Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SkyExplorer

  1. Hi Carole, I have the same DSLR, a 450D as you, I have a field flattener on there as well which pushes the DSLR further away from the centre of the mount. Saying that, it does just balance now with my 450D, but when I put on my 7D mk2 I know it will not balance as this is a lot bigger and heavier than the 450D. I'll try the longer dovetail bar then as I think I can get one for about £20 or so as it sounds this will make a difference.
  2. Is it better to avoid adding weights and keep the overall weight lower? If I get the long dovetail bar, is there a quick release way of mounting the finder guider on the main tube rings so that I can still pack the scope away in it box after use?
  3. So my options seem to be 1. Upgrade the saddle, how would this help (sorry for silly question)? 2. Longer dovetail, would this work on it's own or should I do option 3 as well. 3. Is there a way that I could mount the finderscope on the main tube ring(s) as this will help shift the centre of balance away from the camera end? Thanks
  4. My finder maybe to small for that approach. Found a picture of my setup, using the 450D here you can see the tube and dovetail are as far forward as they will go.
  5. I also think the main difference between your setup pictured and mine is that I use the 10x50 finder scope with QHY5 camera for PHD, so this adds weight to the camera end of the scope. With your setup your guider is mounted in line with the main scope on the mount. Maybe instead of a weight either a longer dovetail for the main tube or could I piggy back my finder/guiding scope like yours?
  6. I have HEQ5 mount, I think the tube has been slide down inside the clamps as far as it will go and the dovetail is as far forward as it will go (cannot go flush with the mount as the screw that holds one of the rings is in the way). I'll have a look tonight and see if I can get it to balance with the 7dmk2.
  7. I guess I could do, had not really thought of that.
  8. Ooh, they look like er.. they may fit, not sure pink will go with my setup though
  9. I can't get the tube forward enough, it was right at the limit with my 450D and now that I have a 7Dmk2 it will need weights. I've looked at ankle weights online before, but not sure they look long enough to go around the tube. Have you used them before, if so could you recommend any? Thanks
  10. Hi, Does anyone know of any weights I can buy to put around the front of the tube to help balance it out when i have my canon camera body attached? Ta
  11. Thanks Fozzie, I have a few extra eye pieces, 2x barlow, compass, a few books, basically everything a beginner will need to get started, plus as stated a sun filter that fits over the tube end. so maybe around £280 ??
  12. hi, Not sure if this is the right place for this..... but.... Does anyone know what sort of price I could sell this for in the classifieds ? It only been used a few times and is like new with sun filter and other accessories. it retails for about £400 so I was thinking £200, is that too much? Any suggestion much appreciated. Thanks Steve
  13. Looking good. I'll be interested to see what the final image looks like and also if you think it was easier to process due to the better sensor.
  14. My setup consists of only 2 USB cables, one for the guide cam and one for my Canon 450d. My guide cam is a QHY5 and that has ST4 port and my mount (HEQ5) also has an ST4 port so I connect my guide cam to my mount. I use APT and PHD and with two I am able to dither as well. I use an outside power point and plug everything into a 4-way adapter which I hide inside a wooden box I made and leave my laptop outside and just use TeamViewer over wifi.
  15. I have a skywatcher 80ED and a canon 450d. I use this http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/skywatcher-field-flattener.html (acts an extension tube and helps flatten the field) with a Canon T ring adapter, which threads on the end of this. Then slot the whole ting into the 80 ED tube.
  16. Ah cool, thanks for the advice guys. Oh right, so yes that makes sense regarding the dark frame scaling (optimisation) - Thanks Thanks, I'll follow this when I get home later to create my master flat
  17. Here is the link http://pixinsight.com/tutorials/master-frames/index.html
  18. I created 40 x 300s ISO800 darks using my 450d (covered with a towel at room temperature). The file size for image one is 13.1mb and rise steadily to 17.9mb for the 40th image. Looking at Peter's file sizes for ISO800 I can see the 7d Mk2's first image is only 3.8mb in size, a whole 10mb less than the 450d's first image size. By the time I have reached 40th frame, the 450d is up to 17.9mb, where as 7d Mk2 is at 15.8mb. The 7dmk2 file size has increases quicker than the 450d, however I was not using a battery for my darks so this may have a bearing on the noise level. I download Peter's raw files for his ISO800 shots and auto stretched (boosted) them in PixInsight along with my 450d files so I can ascertain a direct comparison. Here is the composite image for frame 1, 20, 30. and 40, I have only included the left half of each 7dmk2 image, as they are consistent across the width of the frame. You will notice that from shot 1 to shot 40 the 7dmk2 darks frame are pretty much identical, however the 450d change a fare bit. Shot 1 Shot 20 Shot 40
  19. My flats were 1/30th of a second. So I should not be too worried about this message then and carry on following the tutorial to create my master flat?
  20. Hi, I havd Canon 450d, and I've created 40 x 600 second darks at ISO800, 180 x Bias frames at ISO800 and have 120 x flats at ISO800. I've been following the Master Calibration tutorial by Vincent Peris from the PixInsight web site and run in a an issue when calibrating the flat files. For each flat processed I get the following message, (for some files I may also get this message for channel 1 and 2). ** Warning: No correlation between the master dark and target frames (channel 0). Does anyone know how I can stop this from happening? Thanks
  21. Ah, so doing this on the image of M74, I see a band of darker area and few blotches of darker area and some darker area around M74. So I would ensure the samples are in the darker area and lighter area, but maybe not the darker area around M74 as this could be part of the galaxy?
  22. I also look at other images, I did for M81/82 and have for M74, mainly to see where the fainter parts of the galaxies are. This stops me putting a sample point where there could be galaxy.
  • 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.