Northernlight

Hi All,

I'm just trying to get back into imaging and i've just been working on IC5070 in Narrowband and really struggled to process the image. I've attached my poor attempt, but would be interested to see what other can do with my data.

I've put my narrowband subs on google drive - please feel free to try and process them as i would really like to see what the pro's can do with my data and see if they can turn it into a half decent image.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PhbJ2bZ9exJREHOd1YI-nuoUjGkfKEIW?usp=sharing

All the best,

Rich.

yeah i'm happy for it to be closed out as i think we have got a bit off topic here.

yes that is my biggest concern about OO uk, their reputation for customer service leaves a lot to be desired.  This is the reason i'm patiently waiting on the new design lacerta newt. it's a new design built from the ground up.  I couldn't bring myself to buy the the original design no matter how good the reviews were  as it was essentially a heavily modified SW quattro and used the standard SW quattro primary & secondary mirror cells and for over £2000 i just couldn't justify it.

from what i've seen so far or the yet to be unveiled new design, it looks like it's built like a tank and they have taken some neat design ideas from other types of scopes and adapted them to the newt

the think i really like about lacerta newts is that they literally do real star tests with them before they ship as well as tests on the bench and every is hand built, so you know you are getting a good quality item.

Not waiting for it to be delivered, waiting for the new design to be completed. Lacerta is designing a new version of their newt from the ground up. I'm pencilled in to be 1st customer to receive  it

Out of interest  what software do you process your image with ?   Can recommend a bit of MureDenoise on the background 😉 

Hi  Mangifigeek,

Great image  - Can i ask if you were using a coma corrector as i noticed a lot of coma in the corners of the image  ?  Also were you using an OAG to guide or a seperate guide scope as i also noticed some elongated stars in the middle of the image so wasn't sure if this was differential flex, guiding issues or just flex in the tube itself.

The reason i ask is because i'm still keeping the idea of a VX10 on the back burner in case my new lacerta scope gets delayed past the end of the year, so want to find out as much about the vx10 direct from  people using the scope.

Cheers,

Rich.

Well it turned out that it was due to the latest version 1.8.8.6 which has starnet built into it.  So a quick uninstall & reinstall and configure of the wights in the starnet and everything is golden all thanks to DarkArchon  who to took the time and patience to talk me through solving the problem

I had a look at discord once and couldn't figure it out - I suppose i could try and again.

Hi All,

I'm trying to use the EZ-Deconvolution from the new EZ Suite script. but when i try to use any of the scripts in the suite - it just stop and does nothing and gives no error messages until i close the script.  So just wondering some kind folks could take a look at the attached screenshots  and see if they can figure out whats going on.

Hi Nigel, I'm just up the road at whitley Bay. I've been considering the 10" and 12" quattro for my EQ8. How do you find your mount handles the scope ? In regards to the scope, how have you found it for imaging? Does it hold it collimation across the sky. Also have you noticed  any tube flex.

Sorry for all the questions, just keen to get some feedback from someone who actually owns the scope rather than people who just have opinions about it.

Cheers,

Rich

6 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I just wanted to know what sort of FWHM were you getting with that scope.

That is important for sampling rate - I have feeling that even 1.1"/px will be oversampling but that really depends on usual FWHM that you get in your sky and with your mount / guiding.

Ideally, sampling rate that you should target is FWHM that you usually get (or best values if you want to "be ready for those perfect nights") in arc seconds divided with 1.6.

I'm trying to remember what the average was on half decent nights - i'm sure it was usually anywhere between 1.6-2.0, but then again my memory is not the best. I normally imaged at around 1070mm F/L @ about F5.4

Many thanks Chris

I'm really struggling making a decision on this - I'm torn 3 different ways :-

1) Buy 10" Quattro and upgrade the focuser, springs etc   (chapest options but none available until end of Oct)

2) Buy the 12" quattro - upgrade focuser & springs as well as flocking the entire tube (Can't get the focuser upgrade i want - but is available in 2-3 days)

3) Wait until the end of the year and get the new design 10" F4 Lacerta when it's finished an ready to ship (will be superbly built and most likley hassle free, but also 3x price of option1 and 2x price of option 2)

Rich

21 hours ago, vlaiv said:

Looking at your signature - you seem to have 8" GSO RC?

What sort of FWHM do you get in your subs (in arc seconds) with that scope and said camera on EQ8 mount?

 

Vlaiv,

I dont like the RC, even using it reduced down to around 1m F/L, but i struggled with wierd reflections from time to time and i found that flats could also be a pain in the end i grew tired of it, and wanted something a bit bigger and a bit faster.

I also want something that i can also use visually, as the RC was no good in that respect due to large central obstruction.

I'll probably keep it and maybe play around with it again in the future.

My camera is a QSI 683 with 5.4 micron pixels,  so it's a fairly decent match to both the 10" & 12" 

10" - 1.11" per pixel   /  12" - 0.93" per pixel

Well, i'm in agreement with alacant . We need a 3rd opinion on this  - Olly where are you lol

Hi Alacant, yes this was my understanding -  lets use a small galaxy as a good example - assuming that the galaxy fits into the fov of the sensor for both scopes then the 12" would be a lost faster and have the bonus of a slightly larger image scale than the 10" - so it seems like a no brainer for the fickle english weather

Well, it sounds great but as many have said  you need a high end mount. whilst i do have an EQ8 i do worry, that i might end up throwing out more subs

So whilst i would like a 12" - I'm going to let common sense prevail and go with a 10", but i also spoke to Tommy at Lacerta and they should have their new scope ready by the end of the year - so should be worth the wait.

yeah this is my understanding, if the aperture is larger for the same focal ratio, then the larger aperture will reduce time needed to collect the same amount of data

Sam, really not sure about that   - I can't believe that a larger aperture has no bearing or other than focal length. If the larger aperture is gathering more light, i would  have thought it would concentrate more photons onto the camera chip  or to saturate the pixels on the chip quicker.

so putting aside size, weight and mount requirements - if i were to choose the 12" F4 over the 10" F4,  i'm assuming that this will help slightly to reduce my Sub lengths further, given that it grasps 44% more light than the 10" model.  But the big question, is how much shorter can i make my subs  44%, 20% 10% etc ? just rougly trying to decide if a 12" is worth the extra cost and effort, i.e. will it pay dividens in terms of reducing aquisition time.

I assuming that the EQ8 should be enough to handle the 12" and combining with my QSI 683 with built in OAG should help guiding as it will rule out any flex issues. I would also intend to reinforce the tube rings with a losmand bar on the top and bottom.

Stu, did you find that your spring upgrade helped with your scope. Did it help with colimation ?

To be honest, i'm really tempted by the QHY268M - as modern day CMOS sensors have a much higher QE, so would help me reduce my sub lengths. I currently have a QSI 683 with the built in 8 slot filter wheel and OAG and they really hold their resale value very well, so I could probably sell it,s at the same price to buy the QHY268M + filter wheel - so very tempted.

The Rasa looks a great scope, and It certainly makes an interesting alternative to a small refractor or the likes of the Takahashi Espsilons. You get the same FOV but with much bigger optics to pull in the light. For me I already have a 102mm Frac, which is wide enough for me @571mm FL with the reduce. Whilst it's only a doublet, it's fine as i only ever image in narrowband, but the rasa would make an interesting replacement. At the moment i'm only interested in longer focal lengths 1m-1.2m as i want to go after the galaxies and smaller DSO.

The trouble with RASA scopes are that they forces you change your camera to a round body camera like the ZWO or QHY and in most instances a OSC, as it would be an absolute pain, running with single filter and having to change individual filters.

But im with you on the short sub lengths in the UK, as i just got my QSI camera back from repair and started imaging last night and with the smaller frac, evan running at F5.6 i tend to find that i need to do 15-20min subs to get a really nice result and in the UK, that can be problematic and last night being a good example, i only managed 5 subs before the clouds rolled in. So if i can get these subs down to 300-600s then it would be a huge help.

Rich.

Hi olly, uou tal

14 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

That makes perfect sense. I'll make my usual point that 'faster optics' and 'larger aperture' really mean the same thing but I take your point entirely.

Olly

Olly, do you mean the F-Ratio Myth - think i recall you saying something about for a given aperture the light hitting the sensor will be the same no matter what the F-Ratio ?  I could be wrong as it was a few years back. Never understood it then and still dont now 🤣 

Back when you told me, i thought to myself - so why do they even bother mentioning the F-Ratio if it doesn't matter, why not just state the aperture and why do scope manufacturers make the same aperture scopes with different F-Ratio ? Is it purely for different FOV ? 

Rich

Hi Susan, I had an email from QHY and they just told me that it will release before the end of the year, but luckily after a 16week wait, atik managed to repair my QSI 683 for around 300 euro's so i'm back in business, just waiting for clear sky to test it.

Olly, for me speed is they key, so the comination of the faster optics and larger aperture is a must. Dont get me wrong i love the plug and play nature of a frac, but my scopes are perfmanently pier mounted in the obs, so should only need little tweaks to collimation from time to time once it's been fettled.

At the moment i'm just waiting on Tommy from Teleskop Austria to reply in regards to his new Lacerta scope design - if it will releases soon, then i will buy one of those, as well made hand crafted newt with good quality components can only help to make things a little easier, but if it's not releasing this year, i'll go the hard route and buy a quattro and try to fettle it through upgrades.

3 hours ago, dannybgoode said:

Loads of people image very successfully in the UK with a good frac. In reality you’re going to be collecting the same amount of data time-wise whatever scope you use and, unless your focussing and guiding are spot on there’s a chance you’ll get poorer quality subs from the ‘fast and wide’ scope than you would a nice easy to handle frac.
 

 

Sorry buddy, but i have to completely disagree. I have a 102mm Frac already and i know how slow it can be.  There are some arguments that for a "like for like" aperture, then you wont see much of a difference between F4 & F7,  but when we are talking Faster F4 optics and double the aperture size then there is a huge difference no matter what any frac lover might tell you, it's basic Physics that you just can't argue with.

Yeah sure if i won the lottery - there would be no doubt, i would have a huge mount and a 10" APO any day of the week over a newt, Unfortunately being a mere mortal i dont have £60,000+ spare sitting in the bank for that kind of setup, so i'm stuck with the next best option which is a fast newt.