nfotis

if I remember correctly, FD lenses on EOS bodies are problematic, because adding a glassless adapter means these lenses become myopic, while a typical FE-EOS adapter with a corrective lens does worsen the optical quality (FD lenses have 42mm backfocus, while EF lenses have 44mm). If you check the list at the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance you can see why you can mount Nikon lenses to Canon EOS bodies but not the reverse without a lens correction. To the OP: there are many nice manual focus lenses for Canon mount like the Samyang/Rokinon/etc lenses (the 85mm/1.8 and 135mm/2 are big favorites of astrophotographers). From the Canon EF range, the 50mm/1.8, 85mm/1.8, 135mm/2, 200mm/2.8, 300mm/4L and 400mm/5.6L might be useful to you (and usable in regular photography, too). The newer, image-stabilizer editions aren't required for astrophotography. N.F.

Intriguing. Tried to enter the data for a Skymax 180, I am not sure that the resulting drawing is correct, though. N.F.

Do these cover your requirements? https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p7660_Baader-AstroSolar-Telescope-Solar-Filter---Aperture--180-mm--Tube--200-240-mm.html https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8812_Baader-Digital-Solar-Filter-3-8-OD--aperture-180-mm--for-tubes--200-240-mm.html Another, more compact solution, is the Astrozap: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/solar-filters/astrozap-baader-solar-filter.html N.F.

Thank you for your work and your effort to illustrate the stages. I am still new in planetary imaging, but I hope to manage the next opposition in a good way. By the way, isn't AS!3 own sharpening "good enough" for getting an adequate view of Mars? My first tests on the Moon were quite good. N.F.

From what I understand, it's not a requirement to have exactly the same amount of signal in each LRGB channel. Many people throw more time into the L channel in order to get the geometry correct, and the RGB data just "colorize" the L channel. So, running an OSC camera for the same amount of time as a monochrome version running the L channel isn't that bad. Of course, you could try a Ha filter instead of L (depends on your target), then you mix the multiple channels to your preferences/palette. N.F.

Better not enter the messy RC collimation trap before you use it as it came from the factory. As a well known professor wrote "Premature optimization is the root of all evil" 🙂 One of the most approachable documents I have read on the subject is below (at least, it promises a converging solution): http://www.deepskyinstruments.com/truerc/docs/DSI_Collimation_Procedure_Ver_1.0.pdf N.F.

Personally, I didn't even use Registax, I was satisfied with the sharpening in Autostakkert!3, but that's subjective. You can look for yourself, if you prefer this approach, or another - there's not a single definitive interpretation of these data (try different processing approaches to your data which you already captured): Regards, N.F.

Don't know the Vixen range, but maybe a Skywatcher EQ6-R is good enough for your scopes? (I am eyeing one for my scopes as a follow-on to my HEQ5 Pro) For fit and finish, maybe iOptron CEM-70? N.F.

Nice effort, I think that a different processing will give even better results. I suggest that you simplify your processing flow as much as possible - less things to go awry this way. N.F.

I am quite impressed by my ASI462MC, with its high IR sensitivity I can shoot both in infrared and as a colour camera (using an IR pass and IR cut filter, respectively). I haven't used other dedicated cameras until now, so I cannot offer a comparison (I posted some samples in the Lunar photography forum): I haven't still started shooting the planets, but I am optimist about my chances with this camera. N.F.

It's my understanding that Sharpstar is the OEM for these. If you buy the equivalent Sharpstar from FLO, you should be getting the same product, and you avoid messing with VAT, import taxes and paperwork. N.F.

Thank you. I am wondering if I should up the contrast a bit, but these look quite pleasing to my eyes. I think that even the IR cut version is quite good (and I didn't have to mess with white balance/colour correction after the processing). Need to correct things on my capture sequence (I learned after the fact that Sharpcap can do automatic white balance as well). After I settle, I may attempt a mosaic of the full moon disk as well (a larger version of the IMX462 would be quite helpful, but I think that an IMX492MM in the 47 megapixels mode would be quite something) N.F.

Here's an example of a stacked lunar image I did with my Skymax 127 (at f/12) and my ASI462 using the ZWO 850nm IR pass filter. I had exposure time at1.8ms and gain at 227, shot an AVI RAW8 video at 4000 frames and 135 FPS on my old Thinkpad laptop. Stacked the 15% of the best frames in the first quarter of images with Autostakkert!3, and used its own sharpening (didn't bother with Registax), then colour corrected the image and saved as a JPEG.

You don't want only a narrow signal (I think), but to collect more signal all over the range beyond the 750-800nm, as I can understand. We are not shooting narrow band here. N.F.

A comparison with a shot using an IR-cut filter might be useful (from the same night). The white balance wasn't tampered with. Only stacked the 15% best frames from a 4000 frames RAW AVI video, then opened up the dark places. N.F.

Maybe you should contact GSO directly? http://www.gs-telescope.com/ There are multiple dealers in Europe selling these telescopes, too, in case they cannot undertake end customer service: http://www.gs-telescope.com/content.asp?id=144 N.F.

The Astronomik filter cuts above 850nm, that's not desirable for the IMX462 sensor (I attach this sensor's response) The 807nm looks more suitable to my eyes: https://www.astronomik.com/en/infrarot-passfilter-infrared-pass-filters/proplanet-807-filter.html Look at the ZWO diagram: N.F.

As another CN member mentioned, the IMX485 is a different family, hence the quite different spectral response compared to the IMX462: So, that seems to leave planetary imagers with the IMX462 and IMX464 for advanced capture into near infrared. N.F.

I don't understand why an 850nm IR pass filter has to work with larger scopes (I was using one with my Skymax 127, I didn't see any bad effects, but then I am a newbie in planetary imaging) Wonder if there's an IR pass filter which starts at 650 or 700nm, it could use a larger part of the sensitive response of the IMX462 sensor, judging from the diagrams I see. N.F.

*scratching head* why did you need to extend the levers? N.F.

The 533 is generally considered a quite superior sensor compared to the 183. Megapixels is not the only measure. The 533 (and 2600 and 6200, if we speak about the ZWO range) are the latest generation of Sony sensors, with high dynamic range, deep well, no amp glow, etc. N.F.

A quick check at Sony seems to show that the line up is: IMX462, IMX464 and IMX485 (looking at 2.9um pixel sizes) https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/e/products/IS/security/product.html I would like to see an IMX485-equipped planetary camera 😉 EDIT: Just checked, and QHY offers such a camera. I wonder if it's more usable than the 462, though (the diagrams of the sensors look quite different) N.F.

For me, an IR pass filter (850mm) resulted in a reddish hue with my IMX462MC camera when shooting the Moon (yesterday I posted my first efforts). It takes some effort to correct the colours afterwards when shooting this way, I haven't yet tried to shoot planets (too low over the horizon). N.F.

I am not sure that keeping the shutter speed and gain similar is the correct way to compare the two views. We want to expose "correctly" for each filter (it's not worth it to use the same exposure for an IR pass and IR cut filter - the histogram is quite different) A comparison with a traditional 850nm IR pass filter would be quite interesting, IMHO. N.F.

Thank you, still learning the ropes myself. Fortunately, the moon is such a bright target that's not hard to shoot (when it's not cloudy) here in Athens. Hope to raise my level to planetary imaging soon (as long as the planets return over the horizon for us in the northern hemisphere) If everything goes well, I may try with DSO objects later (but the light pollution in the city would mean a costly set of filters and cameras and whatnot). We'll see... N.F.