Laurin Dave

Did you sort this out? Wonder if this was caused by internal reflections.. Had something similar and sorted it out with some flocking

Very nice, what equipment did you use? I’ve used Pixinsight for mosaics, other applications I’m aware of that will do it are APP and Registar.. not done many but one of the key things to do is to minimise any gradients on the individual panels before combining.. Dave

Not sure but the screws labelled B secure the focus adjuster to the body..

A man with three galaxies 😊.. nice one

That’s very nice Alan.. wondering whether your low black level is causing you to lose some of the Nebulosity. Maybe a closer crop and less clipping would show more? Dave

That’s fabulous Steve.. well done .. nice star colour

You can download it from Sourceforge and install it as a PI module.. won’t work on Macs more than about 7 years old

Just read Craig Starks note.. my reading is that the f ratio myth would be a myth if it were not for read noise.. in my recent experience taking Ha at the same time through Esprit 150 SX-46 and Esprit 100 asi1600 the Esprit 100 stacks are better,(which is a trifle annoying.. added together though they are even better) even though the Esprit 150sx-46 gets 1.5 times more photons per pixel.. read noise though is 9 vs 1.7 on the asi1600.. on LRGB the 150 combo is streets ahead..

Excellent Gav.. I look forward to great things from you on 11 November Mercury transit Dave

It won’t work on Macs from before 2012 or thereabouts.. so if that’s what you’ve got that’s the reason..

Agree Rodd .. shows the importance of getting the right pixel size for your scope.. or of binning . If you'd binned the camera on the 5" I expect the result would be much closer.. Dave

Hi Rodd. I think about it in terms of arc sec squared of sky per pixel, the more sky area per pixel for a given scope diameter the more photons arrive per pixel and hence SNR is higher.. ie using a reducer puts more photons on each pixel with the obvious result .. I estimate your 5” F7.7 has a pixel scale of .8 arcsec/pp and the reduced FSQ106 2.5 arcsec/pp ie almost 10x the sky area per pixel .. light gathering capacity is 1.6 times in favour of the 5”.. so the reduced FSQ gets 6 times as many photons per pixel per unit time .. (assuming same pixel size) although the resolution decreases.. could be completely wrong on this 😬.. Dave

Nice image Steve... how are you stretching? I use a combination of Pixinsight and Photoshop and follow Barry Wilson's tutorial (on his SmugMug website) on the use of HSVrepair (pulls the colour back into the core) , ArcSinh Stretch (stretches each channel equally I believe) followed by Masked Stretch in Pixinsight, it give nice star colour.. also in Photoshop if you have Noel's actions you can use increase star colour. Not much use though if you don't have these apps... I think I've read somewhere that you can do ArcSinh stretch in Photoshop although I don't know how. Dave

I got it from Amazon... if you go to the Krylon Website they have a "Where to buy" tab.. eg Walmart 161 Berlin Rd CT

Looks like both to me although the microlensing is faint.. there are some arcs just inside the main halo and faint circles outside

It's a man made fibre black velvet (not Guinness and champagne though) with sticky backing. Awesome Ha Horsehead !

Hi Rodd.... I've used this ... Krylon Camouflage paint in flat black and also black flocking that I got from FLO.. to get the flocking inside tubes a trick I read is to stick it onto some thin plastic sheet and then insert that into the tube. it expands to fit.. much easier than trying to stick it on.. I tried more shorter subs Rodd... for me it made no difference when stacked... but then why would it as we stack loads of subs to bring out the faint detail .. others may of course have different results. Dave

I think it is and I’m sure it would help Rodd.. something to do the next time it’s all apart.. I’ve got some Flat black paint and flocking ready to do it.. I suspect it’s the anodising which in some wavelengths is anything but non reflective

Very nice.. I tried a Samyang 135 with my ASI1600 and ZWO connectors.. very good except for the corner star distortion (even stopped down to f4) which I'm pretty sure is down to the ZWO camera connector.. I'm thinking of getting the Astrojolo adapter which has screw thread connection. How is yours connected? Dave

I annoyed me so I got another camera! Still needed the magic of Photoshop..

It looks like this Alan.. Esprit 150 at F7... also another reflection around IC434 which is similar to that on Rodd's image.. I believe these are reflections from other bits of the ZWO kit. ASI071 doesn't suffer, its a DSLR sensor and I haven't seen or read of anything similar on the ASI183. Still like the ASI1600 its just choosy about its subjects.. Edit.. just done dust donut/reflection calculation and the large halos are from +/- 27mm.. which is the connection at the scope side of the ZWO EFW.. in my case to their OAG And this is the Witches Broom Esprit 100 at f5.5, artefacts around the bright star but not as bad as on Rodd's

Very nice Richard, lovely field of view.. I’m finding StarNet to be a very useful tool.. Dave

Same as me and Rodd.. slower scopes worse, also for me changing from zwo to Astrodon filters had no effect on the microlensing. Pleased to hear you’re on the mend Olly Dave

looks great in green

Thank you Ragnar. With two cameras running on SGPro you need to run two instances of SGPro, they don't talk to each other ie no co-ordinated dither or autofocus (It's on their to-do list) hence the lost subs on the Esprit100. Dave