scitmon

They are not difficult to do once you have your light source setup. Use the cameras AV Mode (I assume Nikon's have that mode?) with the same ISO you used for your light images. 20-30 shots should suffice and its important to not change focus or orientation of your camera from what they were set to for lights. If you were not able to take flats for whatever reason, the issues you make come across are changes in light levels on edges of the images and possible dark areas where there was dust particles on the camera image sensor and/or lenses.

There is an extended list checkbox in the object browser which you may have missed? If not and the target you are looking for is still not there, you can try some of the community made lists in the APT forums such as ones on here: https://aptforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=147 Or you can use cartes du cel/stellerium as suggested.

I'm no expert on this yet, and I may be corrected by people who know better but I think it depends on the camera. If you have a lot of read noise it might be worth going for longer subs providing you don't over saturate any bright areas of the image, but in general, more subs that get a histogram that doesn't clip on the left hand side is the best way to go.

Well this is very impressive, I clearly have much to learn and practice. I think perhaps the main difference between my approach and yours was the seperate processing of luminance, I will give that a go. Its good to know my data has more potential than I thought. I should point out that it was 47 x 60s, I named the file incorrectly sorry. So it does seem that 300s might have been too much. It didn't occur to me that overexposed stars could adversely effect the colour of the image overall to such a degree. I learnt a lot from your input, thank you very much!

I do wonder now, I am class 5 Bortle and as you can see I can easily get 60s without one. I will have to look into it further.

I did do all those on my image, obviously not as well as you! I'm going through the Inside PixInsight book as I go. It would be great to know what my data can achieve in the right hands. Sorry I was replacing them with the linear images: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al9nr2n1J94MnGKt6CE7ovlKyhmg?e=KFCdOR https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al9nr2n1J94MnGM4YEUs8qqSje73?e=lMd6YU All I've done is calibrated and integrated with flats and bias, (no darks and dithered).

Wow looks much better, may I ask what you did there? You say the filter will effect colour... as in colour balance which can be corrected in post processing or am I actually blocking colour? If thats the case I might reconsider using it. I will happily provide the xisf files if you want to show me what more can be done. Here are the links to them in my OneDrive: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al9nr2n1J94MnGFYTyu23WkEK6_B?e=psoK8E https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al9nr2n1J94MnGBPbZCdlwtGGY2k?e=qMesMa

That is some excellent noise control there, was it mostly processed out? With Pixinsight?

Yes possibly, certainly sounds like something other than the sub length. I think an autofocusser and SGPro (so I can schedule refocussing through the night) is my next step to improving my pictures.

Thank you for the reply, yes I was guiding and my camera is modified. I was using the IDAS D2 Light Pollution Suppression Filter on the 300s and not on the 60s. I wasn't too concerned about the stars as I could blend in 60s ones, I was looking for more detail and colour in the galaxy, which I don't really understand why there isn't after adding over 3 hours of exposure? Still much to learn in this hobby!

I recently completed an imaging session of M33, with sub lengths of 300s. I was hoping this data would greatly add to my previous attempt on M33 where I only did 60s sub lengths. However after numerious processing attempts in PixInsight I am very dissapointed in the result. Obviously the stars are bloated, but it all appears to be a blury mess. Could it be that I was out of focus or have I just pushed the sub length of my Canon 700d too far? 39 x 300s: 47 x 60s:

The 80ED Pro would be the better imaging scope between the two, with the field of view being better for most DSO's and being easier to guide. However, it has a very similar field of view to your 130PDS, are you using that for imaging?

I neglected to mention, may seem obvious but avoid looking anywhere near the sun while doing this!

You will first need to align your finder scope with the telescope so they both point at the same point in the sky. This is best done in the daytime by pointing at a distant object such as a house chimney pot, when you have it in view with your telescope, adjust your finder scope to point at the same object. It is also worth pointing out that looking through glass windows is not recommended, the light will be distorted through the panes of glass.

I think I'm sufficiently put off the RASA now... also reading issues with sensitivity to tilt. I think I'll go back to my Esprit 100 plan. Thanks for the inputs!