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.

Welcome to Stargazers Lounge

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements



Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

254 Excellent

About bobro

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Isle of Wight

Recent Profile Visitors

547 profile views
  1. Peter's flat shows as taken at ISO3200 and 1/4096 sec exposure. I guess the speed is as fast as the camera will go. Perhaps the shutter is a bit sticky at this fast speed. In any case it looks a bit overexposed - a good plan is to have the histogram around the mid point. Flats don't need to be taken at the same ISO as images (I previously thought flats needed to be taken at the same ISO as images but was corrected by someone with more knowledge and did some tests that showed flats worked irrespective of the ISO used). So I suggest reducing the shutter speed and ISO if necessary in order to obtain flats with roughly a mid point on the histogram.
  2. Presumably the mono version will be more sensitive and even better for use as a polar alignment / guide camera. Could you post a link to the seller of this version? Will be interested in seeing the results of your testing. Note : I've used the (colour) camera for quite a few sessions now for polar alignment and guiding (Orion 50/162 mini guide scope) - very good results. Thanks.
  3. Thanks guys for the images of the Crescent Nebula. It's certainly not the easiest subject! If I try it I think a test with a good long exposure is called for - perhaps 10-12 minutes and preferably with a darker sky.
  4. Neil - could you post the standard DSLR image for comparison? Thanks. Bob
  5. I like the sharpness and clarity of the image Mikey. Can you tell me what subs were taken? (It helps me evaluate the image/target and also decide if I should have a go at it.) Thanks Bob
  6. Better positioning this time on the Pelican Nebula. Longest exposure I've given so far to any image - 20 subs @ 480 secs. As you can see, still not a great result. The blue gaseous 'haze' got in the way of the red pelican, reducing contrast. Will need to practice processing on this one.
  7. Mistakenly thinking the Cocoon Nebula would require similar effort to image as M27, I pointed the scope in its direction. Of course it isn't quite so bright, so I had to work at my very basic processing knowledge to produce this image. 23 subs @ 240 sec, Meade Polaris 130 on EQ2. Certainly needs more subs to get the noise down and improve the image (as well as making processing easier!).
  8. I've used the standard Orion Mini Guide Scope (no helical focuser) as a simple finder by attaching a standard eyepiece. The main issue was finding the correct spacing for the eyepiece : as the scope is designed for use with a guide camera, the prime focus is some way behind the rear flange of the scope. That meant a standard eyepiece needed a bit of extending. To achieve this I cut down the plastic barrel from a Barlow lens and also shortened the eyepiece metal collar - no doubt there are other ways to achieve this. It did take a bit of working out measurements. Unfortunately I don't have the measurements as I glued a camera board onto the (modified again!) cut down Barlow to make a guide camera for use with the scope.
  9. Ah! Thanks Art. Makes sense now as the Dumbbell is smaller than the Cocoon. I must find a good source of surface brightness values for potential targets. Must admit, I didn't expect to find the summer nights quite so interesting in terms of targets - but there are plenty around!
  10. According to Wikipedia, the apparent magnitudes of the Dumbbell Nebula and Cocoon Nebula are very similar. I know this isn't an exact science but, even with 240 second exposures for the Cocoon (compared to 60 sec for the Dumbbell), the nebula was still quite faint. The sky was perhaps a bit less clear. Can anyone comment on this difference? Here is the Cocoon 'final' image - needs a lot more input. 23 subs @ 240 sec.
  11. Well, if I can image with an EQ2, what could an EQ3 - or even better an EQ5++ do? Just enjoy whatever you go for - the Hubble can always beat you!
  12. It's a familiar question from someone who has purchased a 130EQ reflector scope and wishes to put it to a particular task. (Moderators - should a new sticky thread be started?) A starting point : is the mount polar aligned i.e. pointing towards Polaris? May sound simple but not intuitive. Once polar aligned the simple RA motor needs to run at the correct speed. Again, how to ensure that it is running correctly? Next step : different approaches to capturing images e.g. video planetary and individual still images. Followed by processing the video or individual images. it can be a good idea to read up on possible approaches - try the book 'Making Every Photon Count', available from the sponsors of this site. It should help with a general understanding. It's not straightforward stuff but my 130EQ keeps me happy with many hours of DSO imaging.
  13. In recent years Canon DSLRs have been fitted with 2 filters : UV/IR and Red Balance filter. The Red Balance filter is removed to increase the red sensitivity of the camera, with the UV/IR filter remaining in the camera, unless a full spectrum mod is carried out where both filters are removed. So your camera still has a UV/IR filter in place. HTH
  14. Tried a bit of processing (GIMP) to see if I could move towards Göran's image - star reduction, reduced colour saturation in background, sharpened, increased saturation and luminance (I think) in nebula. No match, but a start.....
  15. Hey Göran - I like the improvement and am impressed! Still a 'natural' looking image, which is what I like. Thanks! Now I can see why those who understand image processing say get good software and learn how to use it. My excuse is I'm still occupied with understanding how to make best use of my diy modified setup. A subsequent step has to be to learn how to process images and make the best of them. Does anyone do courses????