Jump to content

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.

  • Announcements



Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

About Robrj

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/05/1962

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Southern California
  1. Total newbie to VA/EAA

    I don't think you'll see much of a problem with Coma even with the Ultrastar. I've run my 8" f/4.9 Newtonian with a 0.7x focal reducer (f/3.6) and the stars still look okay: Full resolution: https://www.astrobin.com/full/270541/0/?real=&mod=
  2. Total newbie to VA/EAA

    You could try it first with your existing mount and camera to see what kind of results you get. You'll probably get some edge artifacts, especially with the Horizon or your DSLR as they have a big sensor, but you can crop it out. You could probably get away with up to 30 second exposures depending on what part of the sky you're looking at (East/West). I've done up to 35s with my Celestron 130SLT (smaller sensor). Though I have guided in the past, I don't guide on a regular basis. For an EQ mount, depending on how good your polar alignment is, you should be able to get by without guiding up to 1 minute. Your Canon should work with Backyard EOS and Astrotoaster/DSS. This user has some tutorials on using his Canon cameras for Video Astronomy/EAA. He typically does 30 second exposures so an EQ mount might be a reasonable option: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwRg2BjC54F8MEPAaXYsTCA/videos
  3. ZWO ASI294MC Pro

    Those are all unprocessed. I did a quick process of the Flame Nebula/Horsehead with Startools and Photoshop: Full: https://www.astrobin.com/full/329161/B/?real=&mod=
  4. ZWO ASI294MC Pro

    I got a chance to try out my new ZWO ASI294MC Pro last night. These are done with my Orion ED80T-CF/AVX w/Televue 0.8x focal reducer/field flattener and an IDAL LPR-P2 filter: M45 (34x16s, gain 400): Full image: https://www.astrobin.com/full/329176/0/?real=&mod= M42 (213x1s, gain 400): Full image: https://www.astrobin.com/full/329158/0/?real=&mod= M81 & M82 (40x16s, gain 400): Full image: http://www.astrobin.com/full/329178/0/?real= Flame Nebula & Horsehead Nebula (38x16s, gain 400): Full image: http://www.astrobin.com/full/329161/0/?nc=Robrj&real= M97 & M108 (38x16s, gain 400): Full image: https://www.astrobin.com/full/329180/0/?nc=Robrj&real=&mod=
  5. I noticed an error with my Custom Options line: the noplots flag should be no-plots. --sigma 70 --no-plots -N none -H 0.8 -L 0.6 -r --objs 100
  6. Don't you need to do an alignment to get CdC or Stellarium to work with the mount?
  7. I think with Nexremote, if you do the alignment, it's the same as doing it with the hand controller. I've not used it as it's not compatible with Starsense.
  8. For mine, I do my usual alignment and then use Astrotortilla, so I would have done what you did at the end first. For the AVX, I use Starsense so the scope aligns automatically but with my 130SLT, I just do a manual alignment with the hand controller. After that point, I can control it with Stellarium and plate solve with Astrotortilla after the goto.
  9. Since I did mine just before Thanksgiving, my wife commented that the HOO shot looks like a turkey. M1 is another good target. It should be awesome in the C11.
  10. Very nice Bruce. I like that CFHT Palette. I forgot to post mine from November 21st. Also done with an 80mm (Orion ED80T-CF) but with a Lodestar X2M. IC443 in SHO (15x30s per channel) M42 SHO (5x30s, then 10x5s per channel) M42 (5x30s, then 10x5s)
  11. Which cam

    I've read from more technical users that the order of sensitivity of the 290 and the 224 are as follows: 1. IMX290 Mono 2. IMX224 3. IMX290 Color So if you don't care about color and are more interested in picking up faint detail, get the IMX290 mono. If you want a one shot color (OSC), get the IMX224. I like the ZWO ASI224MC. I picked one up recently as it was on sale for $250 which works out to about £186. There is very little amp glow (purple fringing on the right edge) and what is there can be reduced with darks. I have no experience with the Altair but from what I've read, it works fine natively with Sharpcap. As for pixel size, it won't make a tremendous difference unless plan on doing planetary. In a perfect world with no atmospheric interference, if you could get equal sensitivity for both cameras, an object like NGC 40, with your 80mm and the IMX224, you'll get an object that is about 24x24 pixels in size. With the 80mm and the IMX290, you'll get an object about 30x30 pixels in size. In this case, the IMX290M would be the best case (higher sensitivity and smaller pixels). The IMX290C has less sensitivity than the IMX224. You're probably seeing limited though. You'll likely see fainter objects with the 290 mono as it doesn't have a bayer matrix but you may not see any difference in fine detail between the two chips when you zoom in due to seeing. I've attached a 24, 30, and 41 pixel image of NGC40 (about 38 arc seconds in width). So assuming you could get the exact same sensitivity, you can see there's only a slight difference in the detail you would see. With the 130, you'd see a 41 pixel image with the 290 and and the 30 pixel image with the IMX224. Again, that's assuming your seeing would allow that level of detail.
  12. I would just try it in a live setting. I use 0.7 with my setup. My computer is an Intel Computestick (2nd gen) which has a quad core atom processor and only 2gb of ram. AT 0.8 is an alpha version so it may not be stable.
  13. Which cam

    Sharpcap will save as AVI (8-bit per color channel only) or SER (8 or 16 bit). http://docs.sharpcap.co.uk/2.9/#Camera Basics
  14. Which cam

    I like the USB cameras (I have a ZWO ASI224MC and a Lodestar X2M). I think they're simpler to set up than the analog cameras. Just one cable from the computer to the camera. They get their power from the USB cable and a tablet/laptop computer would act as your screen. Plus all adjustments are done on the computer. The IMX224 cameras will also be better for planetary imaging as they have a high frame rate.
  15. Adding files you don't need would actually slow it down, not speed it up because it Astrotortilla may try to search through them (which is a waste of time if you don't need them). I would move everything above 4208 out of the folder Louise mentioned. The log file that Louise mentioned will show which index actually solved. I would keep the indexes that solved plus maybe one level above and below and move all the rest out. If you find you're not using 4200 or 4201, move those out too. They're really big.