MimasDeathStar

That's such a lovely looking setup! That platform reminds me of Halfords Gadget Blue which is the colour I spray just about everything!

wow thanks both that's fascinating. So I suppose the glass one's are aimed at the impressionable newbie's like me looking for the best experience! Am I imagining it or are there different grades of Baader film or am I imagining it?

Hi all, I've been using an Explore Scientific filter (the big black cardboard one) with my Skymax 102 for a couple of weeks. I have no problems with it but as it was so cheap I got to wondering whether there was any way I could upgrade the view. Having a Mak I can't use a herschel wedge but, having looked at white light filters, I'm not having much success at cutting through the blurb! Do the glass filters work better than the film ones? Are the white filters actually better than the yellow/orange ones? What difference do the different film materials make? Or is it all a much of a muchness and not something to spend much time worrying about? Many thanks and apologies for my obvious questions! Niall

That's a great pic well done. If we could speculate it was an F104 doing the flyover then you'd definitely have the competition won!

Hello there!

I love my scope, but I cant help but feel life may be easier if I added another mounting option to my eq1 setup because I'm finding star hopping a bit of a challenge and I'm perhaps not as disciplined as I could be when it comes to polar aligning for quick sessions! My scope is a Meade Polaris 70/900, its not very heavy at all, but it is quite long. I'm lucky because it has a standard sky-watcher style v-shaped base. I do have an extra heavy weight tripod, and a lighter carbon travel tripod. I'd really like to use one of those if possible. The heavier tripod has a video head but I found that using the 1/4 attachment on the scope meant the scope had a tendency to "wander around" on the mount when panning. And I didn't really get on with the video head, it seems to... wallow... a bit., sort of feels a bit spongy and a challenge with the narrow FOV - certainly not as good as the EQ1. I have seen the AZ pronto which looks perfect - but it does mean buying another tripod which seems like a shame as I already have a tripod or two lying around. The AZ4 and AZ5 seem a bit overkill for my lightweight setup and I'm not sure they'd work with my tripod. If I could utilise one of my tripods rather than buy a new one, then that would be one less thing to take on holiday! I have seen the Omegon AZ Baby mount which looks amazing https://www.astroshop.eu/alt-azimuth-without-goto/omegon-mount-az-baby/p,49753 but I haven't seen any reviews for it, maybe it is quite new. I did find one picture of someone mounting what looks like a 90mm or so frac on it so I think it would work - but I'd love to hear what other people do, especially when looking for a nice lightweight compact setup. Once again, many thanks all.

Amazing shots - well done for finding a gap in the clouds! How are you getting on with the AR-102xs? Looks like an intriguing scope I'm thinking about upgrading my Meade 70mm for one. That earth to scale image is really useful by the way!

That's brill Well done considering the conditions!

The cloud and rain are that terrible I decided to go all ethereal and atmospheric with processing!

I do know that if you are looking at the EOS4000D then you'd be better trying to get a 1300D instead. They replaced the 1300d with the 4000 but the reviews I read say that the 1300d is superior in every way.

Thanks everyone for the replies and kind advice. I feel reassured about getting an older model so did some more research. Although I admit I did ask specifically about Canon cameras as these are what I've used in the past, I found that Nikon seemed to be a bit cheaper in terms of both lenses and bodies so I picked up a Nikon D3200 and a 70-300 Sigma macro APO lens for £178 which I'm pretty impressed with. I know it wasn't Canon but if it weren't for your advice I wouldn't have thought about venturing out of my comfort zone so many thanks for that. I've got a motorized EQ1 mount already so will do some playing at around the 70mm mark to start with and see how I get on. Thanks again everyone. https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-digital-slr-cameras/used-nikon-digital-slr-cameras/nikon-d3200/sku-865049/ https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-lenses/used-nikon-fit-lenses/sigma-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-macro-nikon-fit/sku-901359/

Thanks for the question. Its a good point I should have mentioned it in the post; I do really only want it for night time use but do not have the sort of budget that would make an astro modified camera a consideration. Thanks for the advice.

Hello everyone I was thinking about buying a cheap DSLR for astrophotography use to see if I like it. So I'm looking for something really inexpensive, but something that still works well. I'm thinking if I like it then I don't want to have to immediately feel like I have to upgrade the camera, but at the same time don't want to throw money away on something if I decide its not for me. I've been looking on mpb.com but its occurred to me I have no idea what criteria I should be applying... I've been tempted by a couple of 1200d on there but if I'm being honest it's still a little more than I'd like to pay as I'll have to find a lens from somewhere too. Could I get away with going really cheap and getting an older model in the £75-100 range or would I regret that outrageous thriftiness?! Many thanks all, apologies for the beginner question again!

That's brilliant, so sharp. I might even go as far as to say its arguably fractionally better than my drawing from last week. But only a smidge 😂

Many thanks all those are really useful responses, lots of interesting reading to do!

Hello all This is probably a very obvious question but I was wondering about telescopes that have central obstructions and how that affects the view in telescopes? When you compare the aperture of a refractor and... lets say a reflector - is it a direct comparison between the apertures or do you have to take into account the impact of the central obstruction? Is it as simple as reducing the area of the central obstruction from the reflector and comparing it to a refractor to give a true comparison - or is it more nuanced in that the width of the perimeter defines light gathering power to a different extent and needs to be considered separately? Many thanks in advance.

Lovely image well done

Thanks grjsk very kind. At the moment I'm sketching them at the eyepiece but its not a very impressive process! So I'm redrawing them on my phone when I come back in. I've been playing with two different application - Sketch (Sony standard application) and Autodesk Sketch (free version). Both are ridiculously powerful and quite similar but I'm a terrible artist so it doesn't matter too much. Another skill to learn! But either way they look much neater than my little scrawls so better to share!

I've used the term "proper proper" as I guess I've had a few chances to zoom outside and study things briefly but following on the success of figuring out how my scope works and being confident using it - and then having a session where I found a couple of objects using stellarium / books and so on - then I felt like I was "ready" for last night and reasonably well prepared. I'm having some great fun with my Meade Polaris 70/900 refractor and don't even mind the equatorial mount too much (although I fully respect that some people warned me off it and I can 100% see where they were coming from but this package was just so cheap I had to take the risk!). I think astronomy is probably something I will stick with so would like to upgrade to a bigger scope. But before I do that I really want to "earn my stripes" if you know what I mean! So I've set myself certain criteria to achieve before I consider upgrading: 1. Image Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and Venus (can't really achieve this until next summer anyway so that's a good way to put the brakes on my spending!!) 2. Find, view and draw at least 75 Messiers (although this may be challenging given last nights events) 3. Complete a lunar mosaic. My little scope has the noisy coffee grinder / bees in a box motor drive with it, and it seems to work well enough I guess, so I think imaging with my ASi120 is theoretically possible. Anyway! Last night was incredible, clear skies from about 3pm, great conditions with very little twinkle in the stars (which I read is a good thing) and no moon anywhere that I could see. I set my scope up before dark and spent a couple of hours on Stellarium having a look at what I could potentially see. Below is what I achieved: M13 - I've read everywhere that M13 is one of those "must see" things in the sky, and reasonably easy to find too which made it right up my street! Using the sort of square shape in Pegasus it didn't take too long to find as it was sort of between two brighter stars above and below. It was a relatively large and easy to spot splodge, but with "averted vision" it really came to life with a sort of central core appearing and almost like a spidery or spoke type of pattern radiating from it. M92 - As it is just above M13, many people seem to suggest that these two go to together as a pair, so it made sense to stay in the same area and go straight for this one! Also, time was against me as Hercules was rapidly disappearing into the leylandii at the edge of our garden - and this is why I went for M13 first as it was lower. M92 wasn't too difficult to find; using the top of the square of Hercules as the base of an equilateral triangle with M92 at the top it was easy to find. It was quite different to M13 though in that it was much smaller but seemed to have a much brighter and more condensed core. If it stopped right there it would have been a new record with 2 messiers spotted in one night! M57 - So I moved over to M57 and using the two stars below Vega, found the right region quite quickly. But it took me a few mins to find M57 as I was looking through my 40mm plossl and nearly missed it as it was so small! I was aware that in bins it is described as a "slightly out of focus star" at low powers so swapped to the 25mm and it jumped out at me. I could see the ring shape at 25mm but it was much more defined at 15mm (60x). I really enjoyed the view through averted vision and could definitely see a halo with a couple of mis practice. Such a strange thing I've never seen anything quite like it! Although it should be pointed out that at this point my lack of forethought with my equatorial mount was becoming an issue as I'd gone from sitting on a seat to sitting on a low stool to actually sitting on the patio the higher I got to the zenith! It reminded me very clearly of the smoke rings I learnt to blow at university many years ago in an attempt to show off and look uber-cool (didn't work!) Double double (epsilon lyrae) While I was in the area I had a go at the double double; having spent some time on the forums I know that many people say they are a "test of your telescope optics". Now I'm not too sure exactly what they mean but I thought I'd have a go and report my findings anyway! Once I'd found Vega it was quite easy to narrow it down. With my 6.5mm Plossl I got a magnification of about 133x and that was just (just!) enough to split them! Saw a definite clear black stripe between all four components with a perfect little ring (airy disk??) around them which made on of them look like a tiny snowman. Does that mean my optics are good? I have no idea but was quite impressed! M71 - This was a tough one - really tough! I knew I was looking in the right place as I'd found the arrow of Sagitta quite easily in my 50mm finder scope, and using the 40mm plossl the area appeared blank to me. Or did it?? After a couple of minutes of study and moving the scope around I began to suspect the faintest whisp of something. To be sure my eyes weren't tricking me I moved the scope a little and the smudge stayed where it was. I changed to the 25mm plossl and the increased contrast made a difference. I spent in the region of 10 mins just staring at what I was seeing and it very very slowly got clearer as my eyes adjusted. With AV I could just make out the faintest twinkle of tiny stars within in and across it. I did the most careful drawing I could and then checked SkySafari on my phone to see if the star patterns matched and they did, so I'd bagged it. Just! But this may be a problem in itself as I'm trying to get to 75 Messiers from my back garden and double checking a list of messiers arranged by apparent visual magnitude showed the M71 was only about 65th down the list with an apparent visual magnitude of 8.3 so this may make getting to 75 a challenge if this is the faintest I can go. Only time will tell. M27 - a much easier find! Looked a bit like a rectangle with occasional hints on "apple core on its side with AV" but no colour at all which was a shame.; not like all the amazing astro-photos! M29 - Hmmm... apart from having to sit on the patio again (!) I was a little but underwhelmed with this one. In all honesty if it wasn't for my second hand 50mm finder I never would have found it. In the eyepiece it was just a "group of stars in a bigger field of stars!" but in the finder it was clearer what I was looking for with a hint of nebulosity which may or may not have been there in the 40mm - I'm just not sure... I can sort of see why its called "the cooling tower" but for some reason it looked more like one of those old fashioned oil cans! M15 and M2 - like M13 and M92, these two were in an area of sky that seemed to suggest I could bag them both. M15 was definitely my favourite of the two - although I did note that in the 15mm finder both definitely did look like comets so I can see where Messier was coming from! M15 was lovely, a big bright punch that had a bright sparkly core that really jumped out with averted vision! M2 was good but much more subtle and less defined that M15 - but I did wonder if the fact it was quite low to the south in the direction of my nearest big town played a part? Both of these benefitted from 15mm plossls for more contrast. M39 - Last one! Seemed like the only obviously achievable one left in that portion of the sky so I thought it would be rude not to! Took a while to figure out what I was looking for - so had to resort to SkySafari for help! Luckily there was a small "stripe" of stars running close by that acted as a great pointer. I think part of the problem was that having spent a lot of the night hunting for globular clusters I was a little surprised at how large and open M39 was - it was big, took up most of the view with my 40mm eyepiece (which is much wider than the maximum width of the scope granted). In my notes I wrote that it looked like a "Christmas tree sitting in a tent", which is either a sign of madness or perhaps tiredness setting in! So with that, called it a night. Had hoped to tick 4 or maybe 5 things off the list but the conditions were so good I just kept going! If you are still here at this point many thanks for sticking with me, I just wanted to chronicle this all somewhere as it was a very exciting experience!!

I've only recently started but I was told by a few people on here that I definitely should keep a record and sketch wherever possible as its a good record and seems to really help train the eye. The first think I found was M11 the wild duck cluster. It was only after looking at it for quite a long time that the sort of flared V shape began to appear and it was quite a challenge to transpose that to paper. I think its made a big difference to my understanding of it though and I'd hazard that I got much more out of the experience by being patient and recording what was going on. But I am terribly impatient normally though - if it weren't for keeping a log I'd probably be "zoom, zoom, next, tick, tick, faster faster faster!" which I'm learning doesn't seem to really work in this hobby!

Hello there, everyone is really nice here I'm sure you'll get lots of great advice, I know I have! Googled your scope - what a beast! Can't wait to see what images you can produce with it!

That's amazing thanks ever so much!

Having looked at it again - is this just a single raw frame that you've posted for our reference? I can see a few hot pixels so it doesn't look like it may have included the darks properly when you stacked it? Or maybe you haven't stacked them yet? As @Nigella Bryant says, the optimum range for the 1300d is in the 800-1600 iso range.

I may be wrong here but if its been through DSS then shouldn't it be in a TIFF or FITS format not RAW? Have you applied any sort of stretch there, I'm surprised there isn't a lot lot lot more detail there than you've captured. What scope / lens/ f ratio are you using to capture this. I think you're tracking and focus look great.

Hello there everybody I have a subscription to BBC Sky At Night magazine and I was going to try and have a go at building the red light clipboard that I saw recently but I think I've thrown the magazine out! Does anybody on here read that magazine? I was wondering if anybody knew which issue this clipboard was in and if possible would be so kind as to share the code for the web content thingy for that issue so I could see if it is on there too. I really do have a subscription I promise I'm not just trying to get the specs for free! Many thanks