Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About catburglar

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location
    North Wales
  1. I’ve got no personal experience if these, but what about one of the TS Power Newton scopes? The 8inch F/2.8 would be nice and fast @ 560mm FL. Obviously collimating will be key, but if you’re not fixed on a refractor setup you could get data pretty quickly once you’ve fettled the setup. https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4611_Boren-Simon-8--f-2-8-PowerNewton-Astrograph---Carbon-Tube.html
  2. I don’t think you need the -L and -H parameters in your custom options string...your scale minimum parameter is setting the minimum image scale to 1.32 degrees and then the -L parameter says it’s 0.5 degrees- and likewise for the scale maximum / -H pair...I don’t know how the solver handles this...but I’d remove them from the custom options string.
  3. The issue with most unmodded DSLR’s is that the IR cut comes in a bit too early therefore blocks most of the H-alpha signal. I think Uranium235 has hit the nail on the head...My understanding is that the CLS-ccd filters add back a bit of IR cut that you’ve lost by modding the camera without blocking the H-alpha.
  4. I don’t want to put you off, but I used to have a Meade ETX125 OTA mounted on an AZ-GTi and matching tripod and found it was fine...If I were you, I’d give it a thorough try out before you dismiss it.
  5. Victor- Can you measure the diameter of your t ring aperture as shown in your first picture (the threaded part not the bayonet that connects to the camera. ) if it measures approx 48mm you need the first item you linked, if it’s 42mm then you need the second version. You don’t need precise measure- a ruler across the opening should make it obvious.
  6. There have been loads of suggestions here- some relevant, a few less so. You seem to have tried all the relevant ones and they’ve not worked for you, so I think you just need to get the ryzen 7 and the ram upgrade and let us all know that PI is now flying through your workflow.
  7. I got an AZ-EQ5 on the back of the exact same thought process. Unfortunately, I find performance in AZ is frustrating. It works, but there’s quite a lot of slop in the AZ axis that can’t be tweaked out. It’s OK for low power, but it’s irritating trying to focus at high power when the object disappears out of the FoV with the slightest touch. If you search in these forums you’ll see it’s a fairly common - although variable - feature of the design. This is much less of a problem in EQ mode because it’s possible to unbalance a little in RA to neutralise the problem and minimise the sensitivity to touch induced wobble. So in practical terms I use it almost exclusively in EQ mode. It’s really easy to do a polar alignment that’s sufficient for visual use with the new sky watcher polar alignment scope and the polar clock from the SynScan app- it takes no more than 5mins. There are still some advantages over the HEQ5- ability to use USB natively to control the mount, belt drive etc, but the Alt-Az mode isn’t one of them in my view.
  8. If iso200 is optimum for that camera and I got that histogram I’d be tempted to expose for longer to get more signal in each frame. Obviously you need to make sure your guiding is good enough for the longer exposures and you don’t introduce too much thermal noise.
  9. The ring nebula is very small, and may still just look like a star even with the 15mm eyepiece(60x magnification) if you look closely, you might see it as slightly fuzzy compared to stars of similar brightness. The dumbell nebula should be obviously non stellar, although it doesn’t look dumbbell shaped to my eyes in a small scope - it looks rectangular. My advice would be to double check you’re in the right field- it helps if you can print some charts customised for your specific location and eyepiece and look for some through the eyepiece sketches on these forums- they’ll give you a much better idea of what they’ll look like
  10. They are cropped images... There were a couple of issues I couldn’t easily fix at the time: 1. I could never get the flats sorted, so I always had complex gradients that I couldn’t seem to process out if I didn’t crop. 2. The PC i was using to process the images was a bit under specced for the job, so it was easier/quicker to process cropped images. I soon moved on to a modded DSLR, so don’t have many example images with the unmodded cam that are relevant to the thread.
  11. I used a Samyang 135mm lens- typically 30-60 second exposures at F2 and ISO800
  12. Many nebulae shine in H-alpha, so you might struggle with some of them. But for galaxies, open clusters and globular cluster- you’re not missing out too much by not modding the camera. I’ve attached a couple of pics from when I started out with an unmodded 1300D- from Bortle 5-6 skies. They’re not world beaters, but I was quite chuffed at the time. One final point before the pics- the Baader modification keeps normal white balance so you can still use the camera for daytime shots.
  13. The CCD version blocks IR- which may be needed if you have a modified DSLR(although not if you’ve got the Baader modifies option from CheapAstrophotography). I’m not sure if that means you can’t use it with an unmodified camera- but you certInly wouldn’t need it. If you’ve got no plans o get a modded camera- stick with the CLS, if you think you may be getting a modded cam, then I’d probably hang on and get the CLS-CCD with the modded camera.
  14. Leon I think it’s difficult to answer your questions precisely because each EQ5 and drive set will have been machined/assembled to a different level of accuracy. Also, the size of the pixels in the camera you are using will have an impact because if you’ve got a camera with large pixels the errors in the drive may be less apparent than if you’ve got small pixels. I’m guessing that you’re using a DSLR and that you don’t have a guide scope/camera in your setup. I think you’d be lucky to get much longer than two-3 minute exposures with the ED72 (focal length is 420mm) and probably around half that with the SW150 (focal length is 750mm). if you can get rally good polar alignment and your drives have low periodic error then you may do better, but the only way to know for sure is to give it a try. Good luck john
  15. I don’t think there’ll be much difference between the two options. It really comes down to whether you want to pay £30 so that you don’t always need to colour balance your daylight shots- if that doesn’t bother you then go with option 2- it’s what I did, but I don’t do that much daytime stuff
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.