Jump to content



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

257 Excellent

About rotatux

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,824 profile views
  1. It may have something to do with color management : the cheapest for cams is to output images with a color model similar, if not identical, to our display devices, which are near exclusively RGB. Using alternative color models at capture time such as LRGB, (L)LRB, (L)Lab, Cmyk, Yuv etc would incur an in-camera processing cost which means more complex embedded code, more power consumption, more latency to display image, and so on. Now we start to have S-log light curves and the like used at capture time in some devices, which has a non null processing cost too, so lines are starting to mov
  2. I'm in for the star-full version. Not only for context -- density of stars gives a sense of depth, e.g. you can can visually see that the america's top is in fact a hole between obscure dust clouds ; So your first image is more 3D-ish ... always a matter of taste of course
  3. Sorry @happy-kat I just discovered your comment here, I must have missed the notification. Mine is certainly not as solid as yours and I don't have pictures of the build, but I've just uploaded those of the result I have at hand : and
  4. Ok I don't have much experience but I can relate on what I've read so far. About matching with 130PDS : I don't think there such a thing as matching filters per instrument, photographically speaking, since they will darken the sky background more or less, and hence allow more or less long exposures. Visually that's another story : their filtering intensity should match your instrument diameter, roughly small or big, e.g. you're probably not going to add a dark-colored filter to a low (<=80) diameter tube. On matching targets : galaxies are more wide-band so you should not use nebu
  5. Hello Kaelig and welcome here. I'm sure you'll find a cheerful hand to help here, just as I got a few years ago. Not answering directly, but just a few remarks... 1) I am afraid CEM25P production has stopped, if I understood correctly, so it's getting difficult to get anywhere. 2) CLS ≠ neodymium; neodymium or "moon and skyglow" are a very wide band, glass-tinted kind of filter, which efficiency I found has dropped these past years with new generation led-based lighting (but is still good depending on your conditions); while CLS is a kind of interferometric filter, between wide
  6. IMO You should instead really try stopping down with the lens' own diaphragm : I have tried step-down rings too, surely they cut down on light (affect aperture geometrically, if I can say like this) but mostly don't enhance optical properties as much as the native diaphragm (I was still having coma and CA in sides and corners, shooting RGB on OSC camera)
  7. Threads are different between T2 (×0.75mm) and M42 (×1mm); I can screw my T2 adapter in full only on half of my M42 lenses, others only screw half or third of the "bayonet". I have the Vivitar equivalent of your lens and like you can only screw part of a T2 adapter on it (but I'm using this as lens2scope to put oculars, not for camera) In doubt you would buy a specific M42 adapter for your camera.
  8. I advise in favor of the Baader adapter : https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p3676_TS-Optics-Optics-T2-Adaptor-Ring-for-Cameras-with-Micro-Four-Thirds-bayonet--Panasonic--Olympus-.html (This one is from TS as I can't find the Baader page for it atm.) Without the extension it allows to rack the focuser out a bit more to reach focus, avoiding much of the known problem of focus tube protuberance in the fov. Also with the SW ComaCorr it allows for several reduction factors (w/ or w/o ext, w/ or w/o M48 filter). BTW you could find this useful too : https:
  9. Very well explained ! Complete and precise enough that I could fill in the few little gaps. I still have to work out how to adapt to my color-aberrated stars, but for the most part it does the job quite nicely.
  10. Only my 2nd attempt at Perseus Double Cluster with that tube. I had this in stock since last year but didn't put online. Now the more time passes the more I like it, and no good night since, so here it is. Gear: Olympus E-PL6 with Skywatcher 130PDS and SWCC at 600mm/4.62 and dydimium filter on Omegon EQ-300 tracking RA Capture: 22 lights × 20s × 2000 ISO, master bias, at 1.28"/px Site: deep country 26km from Limoges, France Processing: Regim 3.4, Fotoxx 12.01+
  11. The puff looks like not moving with the stars or clouds, maybe something has landed on your camera cover dome/pane
  12. Difference is far from obvious to me... Depth looks the same, as well as colors. But they are not the same scale so there may be much more details in the second one. Both good shots given the respective exposures, maybe too large a framing (reduce 25-30% ?), but be proud of them :)
  13. Only partly true: did you try a light pollution filter ? I think of the so-called moon & skyglow kind, aka didymium / neodymium; It is cheap, and filters out enough that color balance is a bit better; And you can mount a astro-2" one on a lens with an adapter. For mounting directly on-lens, search for a used or new redhancer / red enhancer model (same filter material, usually for capturing autumn colors). Just a detail about "histogram clearing the left edge" technique, it works but you need to account for the fact that on many cameras the histogram is an average of 3 channels, so you
  • 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.