Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Uranium235

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,253

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Uranium235

  1. Uranium235
    The 130 meets the Bodes @ SGLX (as found in deepsky subforum):
  2. Uranium235
    Welcome to club 130 Ok, the mount isnt ideal, but there is still stuff to be had - plenty of givers (M27, globs etc). Im not sure how long your max sub length will be before field rotation kicks in, but just give it a go and find the limit. Ive got a couple more snaps to process from SGLX, but its just clouded over so im going to take the kit apart now.
  3. Uranium235

    Guiding tonite @ SGLX :)

  4. Uranium235

    Clear sky? More like pea soup.....

    1. PhotoGav

      PhotoGav

      I actually feel quite depressed right now having packed up with no Astro-joy at all tonight... Damn pea soup pants.

    2. frostynixon

      frostynixon

      Same here. Forcast is clear but you can only make out the brightest stars in the sky :)

  5. Uranium235

    Excellent transparency tonight! :)

    1. PhotoGav

      PhotoGav

      Lucky you, make good use of it...! Pants here in Wiltshire :-(

  6. Uranium235

    Yay! First solar imaging session :)

    1. Amra

      Amra

      Good luck and have fun! :)

  7. Uranium235
    Im still a bit old-skool when it comes to calibration and pointing, prefering to separate tasks out (netbook imaging, mount pointing). However, I do use Stellarium mount control from time to time (depends if I have a USB socket free), especially if im going off the beaten track. To take images over subsquent nights, I use the markers function in Artemis - which always gets me quite close. Low tech, but it works
  8. Uranium235
    Blimey, you need a finder! Im using the Baader sky surfer (RDF), it came with the telescope as a freebie and it helps a lot with those initial calibration stars that have you doing a limbo dance under the telescope. But normally, after the first star is done, the following two always land fairly close to the centre of the CCD chip (I use the crosshairs in Artemis to calibrate the mount). For your next test, try to find something in a good starfield and take a few subs for inspection of the corners. Youre using a nice camera, so you want to make sure you can use every last pixel (just in case you start getting into mosaics). To get better balance, leg weights are pretty good.
  9. Uranium235
    A good start, not sure whats going on in the bottom right (caused by off focus or misalignment in stacking?). But I do need to mention that you have to be pretty good with your focus to get the best out of the 130, especially if its coming out "hot" - you cant get a reliable focus for about 30min. But, once its settled, focused and locked you dont need to touch it again until you change filter (ive been able to do three nights straight without touching the focus). Btw, did you get a CC?
  10. Uranium235
    I'd almost say thats your best image yet! You've set the bar now, no going backwards
  11. Uranium235

    Giving the twin shooter a run-out

  12. Uranium235
    An update on the HH-M42 (full image in deepsky section):
  13. Uranium235
    The Baader MkIII will fit the bill. It all screws apart so you can break it down to an M48 thread, it offers no redcution factor - but the field is good.
  14. Uranium235
    Excellent work Olly, a "zoomify" version of this would be great!
  15. Uranium235

    Guiding tonite!

  16. Uranium235

    urghhh... man flu!

    1. PhotoGav

      PhotoGav

      A night out under the stars should sort you out!

    2. ronin

      ronin

      If it can be transmitted digitally, someone take the keyboard off him. :-))

    3. RobH

      RobH

      If it's anything like what I'm still fighting after 2 weeks, it's not man flu, but the real deal, and you won't want to get out of bed for a few days, never mind go out under the stars!

  17. Uranium235
    Take a look at the post linked by happy-kat, it goes into the question of whether you really need an ST80 to guide a 130pds. Which in reality, is a bit of overkill - not unless you plan to use it with the LX200 as well. To mount the ST80, you can either get a dual vixen saddle and guidescope rings. Or to go the cheap route you can just bolt another dovetail and the tube rings directly to the top of your 130pds tube rings. Theyre an M6 thread if im not mistaken. The aforementioned method means you have no adjustment because its fixed, but they should be aligned well enough to guide off. Another downside is that you have made your rig quite "tall", so as it tracks the sky - gravity will have more of an effect on the balance. If the 130 is going to be your primary imaging telescope, and you have a spare 9x50 finder - then I'd just go with that. All you need then is a half decent guide cam with an on camera st4 port - that will plug straight into your EQ6 st4, and youre up and running! (barring a little configuration of PHD).
  18. Uranium235
    The ST80 would be a better choice for a guidescope if you want to use it with both the LX or the 130pds. Normally a finderguider is good enough, but that probably wouldnt cut it with the focal length of the LX200 (finders can only guide you up to about 1000mm FL). Having said that, the 130pds would happily guide the 200LX. But.... hang on a mo - the alarm bells are ringing in the weight department. If you combine a 10" SCT with a newt (on a dual saddle), with all the imaging gubbins... and then chuck on an ST80 - thats going to be quite a lump (even for an NEQ6). Plus there is the downside that if mounted, there is no way of adjusting the LX/130 to match, not unless you invest in a quite expensive (and heavy) adjustable saddle. So in conclusion, its probably best to only use one - not both. Using both will just over complicate things when really, all you want is to be up and running as soon as possible. As for whether the 80ED is better than the 130? Well I have both, and while the 80ED can yield some fantastic, sharp images (if given time) - its just nowhere near as fast as the 130pds (especially when reduced). In the last 12 months I think the 80ED has been out only twice, but it didnt take long for me to get the thirst for speed again. But I still wont sell the 80ED, I still have plans for it (would be nice to turn it into a solar scope with a quark ep) - plus its always good to have a reliable backup telescope should anything go horribly wrong.
  19. Uranium235
    Not sure the LX will make a good guide scope since its a far longer FL than the 130pds. And with it being a longer FL, comes the problem of the star "jumping about" a bit too much, meaning that your autoguiding will respond accordingly (by jumping about). Perhaps a way to get it to work would be to adjust some of the PHD settings so its less sensitive. A better solution perhaps would be a separate, short focal length frac that will happily do both (ST80?) - you might even get away with a finderguider.
  20. Uranium235
    Hard to say, ive never looked through mine during the daytime. It shouldnt be a problem once you get a camera on it. Surprisingly light these little newts are eh? Well, they are until you load them up with kit... I think mine doubled in weight when the imaging gear and legweights were attached (feels like it anyway!).
  21. Uranium235
    Thanks guys, hopefully if I can get another night or two (with no Moon) I can finish it off and present a full resolution version. Whether I get that night between now and the end of Feb is another matter! Something tells me I might still be doing this one at SGLX
  22. Uranium235
    Just a preview of what im working on at the mo, its not ready yet so its just a cut-down version (quite a bit of moon damage on the top strip to be fixed):
  23. Uranium235
    On balance it will work out quicker than the 200p for larger stuff, slower FR yes - but youre grabbing a lot more sky so youre cutting down on mosaics. Im currenty trying to finish a 6 pane mosaic - which seems to have taken forever! January wasnt a kind month for AP.
  24. Uranium235
    No prob mate Youre using the 383 with the 80ED reduced yes? Then i might suggest 900s subs as a benchmark, but certainly not below 600s as f6.38 does the 383 no favours.
  25. Uranium235

    Sneaking a couple of hours off Orion before the Moon gets out of bed.

×
×
  • 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.