Eruliaf

It is as painful as it sounds. You have to visually line up each image and then use masks to feather the joins. I am still very much a beginner on this - There are some tutorials on youtube which I followed (several times!) to get the end result. On the full size image, there are some visible lines, but I hope as my skills improve I can prevent this in the future.

My first attempts at Jupiter on the 130 - also on the getting started with imaging/130PDS topic as well, but more suited to this location. 3 x Barlow and ZWO 462MC - 3 min AVI file processed with AS3. Also, my first ever mosaic (7 panel moon) - slightly clipped (lower right) where I did not overlap them, processed AS3 and stitched (with much room for improvement) in Gimp.

I believe that the Microsoft ICE is no longer supported and therefore not available for download via the Microsoft website - I was looking for this at the weekend. Ended up using Gimp to stitch the images together which works really well, although is a little more labour intensive.

Appreciate that the 130 isn't the weapon of choice for planetary, however balanced against the thought of deconstructing my rig to put the 200 on, I thought I would give it a go. I have not seen many planetary images on this thread, so thought I would put one up to see what others have achieved with Jupiter so high at the moment.

Good afternoon all, Reaching out to the technical collective of the forum for advice. As per the title, I am looking for a planetary camera for my setup to allow for better images. I have an ASIAir so would like this to be a ZWO unit so that it is compatible as I am getting on the ASIAir very well. A few of my questions: I am assuming colour as I don't have a mono setup and wouldn't look to be going this far for now? Are all the planetary cameras 1.25 inch and not 2 inch? Do I need my comma corrector, or is this not required for planetary? What is the max barlow that I could use (currently have 2x and 3x)? What should I be looking for in a camera (specs)? For use on a Skywatcher 130 PDS with ASIAir There will probably be more questions posed by my request, but any input is gratefully received rather than just take a punt at a purchase and end up with the wrong camera. Thanks in advance

@jjosefsen How did you stop the light getting in around the focusser and still be able to focus? To the wider community - It has also been mentioned that light may be getting in at the bottom of my scope - Can anyone advise how this has been effectively prevented? Thanks

Re-shot my darks with the camera out of the scope - much better result, however it did make me realise that if the darks when in the scope are impacted by stray light, the lights will be as well. I have evidenced this by inputting the new darks into my images and whilst better, I still have a gradient across them. So, my next move will be to take dark shots with the camera in the scope whilst inside with the lights on to try and identify where the light is getting in. Will report back once I get an opportunity to do this.

Thank you - that all appears to make sense. I will look into this when I am imaging next.

I am using my ZWO ASI071MC Colour with the Skywatcher 130PDS. I have a skywatcher comma corrector attached to the camera, otherwise just the scope. The darks were taken outside (at night) with no specific lights pointing in the direction of the scope, with the scope cap on (i.e. I don't think its light getting into the scope) I have the temp of the camera set at -10 Deg C and it was holding this well all night.

Good afternoon all. I have been struggling recently with gradients across my images - which I just put down to moonlight. I managed to get some time imaging last night, and noted that my darks are coming out very strange (see image below). Any pointers on where this issue is likely to be stemming from - light getting into the scope, camera issues, user error? Or, is this normal and I have still got lots more to learn! Thanks in advance!

First proper attempt at imaging for (too) many months due to house move, short nights, too much work and of course, clouds. However I am very happy with the progress from my first DSLR images (refer to embarrassingly over manipulated avatar image) to this, the first with my ZWO cam and ASIAir set up. The ASIAir really is a wonderful box of tricks which makes taking quality images so much easier. Even an idiot like me can do it! Being stubborn, I didn't want to wait for the moon to drop, so had to remove quite a gradient from this image as well, but it did help being such a small target allowing me to crop a lot out. Exhibit A - The Cocoon nebula ZWO ASI 071 MC colour camera with 7 hours 15 mins of 5 min subs - 20 flats, 5 darks and 20 bias. Stacked with deepskystacker and processed in Gimp. Only removed a single sub, where the ISS photobombed with a very bright white streak across the middle of the field.

Good evening, For the first of my two stupid questions tonight - I already know the correct answer (which is buy a dedicated planetary camera), but I can't help think that I must be able to get a better image of Jupiter than the pixelated dot that I currently achieve with my ZWO071MC colour camera. I have been taking a video file, approx. 1 minute passing through Autostakkert and saving the resulting image. The issue I have is that irrespective of the resolution (lower resolution provides a larger image, but obviously of a lower quality) the stacked image is appalling - example below. When previously doing this via my DSLR, I am sure Autostakkert took significantly longer to process than the 15 seconds it has been taking for my latest 1+Gb files! So, starting with the basics - what are the first school boy errors that typically trip people up, or is the answer simply that the camera is not designed for this and a pixelated dot is the best that can be achieved with a dedicated deep sky camera. As always, thank you in advance for any response/guidance issued!

Slow response, but very cloudy.... Added the other adapter as advised above and it has worked perfectly. Deepskystacker scores now off the charts! @fozzybear Thank you for your advice.

Thank you, I will give that a go!

Good evening all, I have recently purchased a ZWO ASI 071MC-Pro camera as an upgrade from my DSLR. Having used a coma corrector previously (Skywatcher one I believe), I transferred this to the new setup. Having taken a few shots last night, I can see major coma around the edges (penetrating up to approximately one third of the depth of the image) of the images, much alike when I used to shoot with the DSLR with no coma corrector. The corrector is attached directly to the camera via the supplied adapter (approx. 10mm). My questions are: Is this typical? Do I need an alternative corrector? Do I need an alternative spacer? Is there anything that I could have setup wrong to produce the coma? Thanks in advance! Scope is Skywatcher PDS130 with standard focuser.

I have a reflector, so there is the possibility of dust being in the tube from the imaging session. I do have the camera on the top to minimise the chance of it getting in - but just wanted to see what others do to stop any dust getting on the sensor.

Quick question for the community. Like many, I keep my rig complete between sessions and just lift and store in my garage - even leaving the camera in place. I am upgrading from a DSLR to a dedicated astro camera and I realised that my new camera will not have a sensor shutter. Does anyone have any clever ideas on how to protect the camera sensor from dust if left in the scope (can be several weeks between sessions)? Am I worrying about nothing, or would it be better to remove the camera at the end of each session? If this is the case, how would you go about ensuring that difference sessions have the same setup so you can stack images from multiple sessions using the same calibration frames? Thanks

Good afternoon all, I am in the process of moving house and have had 'approval in principle' for a small observatory in our forever home. I am still in the planning phase of this, as I would like to ensure that it takes up the least space possible (looking at rotating or hinged roof options as opposed to ROR, although all much lower in priority than actually moving), however I have been offered an opportunity for a fabrication workshop to make me a pier from mild steel pipework (material as per attached image). This is typically used for water distribution systems and comes in a variety of sizes/thicknesses. I appreciate that the bigger the better (diameter) for stability, but to big would not be practical. I was thinking that 200mm dia would be a good compromise (available in 100, 150, 200, 250, 300+ mm dia). For reference, this is quite sturdy, the 200 mm dia is around 25kg per metre of length. I will request that this is fitted with flanges at both ends - one to allow fixing to a base and the other to a plate which will then have suitable holes drilled to fit an adapter plate for my HEQ5 mount. So, the question is, with my current scopes (200P and 130PDS SW Newtonians) - what length of pier is required to retain the mount at a reasonable height for visual and photography use? What else should I be considering with this? Thanks in advance

Based on the permitted development (well, my understanding of it), I think I could get away with it, but to avoid objections/irate neighbours I need to try to get it to blend in. A dome makes it obvious (to most people) what it is and therefore would be a target - not to mention expensive. A wooden shed would look hideous and massively out of place on the roof. So, current thoughts are for a low profile brick built square with hinge off roof (avoids the need for additional supports of a roll off), however I don't think I could automate that - but would always need to get to it to take lens covers off etc anyway. I can ensure the redesign of the garage can accommodate this by incorporation of some steels to the roof, aligned with the wall locations. The more I think about it, the more I am leaning towards making the back of the garage almost dual height (well, 1.5x) with internal steps to access it (like a glorified garage loft). Another advantage of this is that, if insulated well it could effectively be internal unless in use, keeping it warmer and dry and can also be secured internally. This seems to be growing legs.... On the plus side, I can easily extend the alarm to cover the obsy to protect it.

Thanks for the input. The trees are not in my garden, so the chainsaw is not an option - well not if i want my neighbours to ever talk to me again! I think I have to rebuild the garage due to it falling away from the house, therefore when I reconstruct it, it can be designed to accommodate any necessary modifications to allow for the observatory on top. Access (believe it or not) can be from the house, which for some reason has a door at first floor level onto the flat roof next to the garage. I was thinking of a frame within the garage (think 'n' shape) with a fixing in the middle through the roof for the pier, so you can still use the garage - however I think you are correct in that this may all be scuppered by planning, unless of course it became a 'temporary' structure. I think I will have a look to see what is covered by permitted development, as otherwise this could quickly become a very expensive idea.

I have a nice sized garden and agreement from my wife for a fixed observatory to be placed within, however I have several large trees surrounding my garden which prevent views of large sections of the sky (South, South West, West, North West, and North!). When up on my garage roof the other day, I noted that the view was significantly better than anywhere in the garden, as this is to one side and clears a lot of the trees. (this is part of the house, with a flat roof). So my question is, has anyone tried putting a observatory in a similar location to this or would the vibrations from walking around cause significant issues with astro photography? Is there a way to prevent this, other than having the pier go through independently to ground level (and through the middle of the garage!) ? Are there issues with a pier this length (say 3m)? My other thought is to fully automate this so access is only required when setting up, but the cost of this may prevent it for now. All input welcome! Thanks

It is what I started with and got me the bug - however since moving house have not been out for ages due to work requirements. I found I was limited to 45-60 second exposures (not guiding) before everything got too blurred/disfigured. I was happy with my first few images and I have learnt a lot since, but as I have not managed to put it to use yet due to work. You can see the issues with my image below, but it was pretty much the first one that I ever took. Give it a go, you will enjoy it!

The dials on the polar scope are only for initial alignment, once aligned they can rotate as necessary with your scope/camera without impacting your alignment.