Adreneline

No apologies required - it’s all interesting stuff. Interesting. For me this APOD does nothing - purely a personal thing I am sure - I’m afraid to my eyes it looks so “contrived.” I know this is heresy to suggest such a thing but there it is - I’ve gone and said it.

I guess it is a personal thing. The G16 works for me - the menus, the controls, the feel of the thing. The G5's big advantage is the sensor size and resolution but beyond that I found it difficult to use compared with the G16. Yes, an articulating screen would be handy at times. The eyepiece on the G16 is far better than the G5. It all comes down to what suits you and I found the G5 didn't - so I sold it! Adrian

Ah! The Sun - a rare sight around here. As for "too hot" - that's not something we are familiar with either! Joking aside, that looks like an excellent result to me Brendan. More great things to come, of that I am sure. Adrian P.S. Grey skies again here - oh well.

The G16 is a great piece of kit - better in my opinion than the G5X-MkII I recently sold. I’ve used my G16 for lots of AP related stuff over the past ten years - it is brilliant for auroras. If you set the G16 to starscape mode it automatically sets the focal length to minimum and that it is not helpful with comets. The G16 is probably the best all round camera I’ve owned.

This was my third attempt to get something worth sharing. The image comprises 28x4s frames taken with a Sony A7iii with the standard 28-70 kit lens at 28mm. Pre-processed in APP (without any calibration frames) and processed in PI. When it comes to stacking and processing comet images this is all new ground for me. (The red linear feature on the extreme left is a tv aerial). For comparison this was my second attempt taken with a Canon G16 - a single frame. I won't show my first attempt as it requires too much imagination to discern the comet. Adrian

The view from just south of the Lincolnshire Wolds: 13s, f1.8, ISO200 with a Canon G5.

Best not to cross JC - I did and got banned from the PI forum for asking a simple question comparing PI with APP - which is apparently as bad, if not worse, as comparing PI with PS. I am in awe of anyone who contributes anything to PI.

A Quick Look at the 294MM spec and graphs would help to explain it: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/zwo-cameras/zwo-asi-294mm-pro-usb-30-cooled-mono-camera.html

Hi Wim. I took the liberty of plate solving your image so I could be sure I was identifying the galaxies you identified in your post description above. I recognise you point out that there are "several unidentified galaxies" in the image but I for one find it interesting just how few galaxies there are in the image. I am interested primarily in imaging nebula targets and so tend to "turn off" PGC objects in the PI Render AnnotateImage script otherwise the whole image turns blue with an overwhelming number of PGC objects. In this region there are just seven PGC objects! I have this naive and uneducated view that the density of galaxies ought to be pretty much uniform where ever you look - that is clearly not the case. There are huge regions devoid of catalogued galaxies - which just seems odd to me. Thanks for another thought provoking and interesting image. Adrian

.. is a bit misleading and difficult to interpret. I have the 1x reducer and mine is set to 20.36 as per the table, using the scale on the extension barrel. Once you've adjusted the r/f to the setting in the table you have 55m to the sensor, so with my 6.5mm back focus plus 20mm filter wheel I have about 28mm to make up with spacers, etc. So for the 0.8x you adjust the barrel to 2.4mm and then it is 55mm to the sensor. HTH / makes sense.

Very nice Lee. Excellent star colours and very even background. Have you found the shroud has made a discernible difference to your 150P-DS? Adrian

Thank you. I think they all have something to offer in terms of helping you appreciate the structure and complexity of the nebula - and it's fun messing around with the data on a cloudy night! Adrian

Thanks Lee. I thought the gif was quite 'illuminating' really in showing the differences. I have to be honest and say I am far from becoming a HOO convert 🤣

Careful comparison shows the SII and Ha are very similar with only very small and subtle differences, however, in a SHO image it does reveal some additional structure changes which I find interesting. Here's a gif comparison of HOS .... ... and a comparison of just Ha and SII. Adrian

Thank you. Enough to make it worthwhile taking time to capture I thought. The neglected SII of the Eastern Veil: Adrian