AndyThilo

I had 3 Esprit 80's, all were awful. I also had a WO GT81 and that was perfect, same temperatures.

Personally I wouldn't touch another Esprit with a bargepole.

Ok thanks, I read the colour camera could be unlocked as well. Guess not.

Hi

Anyone know if the bayer matrix is still intact in the new Bin 1 mode? I.E will I be able to debayer the 47mp images? 

Thanks

13 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Your chip is APS-c sized, I think, so the flattener should cover it tolerably well. You would still be massively oversampled, though, at about 0.5 arcseconds per pixel. You'd be wanting to software bin down to about half that, since a good EQ6 under guiding cannot be expected to beat 0.5 arcsecs RMS (supporting imaging at twice that, so 1"P/P. There is no point in sampling below that.)

With present technology, and notably highly sensitive cameras like yours with small pixels, an SCT strikes me as being a 'hard work solution' to the DS imaging problem. For some reason they tend to produce big stars, for one thing. My inclination would be to go for a significantly shorter focal length since you'll get the same real resolution of detail out if it, plus a wider field field of view and probably better stars.

I have a 10 inch flat field SCT sitting in a cupboard but since I don't feel it is likely to beat my 1 metre FL refractor I still haven't given it an airing. Maybe I should but my present setup ain't broke...

In a nutshell I think modern cameras may have put long focal lengths out of business for deep sky imaging.

Olly

Thanks for the honest answer and is rather what I am thinking also. My current 130mm (910mm fl) triplet will probably produce better images even when cropped in. It's just always the desire to  have more optical focal length. And I think you're right, modern CMOS cameras just don't have big enough pixels for long FL dustbins. 

Been offered a mint C9.25 for a decent price. Wonder how it fairs for AP? I'm mainly interested in galaxies and would be using my QHY268C with it on my EQ6R Pro. Does the 6.3 reducer help coma and field flatness? Are there other reducer/flatteners out there? Any opinions welcome I'd be fitting either a EAF or Celestron motor focuser so not worried about not having mirror locks.

Trying to get my head around this. I've never shot it before, but tonight seems ideal. It will be with my 286C and either the L-Pro or IDAS NBZ (NBX replacement). Do most people shoot it as HaRGB? Is there any benefit to shooting multiple exposure times for HDR to try and control Altinak?

I think they took that away to reduce the cameras back-focus requirements and to allow for easier use of an OAG and EFW. Principle is still the same though, you'd use the included spacers, and the M48 adapter which both get bolted to the camera, then you can fit the EFW. Or bolt the M48 adapter straight to the camera and use M48 spacers. 

Yeah true, although I don’t get any with my GT81 or 130. Haven’t done any flats yet. DBE in Pixinsight takes care of anything else. I guess I should start doing flats, I’ve got the panel, just keep forgetting. 

Yeah I guess you're right, although I always feel it's better to edit and finalise photos at their native FOV where possible. Maybe it's just in my head though lol

2 minutes ago, Laurin Dave said:

I'd just use your 268 and crop your images if needed, however you'll often find (as I do with my Esprit150 and APSH chip ) that there are numerous smaller and not so small galaxies in the fov which give interest and context, also there are various galaxy groupings where the native 268's fov of view would work very well... eg Markarians Chain and neighbours .. Leo Triplet ..  M81 M82 and neighbours 

Yes this is the other option, I'm sure the 268 will crop down ok, but not sure how much detail I'd lose. 

Hi

So I thinking of a camera for galaxy season. My QHY268C is quite amazing but not really suitable for smaller galaxies as with coupled with my 130mm triplet the FOV is still quite wide.

So I was looking at options. A SCT is out of the question, I simply can't be bothered with collimation, so a camera change could be a good route to go. Looking at CMOS, there's really only the 183, but that has tiny pixels and provides an image scale of 0.54 so will be a headache with guiding. 

However, the 428ex, whilst it's low resolution, has larger pixels and gives an image scale of 1.03 and a FOV perfect for galaxies. Example below with M51 (my favourite)

268C & 130mm @ 910mm

428ex with 130mm @ 910mm

Any thoughts?

Thanks

16 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Very nice image. 🙂 

Steve

Cheers Steve 😊

10 hours ago, TerryMcK said:

I understand the Ha but what is HO?

Well it was shot with an NBX filter which is dual narrowband, receiving only Ha and Oiii data. 

6 hours ago, callisto said:

Nicely done 

 

Mark

Thanks 😊 

21 hours ago, simmo39 said:

One of my fav targets. Great image.

Cheers Simon

Captured over 2 nights, but only used the 2nd night for Ha. Total exposure time of 5 hours. My plan was to have around 8 hours total, but last night was hazy and many subs were thrown away so I instead used the good ones for Ha.

Specs:

• 101 x 180s Lights
• 40 x Darks
• TS Optics Photoline 130 Triplet @ f7/910mm with Hotech SCA Flattener
• QHY268C @ -20C
• Stellardrive EQ6-R Pro
• WO 50mm guide scope with QHY462C camera
• IDAS NBX Dual Band Filter

Fully processed in Pixinsight with final export in Lightroom. Quite a process in PI, trying to figure out in my head the best way as I'm still very much a PI noob and learning all the time. In the end I first did star alignment on the 2 separate light masters, then cropped, rotated and DBE. Both images matched perfectly so all good so far.

I then processed the Ha image, extracted the Ha, removed the stars and processed the data to give a nice image. I've started noise reduction using TGV following the guide by Visible Dark. It works incredibly well, and gives better results than I've seen before.

After the HO image was processed, I experimented with different levels of Ha addition in Pixelmath. I settled on 0.4Ha + HO. Did some final tweaks to contrast and saturation to give the attached HaHO image 🙂

All in all, took me about 3 hours to process including the 2 stacks. I will 100% revisit this on a decent night as I'd really like to have 8 hours on this at least.

100% true, hope the halos are improved.

8 hours ago, tooth_dr said:

I was sent a screenshot of an email:

 

 

Great thanks, I’ll ask my shop to exchange with a new version when they’re available. 

On 23/12/2020 at 13:10, tooth_dr said:

This is of interest to me as I have one on back order.  Apparently they are accepting back the current batch of filters and exchanging for new improved versions. There was a statement from Ted Ishikawa. Anyone heard anything?

 

 

Where did you hear about this? Any links?

Oh good I hope this is true, mine is terrible for Halos. I'll email my supplier!

14 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Fantastic idea, Just ordered some from Amazon, under a tenner for 10 so got to be worth a try. My mount and scope are more or less permanently outside under a TG cover. I’ve never had any major problems 

These are what I use, last about a month or so.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07HXV8NWW/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_-Kr5FbSTZWYHH?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

9 hours ago, newbie alert said:

If using a tripod and some sort of cover most of the moisture will rise up from underneath, especially if setup on grass.. I used a breathable bbq cover for a few years without issues

Yeah, I think as long as the cover is open a bit to air flow it’ll be fine. Worst that will happen will be the screws and counterweights rust. Stainless versions of both will solve that.

Mine lives outside, I hang a wardrobe dehumidifier from the DEC clutch lever, then put a black plastic bag over it, then a Telegizmos 365 cover secured with a bungee. Seems ok. I do check on it regularly though. 

I took some time last night to do some tweaking. Initially I didn't want to over saturate, but it was a little 'dull'. Hope you like the revised V2 in the original post :).

Thanks, the 268C is really clean noise wise. I’m wondering if UV/IR isn’t enough and I needed more light pollution filtering. Might get an L-Pro for the next batch.

My EQ6-R is superb. I did a review of it