Buzzard75

That's the beauty of narrowband I guess. Things can be whatever color you want them to be by changing the channel proportions using Pixelmath in PixInsight. I attempted the SHO Hubble palette at first, but with so little SII and OIII data, it was extremely green. I opted to add some Ha to the R and B channels and drop it from the G to even the colors out and make it somewhat more realistic. I live in Bortle 5 skies with lots of street lamps visible from my driveway. It's pretty awful. The data was captured over this past weekend on Saturday when the moon was pretty big and high during most of my session. I love the Redcat51. It's such a small, portable scope and extremely high quality. I'm amazed at how much light such a little scope can actually pickup. I've used it for both astrophotography and visual including night time and solar viewing with a white light filter. It's an extremely versatile scope and I'm extremely happy with it. It works really well on my small iOptron SkyGuider Pro as a grab and go rig. I've seen similar charts for other cameras, but not this one in particular. I know that narrowband requires much longer sampling than broadband and I probably should have gone longer than 180s. I just wasn't sure of the unguided capabilities of the mount yet and wanted to be sure I had something useful at the end of the night. Like I said, next time I'll push the mount harder and expose for longer to see how long I can really go unguided before I get star trails. My thoughts are that if I get my polar alignment dead on, with a short focal length, I should be able to sample for five or six minutes at least, perhaps longer. At unity gain, which is 111 for this camera, that would put me more inline with those charts.

If we blot out the sun that means we get to look at the stars 24 hours a day....hmmm, maybe he's on to something...

I could sit and play with this image all day and probably never be 100% happy with it. I'm afraid if I play with it too much though, I'll just end up completely destroying it. I still haven't fully grasped PixInsight and have only used it a couple of times with mixed results. I guess the beauty of digital data is that it can always be undone or started over again. This is not only my first narrowband image, but it's also my first image using a monochrome camera and the iOptron CEM40EC mount. I was shooting unguided and I wasn't quite sure how long to expose for. I only did 20x180s exposures in Ha, SII and OIII for a total integration time of three hours. More and longer exposures would certainly help, I'm sure. I'll definitely come back to this one. I'm extremely happy with the roundness of the stars. The CEM40EC tracks extremely well and there was very little drift at all. I only had to shave a little bit off the edges after stacking. I cropped to remove some 'amp glow' that didn't come out even after using my calibration frames. My understanding is this camera suffers from bad glow on the right edge. Next time I'll push the exposures and see just how long I can go unguided before I start to see star trails with the mount. ZWO ASI183MM Pro ZWO 7nm Ha, SII and OIII 1.25" filters William Optics RedCat51 iOptron CEM40EC 20x180s each; Ha, SII, OIII 3hrs total integration Captured with APT Stacked and processed in PixInsight

Looking forward to getting mine! I know it's going to be a hit at our club star parties. I will always have a love in my heart for visual observing though and will get out my 12" dob every chance I get. Having an e-scope like this setup next to the dob will show people what's really out there and why we need to protect the night sky as much as we possibly can before we lose it. It will also be useful to explain to them how Hubble and other space telescopes can give us so much more detail. I think it will be a great outreach tool, but whether I would recommend it to a novice I can't really say yet. Most likely not. I've done it. I've used a camera on my 12" dob and it was certainly not easy. It's not exactly the most stable mount for something like that as it flexes and bounces a lot with the slightest gust. A small scope on an alt-az or EQ mount would be much better suited, but even then it would require a stiff mount and a calm wind.

It will probably command a premium, but the current Naglers near that focal length go for $320 USD. I would say $400-500 USD wouldn't be out of the question. Will I get one? Probably not. Do I want one? Uh, yeah.

I found with my specific camera I needed at least 8mm of spacer (not counting the M48 to M42 adapter) to get focus at one extreme and about 40mm to maintain focus at the other. I didn't do any tests to determine if there was a difference in coma at one end or the other of focus. Might prove to be interesting though.

Tell me more about this Moonlite focuser. I'm having difficulty nailing fine focus with the helical focuser on the RedCat. Is this a home built rig using one of their focus motors and a belt or do they actually sell one to use specifically with helical focusers?

They just published an update to the backers. The first unit from their production line testing has been finished and assembled and needs to undergo quality testing of its own I would imagine. They know they have a few modifications to make and final packaging to complete. It should probably only be a few more weeks before they start mass production of the first units for backer beta testing. It's definitely getting closer!

Another article on the topic references two studies regarding predictions to when a solar cycle will end and another will begin. The article mentions the visual indicators, but it doesn't specifically provide the cause of the increase in the magnetic activity. It may be referenced in the actual studies. My logic tells me that it's possibly due to the study referenced in previous comments here. https://www.space.com/sun-tsunamis-terminators-solar-cycle.html

Hadn't seen his channel before. Very well explained and good summary of the report. I know the theory being presented hasn't been proved yet, I'd still be interested to know what it predicts for the next solar cycle.

Headline for those who can't see it: Light pollution from new LED streetlights could make West Nile virus in birds more infectious, study suggests. Talks about the length of infection in birds due to the exposure to light pollution. Birds exposed to the light were infectious for two days longer than the control group. Goes on to discuss the other negative effects of light pollution.

Thanks! I've read a lot of them and they honestly make my head hurt. 🤣 A lot of them come down to the argument of guided vs. unguided and that you should just be guiding and it won't make a difference. Got it, understand it, not where I'm at with my skills and abilities or equipment right now. Some of the arguments appear to have absolutely nothing to do with the mounts and that just causes me frustration, so I'm probably missing some nuggets of information in there. *sigh*

Thank you! This was my understanding on the purpose of the encoders as well and that it was probably the better choice for me. I don't want to say money isn't a concern, but I can afford it. If it's the only mount I will buy for a long time, I'm also willing to make the investment. The only thing I wasn't particularly clear on was how much of an improvement there would be on the length of the subs due to the improved tracking accuracy. I doubt that's something anyone would be able to give a detailed answer on without doing some testing. I know that at longer focal lengths the error of even a few arcseconds can make a huge difference in elongation of stars.

WARNING!!! Wall of text explaining my situation before getting to the questions that have probably been asked a million times. I've been planning on getting an EQ mount for quite some time to take the next step in my astrophotography journey. I was pretty well set on the EQ6-R Pro after seeing one in person and the results it can produce. It appears to be a rock solid mount, but I was somewhat put off by the size and weight of the thing. I know that weight can be a good thing in terms of stability, but it has to be portable and as easy to haul around as possible as I go from location to location and tear down every night. Then iOptron came along with the CEM40, which appeals to me much more in terms of size, weight and portability. The payload is comparable to the EQ6-R Pro, but it weighs less than half as much. In addition, I already have a familiarity with iOptron mounts as I have a SkyGuider Pro and have recently been using our club's SmartEQ Pro. I have been able to get 120-second subs at 250-300mm reliably on the SkyGuider Pro. The SmartEQ tracking on the other hand is horrible and I'm limited to about 20-seconds at the same focal length before I start seeing star trails even with good polar alignment. The benefit of the SmartEQ Pro is the GoTo though. I'm currently using a William Optics RedCat 51 and camera lenses for all my AP. I have plans to get a triplet in the 102 to 127mm range, but not any time soon. For the time being, it will be short focal lengths and unguided. I can keep using the SkyGuider and continue to limit my exposure lengths, but that is obviously hindering me on the extremely faint targets and limiting my capabilities. Not to mention the fact that it's extremely difficult to locate those objects manually just using a Telrad. I can do it, it just takes a considerable amount of time that I could be imaging. The SkyGuider is great for Milky Way and widefield work though, where your targeting and framing doesn't have to be so precise. However, after using the SmartEQ Pro, I realized how much of a time saver the GoTo can be. I can get the target in frame every time rather than having to take dozens of test exposures and trying to figure out what I'm looking at or if I'm even close. So, question time. I'm sure the standard CEM40 is an improvement over both of the mounts currently available to me. Given my current situation, future plans and that I will be shooting unguided for the foreseeable future though, is the EC model worth the extra money over the standard CEM40? I understand that once you start guiding, it all comes out in the wash and I've heard the argument to save the money and put it into a guiding setup. I don't plan to guide until I get the 102-127mm scope so that would require the purchase of the scope and another camera, possibly two, so more than the difference in cost between the standard and the EC model. It would also mean more equipment to haul around and complexity in the setup. I'm not ready to take that step yet. I guess the real question is, all things being equal (PA, seeing, etc.) and shooting unguided at 250-300mm, will there be any marked improvement in the length of my subs with the CEM40 or would I need to step up to the CEM40EC? What sort of difference in length of exposures could one expect between the CEM40 and the CEM40EC with the improved tracking accuracy? Would the difference be more noticeable at a longer focal length of 750-900mm?

Nice one! I've been wanting to get an EQ mount for a while. I was pretty well settled on the EQ6R until the CEM40 came out. I think the CEM40 is what I'll be getting. Just debating if I want to spring for the EC model and the 2" tripod. I plan to keep it for a long time and have no intention of getting a huge scope so the 40 should be enough for me. Might be worth it to just go all in if it's the only mount I'll have for a while. Decisions, decisions...

I've used Snapfish for several prints including a 30" poster. They have a service here in the US where you can get them printed locally at a pharmacy or other places that print photos and pick them up same day. I will say that those printers are not all of the same quality. I sent one image off recently to a couple different places to compare quality. One came back all blown out while the other one came back looking much closer to the digital image. I had also ordered the same print from Snapfish delivery service and it was also blown out. If you have the local same-day pickup places, you might try a few of them with the same file and see how they do.

I use a Pelican case for my eyepieces and put all my stickers on there. Only have the one TV eyepiece so multiple stickers is not a problem. If anyone has any to spare though, you can send them to me. Just be sure to include the eyepiece when you send it.

Agreed, they all look fairly identical in design and specs.

My Lunt 80mm came with the Lunt zoom eyepiece. I asked the same question before I got it. The Lunt is actually quite good and I've been happy with it.

Last evening our club had an event following a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador program to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. Since it was a public event, I was setup for visual rather than photography. And since it was extremely windy down by the water, I had my little RedCat rather than my 12" dob. After all the guests left, I thought it appropriate to hang around for the moon rise since it was the anniversary and all. The few of us who stayed were well rewarded with a beautiful moon rise. It started coming up on the horizon and we could only see a little of it through the trees. At first we thought the little spot of it we could see was a red marker light on the mast of a ship or something, but it continued rising higher and growing larger we realized what it was. It was absolutely as red as it could possibly be. I took these images through the eyepiece using my cell phone. I didn't do any color correction to them, just a slight bit of smart sharpening. There's a bit of distortion on the red image due to the refraction through the atmosphere. The other image was taken a several minutes later after the red cast had gone away. William Optics RedCat 51mm William Optics CatEye 10mm eyepiece Google Pixel XL

I've read some articles to the contrary, but in my personal opinion, lower magnification will be most beneficial as it will "concentrate" those precious few photons from lower surface brightness objects into a smaller area.

Depends on the angle of the sun to the solar panels/reflective surface and the angle back to you. You'll see satellites that will get brighter as the cross the sky and then completely disappear as they either go into the shadow of the Earth or the angle of incidence changes.

As has already been discussed, smaller exit pupil means you're more likely to start seeing floaters. The light is being concentrated into a smaller and smaller area. It will get so small that at some point you'll start seeing these floaters actually blocking the light path. I start seeing them when the exit pupil is less than 1mm. Others can go down to 0.5mm. A lot of it depends on the age and condition of your eyes so it's all going to be different from person to person. On the other end of the spectrum, if the exit pupil is too large, you're likely to notice a darkening in the center due to the obstruction of the secondary mirror when using a reflector telescope. Using a refractor and having a large exit pupil is essentially the same as reducing the effective aperture of the objective lens. What that exit pupil size is and how large it can be before you start to notice its effects is going to differ from person to person and scope to scope of course. General rule seems to be about 7mm being the maximum for most people. Some people's pupils can dilate larger.

Assuming you have some sort or finder and that everything is aligned correctly, you should be able to see the Ring Nebula with either the 15 or 25. Of course this is assuming you have minimal light pollution. It will look like a faint hazy smudge in the eyepiece. The Dumbell Nebula will be larger than the Ring, but may not necessarily be any brighter. The Lagoon and Trifid Nebula are probably some of the brighter emission nebula at this time of year. Possibly the Omega Nebula. Again, they are still going to be very faint and they'll look like a wisp of cloud in the eyepiece. Those would benefit more from the 25mm than the 15.

I get it, I totally do. I respect everyone's right to free speech and freedom of assembly, but we do have laws. In most states in the US (I can't say all states because I don't know all of them) it is illegal to block a road in protest without an assembly permit. You get a permit and the road will be shutdown temporarily for the duration of the permit. This is how we are able to have marches for causes and things like that. When you decide to just have a sit in on a road, that is when the police get involved and people get arrested. Another example; We had some teachers in a local city protesting for better pay, better benefits and education reform. All things that I completely agree with. However, they were blocking traffic in a major intersection of a downtown area without a permit. They were asked to keep their demonstration to the sidewalks or disperse by the authorities and they refused to comply. Those who refused were subsequently arrested. I agreed with their cause, I disagreed with their methods. You can have a protest and have your message heard without breaking the law. In both these cases, they were already getting attention from the media and being heard. Unfortunately they chose to take it that one step further with an inevitable conclusion.