alacant

You can process either to look like the other. The graphs look similar too. Another consideration -for us at least- was that one costs 10 times more than the other. But that's just lines and numbers. The cheaper one gave better blue/green. A factor we didn't take into account however was light pollution. The Optolong may just give better results if that's an issue for you. As we say, personal preference. Have a look at what you have and go from there. Cheers.

Try it! We have posted several UHC images on this site. Here's the first one I came across. It's with a dslr and 72ed. It doesn't get much more basic. With the OP's 533, I'm sure it would be spectacular. Cheers

Hi Having tried both, just a personal preference.

additionally instead of using the l-e. Cheers

Hi Maybe process what you have already and base your decision upon those findings? 533mc, so a UHC may help may help isolating the blue/green squid bits from the red mush. Cheers and good luck.

Yeah, OK. You're too close. Get a set. Combinations of the 3, 5, 7 and 10mm from here would get you there. Always good to have spare tubes;) HTH

IIRC, it's 63mm, sensor to shoulder of FF. If you have the rotator on the telescope side, my guess is you're 8mm short. A photo may help. HTH

Hi I doubt whether either combination will cover full frame very well. You could try flat frames and/or lose a margin around the edges. Cheers

Hi In this case, it is because the corrector is too close to the camera sensor. Easily fixed. HTH

+1. It may be more expensive, but it solves so many issues with low end reflectors.

¡Vaya! But yes. I shouldn't be so surprised. Some of ours had that too. If you want to keep the high tech card, then 6 blobs. One on the cork side, the other on the cardboard side. But NOT glue, rather non-rigid silicone sealant. And strictly gravity and very gentle pressure only. Aim for, say, no more than 2mm of silicone. Suerte

Look carefully at your frames before. It is rare to find a Baader cc free of astigmatism. Fix the tilt though and it should be minimal.

Yes. The mirror is distorted. You probably pushed the mirror against the cell when you replaced it. It must be allowed to float on the silicone and not be glued by it. You need just three small but generous blobs of sealant coinciding with the cork. The mirror is then replaced and allowed to fall into the cell under gravity. Leave 24 hours on a level surface before replacing.

Additional ring, where?

Hi It's astigmatism and typical of that introduced by the Baader cc. You're also tilted vertically. The bright star. If the pattern persists with e.g. a gpu cc and this 130 is fully modified/blackened, you'll need to 'combination substitute' secondary and primary with examples which are known to be good. Or just accept it:) Saludos

Hi The streaking is almost all in the red. The bias subtraction doesn't seem to have worked. A quick tweak fixes it. A few other bits and pieces which may also help... With the filter in place, it would be a good idea to separate and recombine channels anyway. Flat frames aren't really optional and help ease processing a lot. Dark frames however are likely to make matters worse. We'd also recommend more and longer frames to stack; if your unfiltered frames were 15s, increase that to at least 60s with the filter Get the bias sorted out along with trying some of the above and you'll almost certainly find it easier to process. You may wish to simply subtract the bias without removing a stack full of images. Don't know which camera you used but on our 700ds 2048 works fine and gives clean images. I'll include a screen of where to include that value. Even if you haven't purposely dithered, stack with a modern clipping algorithm anyway. Cheers and HTH

Ah, OK. That's designed to make it look like old film processing. Of course, that's maybe what you're after. If you want something less 'filmy', try AutoDev throughout, with as many ROIs as is necessary to get the effect you want. Here are three alternatives. All have the stars under control. Only one will get you on the road to the current perceived norm;) HTH

Hi I don't think there's anything wrong with the hardware. If anything, it could be not so good tracking or guiding; you still get round stars, but fatter. Maybe go easy on the smoothing/denoise or whatever ps calls it? But hey, there's some lovely detail. HTH

Remember that the 72ed is bottom of the range material and the examples we've used all needed -albeit easy- adjustments to get them working satisfactorily. On the plus side, they're easily transportable; many of our visitors bring them over as carry-on airline baggage. If you get a good one, you'll be fine. Possibly the best research you could do would be to go along to an astronomy club meeting. Between them, the members will be able to show you the setups you have in mind first hand and they'll have you up and running in record time once you made your decision. Good luck and HTH

Mmm. One used camera with which you've had no failures... By all means recommend otherwise. We however, do not recommend used. Cheers

Congratulations. Your experience is better than ours.

Mmm. You must have been lucky. Used and old even more so!

An astro camera with a sensor the size of a dslr starts at around £1500. Call it £2000 if you don't use AliExpress. HTH

Hi The 1000d is over 20 years old. You'll see a big difference between it and a modern eos. Have a look at/borrow a 600d, 700d 4000d... They and a few others all share the excellent 18mp sensor and can be had for a tenth of the price of a cooled model with the same sized sensor. They're also rugged and built to last. Just our €0,02 but HTH.

Hi No time to do it justice I'm afraid, but it looks like the flat frames are working fine: