rnobleeddy

I guess price? My 250mm Newtonian was 1/2 the price of my 60mm APO refractor!

In terms of what to shoot, a +1 for https://telescopius.com. 

In terms of how long, all the other advice is good - I'd simply add that when I was starting out I was a little eager to explore more of the sky, so ended up with too little data on too many targets. More generally, I don't think I've ever regretted spending more time on a single target. It's diminishing returns, but it's never wasted!

Probably worth a little more info on how you've captured and processed data - the usual approach for lunar imaging is to record a short video and use software such as registax or autostakkert to pick out the sharpest frames, and then stack them, in order to get the best image.

The Pi3/4 WiFi is generally solid enough for use in the house, so if it's still disconnecting when your using it in the house, there's definitely an issue! 

Outside, without any walls for the signal to bounce off, it's not unexpected that in certain orientations (e.g. behind a large metal telescope!) that there'll be some signal weak spots, so I agree that a dedicated USB WiFi adapter or a home-made aerial is a good idea. 

If I was starting again I'd attach my Pi on my mount rather than on a shelf that moves with the telescope!

I found it manageable if a little slow on a pi3, but much better on a pi4. 

I've used astroberry on a couple of Pis and aside from occasional network strength issues in the garden, haven't had an issues. I wouldn't rule anything out, but astroberry doesn't reinvent the way WiFi works on linux, so I'd probably start by checking if the same behavior happens on another OS on the pi. If so, that means it's either the Pi or your WiFi. If not, you've narrowed it down to astroberry.

19 minutes ago, michael8554 said:

IIRC that filter will allow you to image sunspots.

The "expensive bespoke kit" have a narrow-band Ha filter that reveals lower layers of the sun's atmosphere where the prominences are - those looping features on the edge of the sun's disk.

Michael

Makes sense - I'd spotted that the Ha scopes have a width of 0.1nm, so I'd guessed that a more standard 7nm Ha filter probably isn't going to do the same work!

Looking for projects for the summer where DSO imaging won't be possible. Plan A is lunar imaging (and many thanks to everyone who helped me on a thread a few weeks ago - I'm set to give it a go tomorrow if the clear skies hold!).

Plan B may be solar imaging but don't want to spend a lot of £ on a dedicated scope. So wondering what I might expect if I try https://www.firstlightoptics.com/solar-filters/astrozap-baader-solar-filter.html with one of my scopes? 

I have available 5", 8" and 10" F/5 Newtonians, a 60mm/360mm APO refractor (~280mm with reducer) and a decent 300mm Canon lens. On the camera front I've got a small colour ZWO planetary/lunary/guide cam and a larger QHY mono CMOS that can do a reasonable FPS with a smaller ROI. The QHY has a filterwheel with LRGB + HOS filters. And  for now, just a 2.25x APO barlow.

Not too knowledgeable on Solar imaging, and most of the advice I've seen covers using pretty expensive bespoke kit - so wondering if anyone more knowledgeable could point me in the direction of what (if anything) might work with the kit I've got? 

In case anyone ends up here looking for the same answer - I found no options locally, or even in Europe, so have ordered from https://www.cyclopsoptics.com/ in Hong Kong. Very reasonable prices (cable £6, postage £8) and good comms so far. I'll try to post back when it arrives.

7 hours ago, tooth_dr said:

@rnobleeddy First night using narrownband with my QHY268, and low and behold, a big bright circle in the middle.  It immediately got me thinking about this thread, so many thanks for coming back and providing your solution.  I havent had a chance to take flats yet as I was only imaging late last night.

Here are my images from last night, 7nm Ha filter, and MPCC (mark i or possibly ii, it's about 12-14 years old, not sure when the mark ii came out)

Integration:

 

Sub: 

 

Sub:

 

 

Looks very similar. Not sure if you're also using a QHY filter wheel, but if so, we have very similar setups¬ I've not seen anything similar show up on any images since I swapped to the mark iii.

Guessing the answer is no, but I'm in need of a new cable to connect my QHY CFW2 filter wheel to a QHY camera - it's 6-pin on the FW side, 4 pins on the camera side, 6 wires internally.

I think mine shorted/melted overnight with dew. Fortunately the FW appears to work fine with USB, but I'd much rather get it running with camera power again.

Does anyone know of a UK or European stockist? Otherwise I'm guessing it'll probably be easiest to make my own, rather than wait for a delivery from the other side of the world - I just hate soldering!

Looking to do some lunar (or maybe even solar) imaging over the lighter period this summer and given the scopes I've got, need a barlow lens. I've got some good advice on a previous thread about what barlow to buy, so the question is how feasible it is to manage to get away with a 1.25" barlow given I have a 2" focus tube and a relatively bulky camera + FW. 

Obviously, I know I could remove the FW but it'd be handy to have the filters available. The FW mounts with an M48 thread so I'd be looking at a 2" > 1.25" to get the barlow attached, then a 1.25" to M48 converter to hold the camera (with M48 spacer if needed). All of this kit exists but wondering if anyone has done this and can report on stability?

It feels wrong, but I guess it should be fine as long as I get solid kit. I thought I'd avoid thumb screws if I can, but many of the Barlows appear to have them (and for example : https://www.firstlightoptics.com/barlows/baader-classic-q-225x-barlow.html  has only one!).

Edit - after posting I realized I wasn't clear - I'm not worried about the inevitable vignetting as I'll be using a small area of the sensor.

6 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

This may not work with CCD. An excess of light will just saturate the chip and cause it to show jet black.

I thought I'd done with this with at least one atik ccd in the past, but my memory may be faulty!

It's much easier to try to focus on something far away in the day time, typically a neighbors chimney, roof, a lamppost or some branches. 

If you can also find some software that can loop images then that'll make it easier. Sharpcap (https://www.sharpcap.co.uk/) might do it, but not sure if this camera will work in that way.

3 hours ago, Yellow dwarf said:

A belt-modded Heq5 for £600 seems like a real bargain, considering that buying one new costs around £1200. Thanks for the advice again, this forum has been a real help when getting into astronomy.

I stupidly didn't buy one last year from a local member of this forum at £600. I'd guess £800 might be a more reasonable average price these days.  

2 minutes ago, Yellow dwarf said:

Thanks for the advice, how much would a second-hand heq5 cost?

Last summer I budgeted £600 for a 2nd hand HEQ5 but ended with an EQ6 instead. It maybe a little more now as there's been a recent price rise, but you may also be able to get one that's been belt modded for that price, which will improve tracking.

The issue is supply/demand. There aren't a lot for sale and most need to be collected.

Interested if you make any progress with this. I've been mainly imaging the tighter globular clusters for short periods between other targets, or at the end of the night, to see what works.

So far I seem to prefer stacks with lots of shorter exposures, primarily because it's easier to avoid overexposure. 

Time is always a scant resource, so I've tended to stick to collecting less data on clusters because they look OK with less data, but I may be doing them a disservice.

I've used an 130PDS setup on an EQ5. If you're not careful about the weight of the equipment, it can start to trouble the 5Kg limit. But that wasn't really the issue - my mount didn't guide as well as I hoped and despite weeks of trying to adjust/modify the gearing, it still wouldn't guide well in DEC. So 5 minute subs were a waste of time - but 60s subs were fine (I'd throw perhaps one out of every 4 of them away). 

I'd love to try that EQ5 again with all the knowledge I've gained since, including better polar alignment. But there's a reason everyone suggests the HEQ5 - almost every HEQ5 will work reasonably well out of the box.  Astrobiscuit has a good video on tuned mounts and if you believe the claims made by the mount tuner he talks to, even the lowly EQ3 can be made to work very well in expert hands. However, the tuning service is expensive, and so unless you want the portability of a tuned lighter mount, it's not economical to, for example, buy a new EQ5 and get it tuned, because that would cost more than just buying a HEQ5.

So a second hand HEQ5 would be a good choice and should be within/around your budget. Of all the advice routinely given out on this forum, starting with a HEQ5 for imaging is probably the least contested!

I only got in to this hobby about 9 months ago so this is my first run through galaxy season. They do tend to seem a little small for the 130PDS but I like that it's so easy to get setup compared to my larger Newtonian.  

About 3.5 hours on M51 in total split 40% L and 20% each RGB. As always, more work to do, but I really like M51's unusual shape.

On 06/04/2021 at 16:26, sagramore said:

Hi 130-PDS owners. I'm a long-time lurker here and I've posted a few images but my scope has been sitting unused for a while now and I am hoping for some advice from you experts!

I've got the 130-PDS mostly stock, although I moved the primary a little up the tube to avoid the focus tube protrusion issue that many see here when imaging. I use it on an NEQ6 mount (no mods) and have an Startravel 80 guide scope with ZWO ASI120MC guide camera and usually do OK for guiding with this setup. I've almost exclusively used the setup with an old Canon EOS 550D/T2i (also unmodified) and I use the skywatcher 0.9x CC with no additional tweaking of distances as I think it's about right, at least within +/- 1 mm or so. I have had persistent issues for years, however, with the camera disconnecting from my laptop during imaging and this is what has led to my lack of use. It is infuriating to spend a few hours getting it all set up and ready to image and then having the camera disconnect mid-exposure repeatedly, wasting almost all the imaging time I have. I've thrown a couple of my best images using this setup at the bottom of this post so you can see approximately where my ability level lies. Recently learning how to plate solve in Astrophotography Tools was a game-changer for my framing and setup, but alas I have still yet to obtain any good images recently because of the camera problems. Also, for what it's worth, I do all my processing currently with DSS and Photoshop (with some plugins like gradientXterminator and the Astronomy Tools actions set).

With the pandemic meaning little money has been spent going out and about I have got a bit of spare cash and I'm considering a serious upgrade to my kit and I'm looking at going narrowband with the ZWO AIS1600MM. I have read so many good and bad things about this combination. I feel like the better camera, while involving a significant upstep in complexity and processing learning, would open up the opportunity for some improved imaging. I am, however, a little cautious about my ability to focus without an auto focuser as well as some comments about focuser droop/flex with this camera and filter wheel hanging off it.

 

Does anyone have any strong feelings for or against this setup? I'm also very interested in whether or not people suggest there's any strong vignetting with 1.25" filters and whether I should be looking at 31 mm or 36 mm filter sets if I do go down this route? I am interested in just going all in on a "kit" from FirstLightOptics like the one shown here: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/zwo-cameras/zwo-asi1600mm-pro-usb-3-mono-camera-efw8-125-lrgb-filters-125-ha-sii-oiii-filters-bundle.html but for similar prices you can get sets that have all different filter sizes.

Also, should I be able to focus OK with the 1600MM without moving the primary back down the tube?

 

Thoughts and comments gratefully received!

 

Flickr album for example images: https://www.flickr.com/photos/hcavaye/albums/72157673412838217

 

Edit to add: My apologies - I realised that I had actually already posted a separate thread for this question in the middle of last year and then totally forgotten about it. I had some great responses there, from some of you in here too, so thank you! I think my "buy now" finger is getting itchy...

Not sure if you still need convincing, but I use a very similar setup to the one you propose, and also used a DSLR for quite a while. So my thoughts:

- it's a big step up in terms of image quality, and the flexibility of narrowband

- focus was fine for me with a different CC, still in the middle of the range of travel

- As far as I can tell, 1.25" filters/vignetting depends on the exact camera/FW setup. I don't imagine FLO would sell a kit that would vignette on what is a very popular scope. My camera is the QHY equivalent and needs 31mm filters, but I don't think they optimised the spacing quite as well. 

- It's a pretty common mod to add a third screw to the focuser tube to help hold a heavier camera, but I've used a 2-screw version on a 250PDS with my camera + FW and I don't feel like it was the thing that held my images back! 

- I'd recommend an autofocuser - it allows much finer control over focus and means you can do everything from the warmth of your house! I used a cheap skywatcher DC focusser + hitec astro controller for a while. It was a definite step up, but a stepper motor solution was a big step up from that. But I would't suggest you need one before you can upgrade your camera. I've also focussed the FW + camera manually on another OTA.

- General consensus is that there are some newer, better choices than the ASI1600MM, although these tend to come with an additional cost, so it's perhaps less clear cut. There are lots of people selling their 1600MM at the moment, presumably to upgrade, so if you're interested in 2nd hand, there may be a decent saving. Either way, I'd recommend posting in the camera forum before you buy - I've made a conscious choice not to look at what's on offer until I can afford an upgrade

1 hour ago, michael8554 said:

That would entirely depend on the telescope it was connected to.

In my case 8" SCT at 1280mm FL, I crop the image to frame the target more than I crop to remove vignetting.

Here's a JPG of a Raw Flat, with OAG prism shadow at the top of frame:

Thanks - sorry, I'd got in my head everyone had a 150PDS (or at least a something PDS, I imagine they're all similar!). 

16 hours ago, michael8554 said:

I have a 6D because of the large pixels needed for my long FL scope, it's sensitivity, and it's legendary low noise at high ISO.

Yes it is vignetted by the scope, so what ? You crop to get the same result as a smaller sensor.

But the price of a Ha modded one is getting into dedicated OSC astro camera country.

I stick with the 6D because of it's simplicity to use compared to OSC.

But the pixels could be to large your 637mm effective FL scope.

Michael

Do you have an estimate of how much of the field is usable? 

I've been thinking of getting an unmodded full frame canon for other uses, but would probably use it for the astro targets that don't benefit from modding.

Haven't used indigo sky, but having used apt on windows and astroberry on a pi, I'd choose astroberry. 

I imagine it's firmly in the realms of personal preference - neither are going to win any UI awards, but I find the kstars integration works well, and the workflow in astroberry feels more intuitive. 

I don't believe the 150PDS can cover the full frame sensor of a 6D.  

Later Canon sensors (after the 450D) are regarded as less noisy, but I doubt you'll see a dramatic difference. It's the cooling on the dedicated cameras that really reduces the noise.

Quote

With heavy light pollution, is a OSC astrocam going to make things worse?  

I'm not sure I'm confident to say this is completely wrong - but I don't see how it could make things worse. You've got a certain number of photons from the target, a certain number from the sky background, a certain amount of read noise and dark current and so on.  The dedicated camera will improve on the camera related noise terms, whilst the sky stays the same. So it can't get worse - only better. I imagine the improvement may be less noticeable if you're in a highly light polluted area as that will dominate.

Most importantly, a new dedicated camera will have a significantly higher quantum efficiency that a 450D (which is around 40%). So you'll collect light more quickly with a newer astrocam.

The enhance/extreme filters work well on narrowband targets (e.g emission nebula) because they increase signal to noise ratio by removing noise but leaving the signal intact, assuming that most of the signal is the Ha or O3 emission lines. They don't work well on broadband targets like galaxies, but there are decent filters for this, such as https://www.firstlightoptics.com/light-pollution-reduction/idas-d2-light-pollution-suppression-filter.html

I've had a 450D and a 550D. Both worked well. I didn't directly compare, but at least anecdotally, the 550D seems a little less noisy. As long as you dither and don't worry about darks, I was happy with the results.

I'm sure the later sensors are a little better, but primarily, more recent cameras appear to have better video facilities and better/flip out screens. I don't know how useful they are, but I presume the video mode can be used to decent effect on the moon.

I'd recommend checking out used prices on eBay. In addition to the comments above, I got a 550D for £75. It costs ~£100 to have it modded. I don't see why you'd buy a second hand one  here or on astrobuysell for more than this, but they're routinely advertised for quite a bit more.