Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Adam J

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,950

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Adam J

  1. Adam J
    You wont be disappointed with the results if you do, I have cooled one before now and it was a massive step in performance.
  2. Adam J
    Hope you have a mixer as thats too much by hand in one continual pour trust me, your dimensions are almost exactly the same as mine. On the other hand I poured the base and pier separately and it has not suffered for it at all, you just have to use epoxy and scour the interface. Also make sure that the pipe you put inside your tube form for the wires is at least and inch from the edge or you will risk cracking and voids within the concrete. In any case I would recommend using an emulsifier to get it flowing around better.
  3. Adam J

    2017_0270.jpg

    Adam J commented on JimT's gallery image in Member's Album

    2017_0270.jpg
    Have you any examples of images from the QHY183c I have not been able to find many about.
  4. Adam J
    I would be a little worried that the weight of the shed itself is insufficient not to allow that weight to be offset without the whole thing ending up on its side. Even bolting it down I would worry about the walls distorting without any additional internal frame work to stiffen the whole thing up.
  5. Adam J
    It looks great, it makes me shudder though as I know how long it took me to do mine (3.5months) and its easily half that size.
  6. Adam J
    In the UK the frost will be unlikely to get deeper than 10cm ever mate. Rain / water course is a different matter.
  7. Adam J
    The only thing that I am not understanding about that statement is that your image looks very blue for an RGB image, when I have seen this before OIII has always been green / teal not electric blue. Mine is of course a bi-color narrow band image and hence the OIII is assigned to blue. But then you do have star color to I was assuming it was OIII + Ha + RGB .
  8. Adam J
    Here is my effort with a 1000D, it did not seem fair to compare to a unmodified DSLR. In terms of comparison you got more detail but less depth, though i have been way more aggressive in processing. I would expect more detail though given the longer focal length (mine is cropped allot) and the mono should improve resolution also.
  9. Adam J
    Not sure I would be so accommodating. Using your image is one thing placing their own water mark onto it is another.
  10. Adam J
    I dug a hole about 75cm x 75cm x 60cm (I hit the local water table at only 60cm below surface level). I can grantee you that the pier is not going to go anywhere with that sized hole. The pier itself i was made using a square form consisting of four pieces of ply wood screwed together and is 1m x 25cm x 25cm with 3 x reinforcement bars running through it and into the base. Its as solid as a rock and possibly overkill.
  11. Adam J
    Yes as its a 0.9 reducer it does just that. The SW CC also suffers from internal reflections which have been known to cause halos around stars. Finally it does produce a little chromatic aberration if you dont use a proper IR/UV blocked filter. The MPCCMKIII is a better corrector.
  12. Adam J
    What coma corrector are you using some of the cheaper ones will give chromatic aberration. Also are you using a UV/IR block ?
  13. Adam J
    I had a go hope that you dont mind.
  14. Adam J
    Attempted to increase the background to make it appear less clipped but i really think that this is all that the data has to give now. Sometimes converting to jpg had reduce the image depth and make it appear clipped when its not in the 16 bit image. At the end of the day I am working with a DSLR from a yellow zone so I am not displeased with this result.
  15. Adam J
    When you said 10c I am assuming that you ment -10c...
  16. Adam J
    Thought i would share this here too. Slight tweak from version in the imaging section. 30x300, iso800, 550D, 130pds.
  17. Adam J
    Thats a nice image i
  18. Adam J
    You will have to post a shot.
  19. Adam J
    Doughnuts on a Newtonian are normally poor focus. I do note that you have some tilt in your image so you may find that while some stars are in focus in some areas of the image the are not in other areas. The tilt is basically that the top of the image you posted is in focus but the bottom of the image is not in focus. You may want to check your focuser is orthogonal to the optical axis by racking the focus tube in and out and seeing if your collimation remains consistent.
  20. Adam J
    I take it this is with the DSLR what is the state of play with the QHY163m ???? Its a nice image though.
  21. Adam J
    Like someone else said just make sure you glue a stop on to the end of the tube to stop it falling out if you move it out too far.
  22. Adam J
    You can shift the primary up the tube on its adjustment screws, it pushes out the focus tube a little and prevents it getting so badly in the way.
  23. Adam J
    Yes it would but you would find that the collimation would change as you move the focuser in and out. So in my case with a laser colimator the position of the reflected spot would change as I racked the focuser in and out, if its parallel then it would remain in the same place irrespective of focuser position.
  24. Adam J
    I am assuming that you have looked to ensure that the focuser itself is square with the optical axis?
  25. Adam J
    I don't have any problem with focus slipping without needing to use the locking screw and I have a 550D inside a cool box hanging off mine 1.25kg total so if you really cant adjust the tension to prevent it from slipping you may have a duff focuser...
×
×
  • 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.