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_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

Photosbykev

Members
  • Content Count

    4,975
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Photosbykev last won the day on August 13 2015

Photosbykev had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,187 Excellent

About Photosbykev

  • Rank
    Wannabe Pete

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.photosbykev.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Glos and Anglesey, N. Wales
  1. Sorry folks blame me for the clouds over the next week. A new HEQ5 Pro mount is on its way to me
  2. An update on processing to pull more of the Ha detail out As is always the case more data needed lol
  3. I saw that as well Dave, CCDCalc reports the scale as 3.07arc-sec/pixel which I used for my dithering calculation (6720px wide sensor and 5.36 micron pixel size). Okay I know why, I resized the full frame down to 2048 pixels wide for Nova to work on I've corrected the top post
  4. Nice clear night for a few hours in the back garden Stock Canon 5D MkIV and William Optics Zenithstar 61 with flattener on a iOptron SkyGuider Pro guided in PHD2 with ZWO ASI120mm and 30mm f/4 guidescope. 30 x 4 minute exposures of the Deneb region, 20 darks/flats and 50 bias frames captured with APT. Calibrated and integrated in Astro Pixel Processor then finished in PixInsight and PS. Full frame image with 100px crop on the borders to remove the dithering artifacts. Center (RA, Dec): (312.884, 44.134) Center (RA, hms): 20h 51m 32.201s Center (Dec, dms): +44° 08' 03.276" Size: 5.56 x 3.6 deg Radius: 3.311 deg Pixel scale: 9.77 arcsec/pixel 3.07 arcsec/pixel Orientation: Up is 341 degrees E of N
  5. Thank you folks, sounds like just the rear filter needs to come out to take advantage of normal DSLR lens as well as the refractor. I'm not too bother about AF as the camera will be dedicated to astro work so all manual anyway but obviously reaching infinity with dslr lenses is pretty important Now all I need is just one modification company to reply to my email. 3 companies emailed in the UK and not one reply so far Kev
  6. No complaints so far and hopefully will keep me happy for a few months lol
  7. Good morning folks, I've been shooting with a stock 5D MkIV attached to the back of a WOZ61 with Flat61A flattener and IDAS-D2 filter. Very pleased with the results I'm getting but I have a spare Canon 5D MkIII which i want to get modified to grab more Ha. Bearing in mind I would like to use the modded camera with standard DLSR prime lenses as well is the best modification just to remove the UV/IR and Colour correction filter on the sensor leaving the AntiAliasing/UV/IR cut filter in place or remove both and replace with a clear glass filter? I suspect the standard Canon AA/UV/IR filter cutoff is a bit too close to the Ha band so I will lose some Ha data if the AA/UV/IR cut filter is left in place? If I go down the clear glass filter route I think this means I would need to use a UV/IR filter when shooting with the standard DSLR lenses to avoid bloating and focus problems. Are there any negatives if I leave the AA/UV/IR cut filter on the sensor for astrophotography with the refractor or with standard DSLR lenses or should I just get the full spectrum modification and then install a Astronomik CLS CCD XL clip-in filter into the 5D3 body and remove the IDAS-D2 filter from the refractor? best regards Kev
  8. I've updated the processing on the Veil and used StarNet to remove all of the star field before reprocessing the nebula and adding the star field back into the final image
  9. A revisit to the Veil nebula using a stock Canon 5D4 and WO Zenithstar 61 with Flat61A flattener and IDAS-D2 filter on a SkyGuider PRo mount guiding with a ZWO ASI120mm and 30mm f/4 guidescope. Plenty of dithering between lights Moon at 80% wasn't helping but it gives me some idea of what is achievable without going down the modified camera route. 40 x 4 minutes lights 20 x flats/darks and 50 bias frames. Calibrated and aligned in Astro Pixel Processor and then finished in PixInsight
  10. I would be very surprised if it was. The IDAS-D2 filter is inside the Flat61A flattener so in theory the mirror should be well clear of the optical path. It certainly isn't visible in any flat images
  11. Thank you FWIW I shot the Veil last night 40x4min subs and the cyan banding was still present in all the subs. Plenty of detail for a stock Canon 5D4 but the banding is strange Kev
  12. Well I seriously misread that piece of advice lol. I use blink in PI to scan every image and then remove any with satellites/planes in them and also any image with distorted stars (touch wood I don't get many of those). I shoot flats for every session so I don't think the issue is there. I think I'm having finger trouble in selecting options during calibration/registration of the data which I need to figure out. Currently shooting 3 hours of subs on the Veil with all the cabling reconfigured so I'll have some fresh data to test with. Kev
  13. I finally sorted out the bias issue, it was being subtracted twice! and below is the final image from 20 x lights/flats/darks and 50 bias images at iso 800 4 minute exposures. More exposure time, subs and a new moon required to really pull the detail out. Image calibration details were: Center (RA, Dec): (10.519, 41.372) Center (RA, hms): 00h 42m 04.521s Center (Dec, dms): +41° 22' 17.713" Size: 5.43 x 3.63 deg Radius: 3.265 deg Pixel scale: 9.54 arcsec/pixel The final image has a minor crop of around 50-100 pixels around the border to remove the dithering artifacts but I'm really pleased with the corner stars on a full frame camera.
  14. Im pretty sure the banding is related to the camera, maybe cabling interference as I can just make out the banding on each 4 minute sub without aligning/stacking. I'll have a session tonight with all the cables repositioned and see if it's still visible. The poor bias subtraction along the bottom edge is, I think, an error in calibrating the images but I mnot sure where I'm introducing the error yet. Kev
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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