Jump to content

Narrowband

newbie alert

Members
  • Posts

    4,030
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1,305 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Location
    kent..UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Excellent.. love the HA contrast with the warmer tone
  2. No idea 💡 as just read the text, can't remember seeing the images , didn't realise any was there🙈
  3. Your flat panel is unevenly illuminated which will cause issues with creating a flat field
  4. I used to have the same opinion but I've seen a fpl51 glass triplet perform just as well as a fpl53
  5. Ok i take that one on the chin Assuming that it's a osc 460 verses a osc 533 I wouldn't have made a comment, never used either but have friends that have that sensor and yes make pretty pictures, so all good there But if it's a mono 460 verses a 533c then my statement still stands Like smarties only the OP has the answer 😜
  6. https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/401578-sct-corrector-plate-replacement/#elControls_4304353_menu
  7. Splitting hairs, so you say a 533c is better than a 460ex mono We're all entitled to our own opinion and I still stand by mine
  8. There's plenty of information on this subject on here and cloudy nights Peter Drew on here made a decent statement that he doesn't think that Celestron hand figure and match correctors but goes on to say that a optical bench makes easier work to align the corrector, or failing that as it be for the most of us a artificial star A quick Google brings these up
  9. Folklore or not if you have the option to mark it's orientation before removal then I'd do it as a failsafe option If you have to replace the corrector then you no longer have that option Chance it or not?
  10. Without guiding how would he know what was reliable, guiding is sub arc sec, sub pixel accuracy, even people with mesu etc still guide and with focal lengths far less than a C11.. id assume than his mount isn't in that category A few questions I'd be asking is if he want to capture more HA I'd assume he wants to shoot nebula, these normally are quite huge targets so imaging at 2800mm might be a little too much fov wise Ha requires longer than usual exposure, so I'd say it's wasted on 30 sec subs I still think it's best to keep DSO and planetary cameras separate, they have separate requirements I really enjoy imaging at 1280mm, can't think of a reason for imaging at 2800 mm unless it's really small galaxy work but it would require a really decent mount to start from, plus some add on equipment to enable you to guide at under the image scale
  11. It's a polar alignnment tool , used for PA on all stars, hence the name Personally I never found it accurate enough for deepsky imaging and when questioned the fanbase suggested doing multiple iterations of it and returning the mount home and switching off between iterations. To my mind pa is aligning the axis with the celestial pole , so 1 point in the sky and doing the same thing multiple times doesnt help as that point in the sky doesn't move, the stars however do If you want to pa quickly then either buy a polemaster or use sharpcap, I found both really quick, really easy and highly accurate If you want to use the ASPA then just follow the instructions on the handset, it won't however tell you to return to home position and switch off and do a few more iterations Other than that the Avx is a great mount, really enjoyed mine
  12. I'd guess the 533 isn't as good as the 460 and the 571 ( 2600) sensor is probably slightly better but there's a lot of difference between cmos data and CCD, and osc and mono Osc isn't necessarily quicker, it's been said multiple times that it's slower as you need more data The 460ex is a awesome camera
  13. There has been several posts,u tube videos etc to do with matching the orientation of the corrector, but I've also read of people that have had replacement correctors that obviously won't match having no noticeable issues If taking yours out for cleaning purposes then there's no harm marking and replacing in the same position It maybe a expensive bit of optical equipment but doesn't mean it's precision made, or not as precisely made as you would hope
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.