Adam J

ok dont change it now as per my comment above.

2x2 bin? Dont worry if not you can just re-size it in processing for the same effect.

As in 400 seconds or 400 subs?

Yeah i would do nothing but Ha all night mate as the moon with ruin anything else. Seriously even if its 1000Ha subs in one night go with all ha. Get the RGB another night.

or for that matter just keep going at the current settings get 100 frames like that and something will pop out, this is ha yes?

Could try bin 3x3 and see if that helps things. Another thing to try is gain 50 and 120s subs or even going longer. Now that your on a target you can play with settings.

well my reaction to the first image is thats not the star pattern I am expecting for IC1805...so thats most likely why your not seeing it. If you have NGC7635 Bubble nebula please share an image :) Adam

Was thinking more like the centre of the heart nebula. Ic1805 so even if you miss that then you can't help but land on some ha. 60 - 120s subs with gain 200. Bin 2x2 if you can't see it in a single sub your doing something wrong.

My advice is to go for something big so that you literally cant miss it lol.

It might help if you shared your raw data on here that way people can take a look and see if they can either get something out of it or failing that make a suggestion on what to try. With a target like ic 5146 you should have seen something in a 60second Ha Sub. Adam

Can any owner of an Esprit 100 provide me with a measurement please? I am wanting to know, with a camera / filter wheel (ZWO preferably or similar weight) / finder scope (guider) fitted, how far forward of the mount centre line does the scope extend when in balance and with / without the dew shield retracted. I am trying to work out if it will fit under my obsy roof without having to park the scope horizontally. Adam

Lol no idea what most of that meant. Let us see how it turns out.

make a list

Is it not just a magnet?

Like the processing but would like to see the full resolution version.

You beat me to it. If your willing to work with it the 130PDS is very capable. I keep thinking about an esprit 80 and then I compare my 130PDS images to those taken with the 80mm scope for detail and I end up backing out. The conclusion may be that nothing less than 100mm of aperture can replace my 130PDS.

Nice detail what scope / camera did you use?

You only need the non-CCD one as the remaining filter is still a reasonable IR cut. Adam

As discussed about your better off with a duel band as opposed to tri-band.

aren't we all lol, am trying to make up sufficient money to buy a new scope at the moment.

DSO viewing and portability are not two things that go hand in hand. As mentioned above you need aperture and big apertures are less portable. Personally I would think that this is as big as things get in terms of aperture before you are no longer 'portable' in the true sense of the word. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html I am sure a US supplier will stock these, they can be collapsed down into a very portable form. Of course if by portable you really mean fits in the back of a 4x4 then get a 8 inch dob. Like this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html Or if you are willing to shell out for a go to package something like this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/se-series/celestron-nexstar-5se.html or this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astro-fi-series-telescopes/celestron-astro-fi-130mm-reflector.html Adam

The only reason I can think that something like that would happend is if you are doing longer subs and so getting some flex or guiding errors that are making the stars bigger in comparison to the shorter LRGB subs. Apart from that there is no physical reason I know if why that would happen. The other reason might be that your not detecting any lower brighness stars at all due to insufficient exposure and a very narrow filter. I have often noted that smaller aperture scopes tend to have a cut of in Ha in terms of star size.

No that's not true at all. All the photons from emission Nebula are contained within emission lines and as such a narrower the filter the better irrespective of if its OSC or mono. The filter will always let all the nebula light through but will block increasing amounts of broad band light as it gets narrower, that includes both light pollution and star light so smaller stars are a secondary bonus. But for this reason you would not use a narrow band filter for galaxy imaging, unless its to image Ha regions within a galaxy and add them to a broad band image. The only slight gocha used to be with older DSLRs, they would have a hard time focusing / finding a target with very narrow filters as they could not see a star in live view mode. That is absolutely not an issue for a camera like your 294 which is more than sufficiently sensitive. Would love to know who is feeding you that information. Adam

Sorry I did not see your question before, I think that you will be happy with the ASI183mm pro, the various mono cameras available at the moment all have different strengths but you can take a nice image with any one of them and while its nice to keep between 1 and 2 arc seconds per pixel its not a hard rule that you must follow.

Very nice, What made you chose to use two different exposures per band for this image? Adam