MimasDeathStar

Hello everybody

I hope you don't mind me asking another dreadfully naïve beginners question (a noob question so my kids tell me!) but I was thinking about getting a solar system camera and for the life of me I cant work out what the difference between these two cameras are! Armed with nothing more than the "they're more expensive than the ASI120 so they must be better" level of knowledge; I've quickly run out of steam. I really really like the look of the ASI178 but I think it may be too expensive at the moment.

I've googled and read various forums about this very topic a few times and I must admit the debate quickly reaches a point where my brain takes off its reading glasses and goes off to sit in a quiet corner...

I think I understand the basic selling points - resolution, quantum efficiency, pixel size, and working out sampling size and so on but these units seem so very close in so many respects that I cant help but wonder why they both exist? Superficially they seem so similar, and I'm really relieved that I'm not the only person confused by this (as I've seen so many people ask a similar question!). I'm guessing they both must have their own USP but I haven't figured out what that is. And I thought I knew about photography before I bought a telescope!

Ofcourse underpinning all of this is a fundamental lack of knowledge and a broad spectrum ineptitude at anything above basic GCSE knowledge so I'm sure someone can point out why I'm being so daft!

Thankyou!

BTW my telescope is a Meade Polaris 90mm refractor (900mm focal length) an a basic EQ mount, I was just hoping for something as "all round" as possible - sun / moon / planets and so on.

19 hours ago, Davey-T said:

As usual the more money you spend the more you get to see, have you had a read through the solar observing / imaging sections to see what's possible ?

Dave

No I'll have a look at that thankyou for the advice!

4 hours ago, Davey-T said:

What sort of solar filter are you using ?

Not much to see in WL ATM although there is a sunspot today which is very handy for focussing in WL otherwise not much to image.

You can take single shots with a DSLR and solar film but doubt it will get much surface detail, some sort of solar wedge will yield more surface detail.

Dave

I'm just using a baader solar film filter. You think a wedge would make a big difference?

Hello all,

I was thinking about white light solar imaging but I am a little confused as to what would be the preferred technique. With my little scope I'm a bit limited to full disc shots as I'm not picking up a huge amount of surface details (espescially with it being solar minimum I guess!).

I think some people are just using a dslr and taking shots and prime focus - whereas others seem to be using lucky imaging of the full disc - or lucky imaging to build up mosaics. Is there a "best way" to do it? I would have assumed that the mosaic shots would hold the most interesting details but the full disk dslr shots look pretty great too to me so I'm not too sure!

Many thanks

Hello everyone

I'm on the cusp of upgrading from my trusted 70mm refractor to a second hand 130mm Heritage 130p scope. I've read lots about the Trapezium and am really keen to have a look at it in the coming weeks. I was wondering whether my 130mm will be a good scope with which to try it - and what I should be expecting? I guess I'll be able to get ABCD? But what about E or even F?

Does anyone have any recommendation for powers? I've got a 25mm and a 15mm plossl and a 2x Barlow.

Many thanks all, clear skies!

There are, I believe, quite a few differences between the 15x70 and the 15x70 pro.

The advantages are as follows:

•  Better coatings
• Better, more adjustable prisms.
• Fully waterproof
• They look nicer!
• They are a true 70mm aperture - where the regular 15x70s are stepped down to about 63mm

BUT...

The 15X70s are much much less expensive and pretty incredible value for money in their own right!

But if I were to add my own 2 pence; I completely agree with the comments above. I started out with a pair of 15x70s and they were pretty much impossible to use handheld. Spotting Dolphins on the welsh coast and watching ships in the distance was no problem but you have to be able to hold them rock steady for astronomy or the stars kind of "dance" around which is very frustrating. In fact - I went from there to a pair of 10x50s after that and I still struggle with them (but not as much). It's not a strength thing I don't think. Seems to be that you need to recruit a whole army of muscles to hold them up at that awkward angle - so it is really really difficult to get those fine motor skills working in the manner in which you'd like.

If I had the money I'd actually go for 8x42s now. But that's just me, I'm sure others will have had different experiences; and there are those out there that say they can use 15x70s for extended periods hand help so maybe I'm just a weakling after all!

I've read a lot about mare orientale. Apparently a British astronomer (Wilkins?) claimed to have discovered it in the 1950s but there was a suspicion that he was already aware it was a German discovery from the 1920s or 1930s when he found it (very naughty!) I think even Patrick Moore tried to claim he's discovered it at one point!

On 15/01/2020 at 19:36, willcastle said:

I agree of course, but I also don’t like being given the benefit of the doubt when I am being honest. It’s a strange one

I can definitely relate to that feeling. If I've ever had faulty stuff in the past I've always found it a really distressing experience - mostly because I'm waiting for the ugly finger of blame to be pointed at me! Its a horrible experience. But luckily most places aren't like that anymore. When I had a problem with my brand new Opticstar scope they couldn't have been nicer about it and re-assured me repeatedly that it wasn't my fault! That's probably why I get my stuff from there still.

Good work! Especially with M51, I've just about managed M33 but I just cant seem to separate M32 from M31 so not sure whether I can count it as it is definitely there!

I've been using the following list to help with my little 70mm telescope; 

http://www.messier.seds.org/dataMag.html

Working down this list I've got about as far as M56 (in terms of magnitude there's many brighter one's I have not been able to see yet as they aren't positioned well and I've only been going a few months! Really looking forward to "galaxy season" which I hope is as exciting as it sounds!!).

But... M56 was sooo faint it took me nearly half an hour to be sure I'd spotted it so I don't think I'll get them all from my back garden with my little scope. Although I think if I had a 130mm telescope like you it would be much easier! With a 200mm scope I can only imagine how much fun it would be!

What have you enjoyed the most so far? I think M92 may be my favourite (its a shame you've missed it I think it is only a little bit above M13 - but I'm sure he'll be back 😉!!)

M29 was quite good fun though. Only a tiny smattering of stars but the first one I found by myself so maybe I'm biased.

It's day its a buyers market rather than a sellers. If the movement of products is dictated by the buyers then the price of the items will have to reflect that or the buyers will go elsewhere. Now more than ever its pretty easy to do an almost exhaustive search of all available products at all price points in a couple of hours. People will pay a premium for well cared for or unusual or rarer products that have providence but generally the price's picked by the sellers along the lines of "what I think its worth" or "I'm not letting it go for x cos I paid y for it and I think its worth much more than that" are the one's that don't shift.

We bought a campervan in the summer and had the same issue (but in reverse!) as buyers. The variability of prices of vehicles was in many case's driven by the sentimentality of the seller rather than a brutal appraisal of the vehicle's real world value. All you could do was look at dealer prices and use them as a benchmark for scrutinising the private vehicles. 

But it's a small market and as its a hobby 99% of sales are probably an offset of guilt vs desire! If you saw a used telescope that you really wanted sell for 40% of its rrp then you may be more likely to hang on a couple months in case another comes up at the same price!

I don't think you can reach prime focus with that telescope - but I may be wrong!

Your issue is that even with the focusser wound all the way in, the chip of the camera is still too far away to reach focus. It looks like your T-adapter is attached to some sort of long nosepiece is that right? If possible try and remove that. Most skywatcher telescopes have a screw thread at the top of the focusser that attaches to the T-thread on your adaptor. If possible connect directly to that. 

Also there are two types of Skyhawk I think one of them has a small lens built into the focusser (bird jones) to double the focal length. Do you know the focal length of your scope? If its really long chances are you've got the spherical bird jones type rather than the parabolic; this would rule out focusser modifications to achieve prime focus if the other methods didn't work.

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Normally 40mm Plossls are around 42 or 43 degrees and 32mm 50 or 52 degrees, those are the limits within the field stop of 1.25" eyepieces.

 

 

Yes thank you good point - I checked they are both 40 degrees 

1 hour ago, wookie1965 said:

I have never seen M32 and M110 looking at M31 in my 5" refractor from my light polluted sky and M33 even when I had my 8" i never saw it. I went Scotland last October to the Galloway meet and saw M33 by eye it was that clear unbelievable sight.  

Thanks that's reasuuring - it is quite bright where I live so maybe I'll just have to cross it off the list for now until I get further away!

Thanks all - honestly I cant thank you all enough for the advice.

I've got the full set of Series 500 Plossl's from Opticstar, I bought some of them and then just kept buying until I had them all. I can't comment on how good they are quality wise but I do know that they are a massive step up from the eyepieces that came with the scope so I'm happy. And I managed to get them all for less than £100 so I was pretty pleased.

@Stu@joe aguiar the 40mm and 30mm have a fov of 45 degrees I think - but as you've deduced that is still wider than the maximum fov that my scope can see. I use the 40mm a lot as I really like it but use the 30mm very rarely as it seems to be the weaker of the set with quite a narrow "window" with which to see through. The 25mm is good because it darkens the sky quite a bit which is handy for contrast I've found. But unfortunately I've already gone way beyond the maximum fov my little scope can handle. 

Here's a quick drawing I took at the eyepiece - maybe someone can deduce it for me! It was fairly near the zenith so I think probably that east is up?

Thanks again all.

Thanks all that's very helpful - yes it looks like it was definitely M32 that I found not M110 so thanks very much for the clarification; I think I was expecting it to be closer for some reason but the penny has dropped - I've been using astrophoto's as a  guide and of course they'll be showing the fainter extended regions too.

@joe aguiar thanks but I'm already using a 40mm plossl and my scope only has a 1.25" focusser so that is as low as I can physically go I think!

Hello all - I just wanted to double check the experience of others if at all possible to make sure that I am not doing something daft!

I was out last night braving the cold for a couple of hours and was looking for Messiers more or less overhead around Andromeda.

I'm using my Meade 70/900; I found M31 easily enough and M110 too although neither really jumped out. I expected a little more from M31 to be honest but that's probably a case of expectations vs reality! I could definitely make out a central core and occasional fleeting glimpses of the elongated shape - but I just couldn't pick out M32 at all.

I have a feeling I may have needed more magnification - I tried 40, 25 and 15mm. With the 15mm M31 took up a good portion of the fov but was so vague and smushy I struggled to pick anything out. Is this normal, have any of you struggled with M32.

Similarly with M33 I got nowhere. I just couldn't pick it out at all. I had moments where I suspected there was something there - and I know I was in more or less the right area, but just couldn't bag it which was a shame. Looking at star charts when I came back in I realised it actually might be a bit bigger than I'd realised. I think I was looking for something smaller. I'm in Bortle 5 ish skies (4 end of 5 rather than 6 end of 5 if you know what I mean!).

When you order the Messiers by apparent visual magnitude M33 seems to be around M71/M56 brightness - and they were a real stretch for me so maybe I need a trip to darker skies!

Many thanks all.

7 hours ago, Lurcher said:

Thanks Stu. I really need to try again, I need a softer pastel or something, (it's too scratchy), but it was better than my appalling attempt at the Pleiades! lol

Have you tried blending stubs? They're amazing, perfect for smudging and "colouring in" the fainter areas. The beauty is then that with just an eraser tipped pencil and a blending stub you've got a whole array of techniques at your disposal. Even better they're only about £2 for a full set and last for years.

Wow so much detail it must be amazing to see M42, I've not seen it yet but am really looking forward to it in the coming weeks! Great drawing.

On 23/11/2019 at 12:39, CanesVenatici said:

Sorry, for my needs the AZ baby is fine without an extension bar. I am sure that the astroshop could tell you.

Thanks - I emailed them it's a M12x1. 5 fitting, slightly different from EQ1-6 which is M12x1. 75 apparently! 

This is a fascinating thread I've really enjoyed reading it thanks everyone for the useful information I had no idea Imaging was so complicated! 

On 26/08/2019 at 23:57, daemon said:

Hi All,

 

I just wanted to share a couple of shots of M31 taken this weekend from here on the south coast of the UK. Andromeda is rising now, the nights are getting longer and I'm looking forward to Galaxy season.

 

Unfortunately I'm pretty constrained with time - other than needing sleep I tend to struggle with alignment and I am still really struggling with guiding, so these shots are based on very little exposure time and are still very much beginners attempts.

 

I did however want to try and compare my DSLR (Nikon D5300) with my relatively new ZWO ASI1600 Mono camera. So here are two images for you to look at - taken on different night's this weekend - unfortunately the clouds rolled in on Saturday - when I had the most time available - typical!.

 

The first one (DSLR) is a single sub. I had a pretty good Polar Alignment but was struggling with other alignment stars so just settled for plate solving to find M31 and took some shots before the tracking went wild on me!

 

The second one was similar (ASI1600). I plate solved after a pretty good PA and managed 4 subs (20", 60" 120" and 180" - all with Luminance filter) before once again the tracking gave up.

 

Sadly no time for calibration frames, so I just packed up and went to bed. Stacking (DSS) and processing (GIMP) done on the following days. Having said that, I shot some darks the next day with the ZWO. I realise this is probably a no-no but thought I would give it a try to see if I could get rid of some of the noise. So the ZWO image does have some darks applied, but probably to no avail, as there is still a LOT of noise. I guess I'd also really benefit from flats (yes, even I can spot the dust bunnies!)

 

The next thing is Coma (& maybe field rotation?). I fitted my Coma Corrector to both the DSLR and the ZWO, but (especially with the ZWO) I am not sure if it is in the right place in the imaging train. Maybe I'll post a pic of my imaging train one of these days to get some advice.

 

Finally, my processing skills leave a lot to be desired (being colour blind doesn't help 🙂 - so I have used quite a bit of artistic license (even resorting to using a basic Windows photo filter! Aghhh!}.

 

Anyway, I've waffled on long enough. Thanks for looking and clear skies!

 

Daemon Steve.

 

1) Sky-Watcher 150PDS, SW EQ6R-Pro, Nikon D5300 (un-modded) Baader Coma Corrector. Single Sub, 300" exposure  ISO 640. No Guiding, only tracking.

 

2) Sky-Watcher 150PDS, SW EQ6R-Pro, ZWO ASI1600M Pro, Baader Coma Corrector, Luminance Filter, 4 subs (various exposure lengths) Gain = 139. No Guiding, only tracking.

 

 

They're amazing well done! Do you have any tips for working on GIMP? I'm still struggling to get to grips with it. Have you any tips for light pollution / gradients? 

Thanks and keep up the good work! 

13 hours ago, CanesVenatici said:

I recently bought one of these mounts and it is very nicely made. It is basically a 2" / 50 mm Teflon disc mount, about the same size as the TS AZT6 but with an easily accessible, top-mounted azimuth knob. It uses plain bearings and apart from some internal washes is made entirely out of machined aluminium alloy. I guess some would like to see roller bearings or some such, but there is no room for slop anywhere in the AZ baby's design and everything fits together very snugly.

 

 

 

This mount has actually been around for over 10 years, and is machined by the Liu Xiaoyi brothers in China, who used to sell it direct as the Astroslew AIM. (They also did a version in stainless steel, plus a much larger version.) Now the astroshop seem to be their main distributor, who sell it with a generic but well-made Vixen-compatible dual clamp. (TS sell the clamp as their XL Premium Dovetail for 65€). XL is about right, as it is rather oversized, being rated for 20kg against the much smaller mount head, rated for 4kg.

 

 

 

If it matters, the clamp is now silver anodised, rather than the black shown in astroshop's photo, but the mount is still anodised black. Only Issue I had was that the two M8 mounting bolts for the rail clamp sat a little proud of the surface of the clamp, so I replaced them with 2 M8 stainless bolts that I had filed down couple of mm.

 

 

 

I have found the mount to be very smooth in use, and I have it fitted to a Manfrotto 190X tripod, which lacks the option to set the extension at 90 degrees but is more rigid as a result. It only carries a Tecnosky  AC 62/520 (the same scope as the Orion Starblast, Vixen A62SS and Baader Scopos 62 - essentially a Long Perng S520M) but it settles down within a second or so, unless the central extension on the tripod is raised too high.)

 

 

 

It would have liked to test the AZ baby alongside the TS AZT6, which is a bit cheaper, but had to choose one so went for the more 'engineered' look of the AZ baby.

 

 

 

If you want some more reviews of this mount do a search for the Astroslew AIM.

That's so useful thankyou! I've just bought one as it happens and it arrived earlier in the week. I was surprised how heavy duty the whole setup was. I had a play with my Skymax 102 on it and there is zero slop of backlash - as long as you get the tensioning just right. I agree that the vixen clamp is a real monster considering the low weight rating of the unit.

I have been considering fitting a counterweight bar like the Altair Mini mount seems to carry but I can't seem to figure out what thread I need. I tried the rod from my Meade Polaris 70 (which I think is just a generic eq1) and while the diameter seems about right the pitch of the threads was not... You wouldn't have any idea would you?

Thanks again!

I cant wait to tick M81 off my list but it is in front of the house at this time of year. Although I'm still not sure it'll look quite as impressive in my 102mm maksutov!

wow that's very impressive. Did you start with bigger areas and fill in the areas around them? Working in pen, that's so brave!

What a lovely location to view from!