Uranium235
-
Posts
7,253 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Everything posted by Uranium235
-
Guiding tonite! (not sure for how long though!)
-
7 panes down, 3 to go! Bit of a challenge with a full a Moon and bonfire night.
-
Hmmm... its cleared up. Perhaps its time to go fishing for photons!
-
It does happen! And if youve already got good data, re-use, top-up, or use it as an RGB layer. Ive had some projects span three years (shows how often I dont change my gear...lol).
- 4,173 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Hang on to that M45 data, its going to be around for a while yet so you could develop that one into something a bit special (given enough long subs).
- 4,173 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Guiding tonite!
-
A 314 will be a good match for this telescope. Epicycle has had good results using his H9 camera (which has the same chip), and that was without extensive modification - but Im sure he had to drill & tap a third hole for another thumbscrew to ensure the coma corrector was seated correctly.
-
*cough* - going a bit off topic here guys Its a 130pds thread remember
- 4,173 replies
-
- 7
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
No prob Have a look at the new WO71 5 element, fast and flat with a large imaging circle. Nearly 800 quid, but thats only 100 more than a new Equinox plus flattener.
-
Had a bit of a brainwave.... The 130 and 150pds have exactly the same size and type of thread on the focuser (M54 female). So its possible to remove your QHY8, MPCC and EP holder as one unit and screw it on to the 130 focuser tube instead. Not sure if youve ever removed your ep holder before, it can be a little stiff at first - but it does come off (eventually!). Just remember - righty tighty, lefty loosen (thats how I remember it!).
- 4,173 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Correct! When the FF/FR is in place (especially in push-fit mode) there wouldnt be enough travel left to insert a FW and its adaptors ahead of the FF/FR (ive already been down this road!). An achromat might not deliver a good enough field either. Also, the 1100d from what I've read is the most difficult camera to de-bayer. The 1000d seemed to have more success. I can see your thinking, in that youre trying to press as many cameras into service at the same time - which does deliver the goods a lot quicker. Its just a case of coming up with the best configuration for the bits you have to hand (easier said than done im afraid!). Im still trying to think of a way to press my 1000d back into service with the 80ED, I had thought of using its two green pixels to collect OIII data at ISO1600 - but on reflection it would present problems when combining the data set with that from the 383/130pds (the image would be full of red diffraction spikes).
-
Ahhh, now I see. Ive just looked into whether there is a way to use a dslr with a filter drawer - and its a no-go. The shortest 2" filter drawer available is 15mm in thickness, which already puts you over the spacing required. The only option available it seems is this: http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p5909_Baader-Protective-T-Ring-for-Canon-EOS---use-with-2--and-50-4mm-filters.html Drop Luis Campos a PM to see how he has his debayerd camera set up, perhaps he has found a different solution. Putting the FW before the reducer wont work really, there is a strong chance you will run out of in-travel on the focuser.
-
Without correctors, the 80ED will win on natural flatness - but it would be incredibly slow at f7.5. But why would you want to use filters (apart from Ha) with a DSLR? (unless you are de-bayering it), you can try clip filters - but that ties you to one system. Why not use your QHY8L instead?
-
I have both, and have used both with the 383L+. Out of the two, the 80ED is far easier to get better corners - but thats what youre paying over 400 quid for (the scope and the FF/FR). But for half the price, and a bit of tinkering you can get a remarkably similar field from the 130 (with a little more vignetting), but 1.6x faster than the reduced 80ED. The only difference between your 150 and the 130, is size (and focal length) - thats all If youre already comfortable with the workings of a reflector (taking it apart, flocking, cleaning, modding etc), then you should already be well prepared for what the 130pds may throw at you. So really its a choice of playing it safe with an 80ED, but spending more time on your subs - or going by the seat of your pants with the 130 and finish projects at a quicker pace, sometimes in a single session. Comfort or speed? Cant have both when youre in bargain basement Edit: But in defence of the 80ED, if you give it enough time and get your focus right - the images can be quite remarkable. It just requires a bit of patience for the longer subs.
- 4,173 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
48hrs of rain coming our way :(
-
Put telescope out under a clear sky to cool, went in for dinner, came back = cloud!
-
A bit of a work in progress, Sh2-171:
- 4,173 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
Guiding tonite!
-
Unexpected clear sky! Noooo idea what to go for.
-
Gearing up for the first marathon session of the new astro season.
-
Getting bored of clouds!
-
Look at the Veil and M31 photos above, they were done with the Skywatcher corrector. However..... The Skywatcher does suffer from internal reflections when it comes to very bright stars (in broadband imaging), and its reduction factor of 0.9x although useful, does make it harder to get round stars all the way to the corner. It can be done, but it involves finding the "sweet spot" of the corrector - which takes up valuable imaging time.
- 4,173 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- skywatcher
- 130
- (and 1 more)
-
20mm? hmmm, that probably wouldnt cover the 383 either (its 22mm). But Im sure you can increase that by fiddling with the spacing distance. As for the MPCC MkIII, it managed to remove all of the coma so I can image uncropped with the 383 (using a centrally focused star) - not sure how much better it can do because ive never tried the DSLR on it. Something tells me it could possibly cope with APS sized sensors, but thats down to how well you are collimated (secondary has to be bang-on, no tilt), and how solid the focuser or tube wall is (I know you have much experience in that department!). The thing I do need to add though is focusing is critical - if youre out either side then the field wont be flat, thats why I always check my first sub closely to make sure its a reasonably good starfield. All of the work I did on the 130 was in order to get every pixel used on the CCD, otherwise mosaics would be impossible. But for a telescope that cost me just £120, I think its done rather well Edit: just need to add a thought.... I was wondering why there arent any baffles on 5 and 6" imaging newts.... there should be!
