Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.



New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

1 Follower

About FaDG

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Rome, Italy
  1. FaDG


    On a different plane, though: are you sure that, with your ASI, you really need that big guidescope with the two counterweights? With the ED80 and the SW 150pds I guided with a small 60mm f3.9 guidescope (like the Altair Astro one) and it works wonders, then one 5kg counterweight is enough. And reducing the load, your mount will become way more reactive. Man, with the ED80 I even got good results with the ASI120 and 50mm guidescope I use with my 72ED, although the 60/224 is definitely better. Never had an issue finding a guidestar, I never had to move it. Also remember that, when imaging Orion, you're at the celestial equator, which is where RA errors show at their top. As you rise in dec guiding become easier.
  2. FaDG

    dark-bias-flat subtraction

    Don't know Macs, but I wouldn't worry toooo much about dew. You might want to give a look at this thread:
  3. FaDG


    Whatever your seeing allows! Relax, the ED80 is a very forgiving scope and the HEQ5 is a great mount: I have both and it's a very easy setup, but @david_taurus83 is right: You'll notice that belt modfing the HEQ5 Will really turn it into a different mount... I couldn't believe the improvement I got on mine! On good nights it can reach 0.4 arcsecs: but unfortunately these nights are few and far between! But honestly, i think that 0,97 should give you pretty good results already, your sub above seems fine to me. Just take care not to lose the star. Fabio
  4. FaDG


    Camera and focal length. You have less than 1 arcsec RMS, so if working at about 1.3 arcsec/pixel or more you should be fine. For less than that, you might have slight bloating but still round stars, as RA and DEC errors are very close to one another
  5. Then, no way it can show up in images, even extremely long ones. You'll have to look elsewhere, i fear.
  6. FaDG


    No mate, seems great! But the proof of the pudding... How are your stars turning Out? What is your imaging resolution? I'd just try to increase the SNR: from my experience i tend to get best results above 40 and around 50, without saturation.
  7. You're basically right: if guiding, huge PA shows up as field rotation around your guide star, and if it's quite far from the centre of the FOV it could seem drift. If unguided, PA misalignment induces mostly Dec drift and a slight RA drift. BUT, misalignment needs to be quite hefty to show up like that, a small amount is often kept to ensure consistent dec guiding without backlash. Well, for us mortals, anyway... I never used a Mesu!
  8. FaDG


    Inside PHD settings, in guiding tab if I'm not astray
  9. FaDG


    I always use APT with PHD2 and seldom have issues. First checks: You could try to reduce the amount of dithering, if I remember correctly it can be set from 1 to 5 Try to e large PHD2 guiding box: if dithering causes the star to leave it, guiding Will be lost Check PHD log to see if the star is Lost during guiding or otherwise. Fabio We posted at the same time! I was late!!
  10. FaDG

    Messier 81 and 82 panorama

    That's stunning! The amount of detail and the colours are just mindblowing... The image fully deserved the 16 hours of processing.
  11. FaDG

    dark-bias-flat subtraction

    Hi Jon, "lights" is, as you imagined, short for "light frames". You're lucky to start today with DSS which is very intuitive and almost full-auto! I second mikeyj1 to look at the tutorial. As an engineer myself, when I started using "IRIS", quite complicated and with console interface, I found a big help in Jim Solomon's "Astrophotography Cookbook" (Saratogaskies), a Google search will yield the result. It explains VERY clearly all the steps from setup to imaging, to processing workflow. And while you'll now want to use DSS (freeware and intuitive, no valid reason not to use it!), the theory behind for calibration and stacking is the same. Fabio
  12. Maybe just a Simple test before passing to something more complicated: do you have another (less heavy) scope, or can you borrow one? If issue still there it would point to mount/saddle plate, otherwise definitely to the scope or scope/camera interface. Fabio
  13. FaDG

    150 vs 180 Mak

    Yes, I meant something like this, about 2.5 hours with my newton 150p and ASI120MM+Primalucelab RGB filters: Each frame was processed with AutoStakkert2! , but then individual images had to be composed to show the motion. An AZ would hve made it more complicated due to field rotation, I guess, but maybe it can be dealt with too... I just don't know Fabio
  14. FaDG

    150 vs 180 Mak

    Well, the opposite for me: I'd only do DSO if it weren't for the moon and terribile LP in Rome, which leave me time where only planets are doable. Yes, I use AS!2 for planetary, and it's fine for a single Stack... but when you take 3 hours of data in separate stacks to show planet rotation in a GIF, how does it cope with field rotation between different frames? Actually it may do so, but I never knew it as it's not an issue on an EQ!
  15. FaDG

    150 vs 180 Mak

    A friend of mine has a 150 mak on an EQ5 and he's really happy with it. As others mentioned: absolutely no need for guiding, but an EQ allows you longer stacks without rotation and also animate gifs of tens of frames each obtained by a Stack. This I see more difficult with an AZ. Honestly, there is no difference on planets between his 150 @ 1900 native FL and my Skywatcher 150/750 brought @2000 FL with a Barlow, so for planets you might wish for that bit more of aperture a 180 can give you.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.