LukeSkywatcher

Hi Matt

I am not really into AP but i have learned quite a bit over the yrs while here on SGL. There is no single answer to your question. Many factors come into play. The biggest factor is probably light pollution in your location. This is a very localized issue and you really have to play around with exposure times and ISO on your camera until you arrive at a happy medium. 

Your image is far from the worst i have seen. 

If you post this thread in the imaging section, you will get lots of great advice.

Congrats on the new scope. They are a thing of beauty.

What is the open mirror/lens part in your second last image?. I'm guessing it is to allow solar projection?.

*edit*

Sorry, i see it is part of the heat dump system.

"You have to use the Barlow lenses to get any effect. Using just the tube does not change the focal length of the telescope and will not provide any additional magnification". 

Thats what i was thinking. As i said, its been so long i just cant remember.

10 minutes ago, Charic said:

I use the Barlow lens directly on my eyepieces for the same reason, 1.5x is comfortable  in use. I have the Skywatcher De-Luxe (the one I use) and a Meade Tele negative Barlow lens.
But just reading this thread has got me thinking, maybe now the  spare Barlow tube could suffice as a Moon filter holder, or not!

So you dont have to keep swapping the moon filter when changing EP's. I cant think of a reason why it wont work. I was going to suggest you put the moon filter on the end of the star diagonal in your scope but noticed you use a Dob, so no diagonal there. 

Its been so long since ive used a barlow that i just cant remember how to do this. I have a 1.5x-2x Revelation barlow and i think all i had to do to make it 1.5x was to remove the lens from the barlow and then just insert an EP into the barlow as normal. In this way the barlow acts like an extension tube?.I dont remember ever having to screw the barlow lens glass onto an EP (like you would do with any filter).

Maybe i need to go reread the OP. I thought this was for images taken only with a smartphoe (no other optical aid or processing).

"The only criteria is that the image must have been taken using a smartphone, with any processsing also done on the phone, no PCs, guiding or decent imaging mounts allowed".

Surely attaching a smartphone to a scope which is mounted on a tripod is breaking the rules?..........unless the tripod/mount is an EQ1 ......then the rules are intact.

LOL.

That's more like i'd expect.

1 hour ago, estwing said:

Really?...AP is too easy for me..

Well yes it is if you only pointed the camera at Jupiter and "clicked". If you used a scope along with your smartphone.......then not so much.

On 10/12/2016 at 20:20, estwing said:

Jupiter ,Elan ...

Thats impressive for a smart phone image.

45 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

That's excellent Nige.

Why not split it? Keep the existing version as the lower colour layer, so you don't risk losing it, and create another version focusing on getting  detail without over-sharpening paying no attention to the colour at all. Put this second version on top of the first one, but set it to 'luminance'.

I do this with most of my images as it means you only have to worry about one thing at a time.

Layers?. Its how many people get great images of M42 without overcooking the Trap.

I agree the image is a tad over sharpened (im thinking this shows finer detail?). 

Fantastic image. The colours are lovely. The dust is lovely.

Well done and thanks for posting.

Your scope should feel right at home and give good views with a wide range of eyepieces. By this i mean, you dont need to invest in expensive eyepieces. It will happily be able to use Plossl design eyepieces. Some are better than others but essentially they are all roughly about 30-40 quid.

I personally find (as other do) an 8mm eyepiece is just about right for planets. 5mm is also good. If using 8mm, you may use a 2x barlow which gives you 4.5mm. This could be pushing the scope limit a bit......but not by much and it works (i have a similar spec scope).

My point here is you really dont have to spend loads of cash on quality EP's....simply because the scope will be/is very "forgiving". I love the Vixen NPL range of eyepieces (EP's), but some people dont like them because of the small exit pupil (distance between eye and eyepiece needed to be able to comfortably see anything).

P.S.~to enjoy viewing the planets (the inner ones anyway), you dont really need to use very high magnification such as 5-8mm. I find some of the best views i have seen come with 15-25mm. Obviously you wont see as much detail but its not ALWAYS about detail. I do like to sit and watch Jupiter and its moons from a widefield view and see the moons dance around the planet.

Loving this thread. It has inspired me to dabble in AP in 2017 without the use of an EQ mount. 

Gina i really must laugh at myself. All the advice against concrete i am dishing out to you. I have recently contracted this company to lay a complete concrete drive at the front of the house and a full patio area along the back of the house.

Its coloured poured concrete and then before it dries they stamp my desired design into it.

http://www.allcrete.ie

2 hours ago, Gina said:

That sounds good

I've looked on the local timber yard website but nothing shown so I've sent a query about it.

If you dont ask, you will never know.

Local lumber yards should have it and be cheaper. I know its big business (these days), but bark mulch is basically a waste product of the lumber industry. 

13 minutes ago, Gina said:

Two possibilities of bark from ebay :-

1. Landscaping Bark Contract Ornamental Chip for Gardening Huge 1000 Litre Bulk Bag    £89.99 + £10 delivery
2. Play Bark Chip for Play Areas and Huge 1000 Litre Bulk Bags Fully Certified   £94.05 + £10 delivery

So certified play bark for £4 more.  I might see if my local woodyard do it.  They're usually cheaper than online and very much cheaper than the DIY stores.

I'd certainly be going for play area "certified". Your main concern is safety.......not ornamental.

50mm depth is just under 2 inches. I think that would be sufficient enough to absorb the pressure from any fall from a standing height. I'm thinking for that to work effectively, you may need to dig out 2 inches of the grass and then lay it in place?. It would also contain the bark mulch within the pathway so it cant spread outwards. It may be fine to simply lay it on top of the existing grass.

13 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

I've no experience of using that, but I think I'd be concerned about mud coming through. The bark mulch idea would be cleaner I should think.

Ian

On closer inspection of the stuff, im pretty sure it similar to what they do actually use on artificial ski slopes........so in the winter when iced over could be very dangerous.

Bark mulch it has to be.

17 minutes ago, Fozzie said:

Hi Gina,

Could you consider a rubber protection mat or grass reinforcement strip.  I've seen them used in various situations, allows the grass to grow through and prevents "sinking in".. also being rubber offer good grip.

Link to a google search web site.. http://www.matsgrids.co.uk/57-grass-protection-reinforcement  Essentially fixed by using pins as well, just like pegging out a tent!

Looks like this!

 

Don't know if that helps..

Ta

Fozzie

I was also thinking of this stuff but couldnt remember its name. Ive looked at it a couple of times in DIY/garden stores for myself to allow me to go onto the grass lawn in my wheelchair while observing. IIRC.......not too expensive.

Good idea. Not sure how it works when wet or iced over. It could be a bit like an artificial ski slope. It must be pretty safe because every year there are a couple of major flower shows here and they lay this stuff down for the 10's of thousands to walk on and i'm sure safety is their priority.

Just now, Gina said:

Definitely Paul!!!  Slippery when wet or ice or even just covered in moss - very nasty to fall on!!

Indeedy. When i was using the crutches (there i go again.......but its all i did for 30 yrs) all the time, wet concrete was ok, Ice covered concrete very very tricky and dangerous (normally stayed inside). Wet moss covered concrete..........absolutely lethal. Some of my worst (but best tuck and rolls) happened on wet moss covered concrete.

I'd imagine its the same for able-bodied people. 

LOL. This is a bit like Room 101. Let's put concrete into room 101.

Ask 1 question, get a multitude of answers. That's fair enough and expected. The 3 things here to consider are:

1. Safety (must be paramount)

2. Work involved (no heavy heavy lifting)

3. Cost (as cheap as possible)

I still think bark mulch is the way to go. I wont harp on about it but i used crutches for 30 yrs and i still use them often. I know what surfaces work well for me using "4 legs" and which ones to avoid. I'm no expert, but ive taken a hell of a lot of falls in my time (no i wasnt drunk..........well not every time) and i have yet to break a single bone in my body. I'm like a stuntman or a paratrooper (LOL)......they are trained to "tuck and roll".

God forbid that you should ever take a fall. Most peoples natural reaction is to put their hands and arms out to save themselves from sustaining a head injury. Thats fine on concrete. You may break a finger or wrist or arm, but no head injury. On any other surface, tuck (tuck your hands and arms into your arm pits) and roll (twist your body mid-fall so that you land on your side). Your arm/shoulder will take the brunt of the fall but your head will be safe.

Just now, happy-kat said:

Bark chips takes ages to rot down as well. The other is gravel but that is much heavier to deal with.

Its also quite easy to lose your footing on gravel and you could end up with ankle,knee or hips injury.