FaB-Bo-Peep

These are all looking amazing thanks.

That looks amazing thanks! When you have time could you please post a full res version and give me a brief rundown on what you did?

Practicing from my severely light polluted back garden I know I'm really up against it and my images would definitely benefit from a darker location but while I'm trying to get to grips with my new Skywatcher 250PDS scope, Rebel XS, (1000D), DSLR and controlling everything from Stellarium and Astro Photography Tool my back garden it is! Light pollution aside the potential of my new scope is clear and the detail in the subs / final images are the best I've ever captured but my processing skills also leave a lot to be desired. I've attached the autosave Tiff file produced directly after Deep Sky Stacker had done it's thing and I will have a go at processing this over the next couple of evenings but would be grateful if some of you lovely people could also have a go and post your results with a brief description of what processing techniques you used as at the moment I really feel that I'm stumbling around with no clear processing sequence / technique. I will be very interested to see how what you achieve compares to my efforts and to learn from you. Thanks in advance 🙂 Autosave.tif

Simply beautiful!

My scope is now controlled from my conservatory via Stellarium, DSLR camera controlled via Astro Photography Tool, I've extended the lead to the remote focus controller and now have the correct "T" thread adaptor for my coma corrector. This M13 is only about 5 minutes of light frames from my light polluted back garden, stacked in Deep Sky Stacker and tweaked in Paint Shop Pro, no darks or flats at this stage but I think it's easily my best to date 🙂 Scope is a Skywatcher 250PDS and camera is a Canon Rebel XS (1000D).

I've come full circle, my very 1st scope was the blue tube SW 130PM which immediately got me hooked and I had some great results with it. Then I went to an ED 100 but although that was a very nice scope I craved more aperture. Then I went to a Celestron C8 which is also a very nice scope but I never felt I achieved the same results as my first reflector so now I've gone back to my roots but on a much larger scale with the 250PDS and although I'm still testing I'm really pleased with the early results and feel like I'm back on track and great things are ahead 🙂

Skywatcher 250 PDS.

Very promising and interesting as I have recently purchased a 10" scope 🙂

Thanks for all the useful feedback everyone. I think ideally I would like to find an EQ6-R PRO at an attractive price but if an AZ-EQ6 GT Pro comes up then I could be tempted. From the comments I don't think I would go wrong with either.

Not even if they are over + above the 2 x 5 kg ones supplied with it?

Very nice ?

Ok let me explain a little further. I have a Skywatcher 250 PDS and want to use this for imaging. The all up weight of the OTA, tube rings, wedge, red dot finder & DSLR is 14.5 kg but I'm not sure if moving the 2 x 5 kg weights to the end of the weight shaft extension will balance this combination or if I will need to add a 3rd weight over and above what's supplied with either mount. If I need to add an extra weight I estimate that this will increase the total load to around 18.5 kg. At some point I will add a guide scope / camera and this will also need to be counter balanced which would probably take the all up load to around 20 kg. I believe the 25 kg capacity for either mount is for viewing and the manufacturer's stated for imaging is less but I'm trying to confirm that the AZ-EQ6 GT is 18kg whereas the EQ6-R PRO is 20 kg as I think the extra 2 kg would be useful to have but I can't understand this difference as the weight shaft on the AZ-EQ6 GT is a much large diameter, why is this when the imaging capacity appears to be less?

Hi everyone, I'm just wanting to make sure I've got my facts correct regarding the load capacities of these 2 mounts. From what I can see the AZ-EQ6 GT Pro, (which looks like a very sturdy mount), has a thicker diameter weight bar than the EQ6-R PRO, (25mm as opposed to 18mm), and yet it's imaging load capacity is less, (18kg as opposed to 20kg). This is correct yes? I think the observing load capacity is the same for both at 25kg yes? Thanks in advance ?