you have massive data to begin with.
  14. I have owned astromodded versions of both and the 550D just smashes the 1100D in my opinion! I can´t give you any technical reasons to why that would be the case, it´s just my experience. But one thing I had huge problems with on the 1100D is vertical dark lines below bright stars. I know this does not occur on every specimen of the 1100D but it is not uncommon. For me it´s a nobrainer. I loved that 550D and would be using it still if I hadn´t gone mono cooled camera.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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