Clarkey

On 13/04/2023 at 19:21, Nrmh02 said:

I’ve just received my eq6 r pro and needing to get some kinda power supply to it. 
 

has anyone tried this and can give me an indication if it’s long lasting or not

or if anyone can recommend something better ?

I have one of these and for the mount alone it is absolutely fine. If you start adding other stuff such as dew heaters it does have limited capacity. To be honest you are paying for a lot of extra's that you probably won't ever use (torch / radio / USB / red light). You could just but a standard 17 AH lead acid battery for a fraction of the price and wire it up to connect the mount. However - for simplicity and convenience it is fine.

I haven't had my observatory long, but so far, no issues with my set up. I have a vent fan running 24/7 (small 7W shower extractor) which only gets switched off for imaging time. If it is a cold frosty night (most of them in Penrith during the winter), I put a dehumidifier in the observatory for a few hours when shutting up in the morning. This helps melt / absorb the frost.

I leave the two mini PC's on permanently to prevent them getting damp - but everything stays put. 

11 hours ago, WolfieGlos said:

and I'm wondering why....

You will get awful chromatic aberration with the ST150. Go for an ED doublet as a minimum for imaging if you are looking at the refractor route.

The RC6 is a good scope, but you will need a flattener and I'm not sure how large the imaging circle is for larger sensors. The RC8 is usable without a flattener, but is at the limit for an HEQ5, even with an OAG. Collimation is tricky - but with care is not too bad.

I have recently purchased a 115mm triplet (Altair Starwave) and am using it with the standard StellaMira field flattener and small guidescope. I have not used it much as the weather has not been kind this winter. However, the images I have managed have been very good. Maybe more than you want to spend - but a possible option. If you are budget limited, the newtonians are a good choice in terms of value for money. Personally, I would go for an F5 as the upgrades required for the cheaper F4's are not worth the cost.

11 hours ago, Rallemikken said:

I'm slowly accepting that focal lenght ain't king, done some testing myself lately. The one that started this topic had a HEQ5. Maybe an 8" f/5 or the shorter 8" f/4 (if wind is an issue) would be the better choice. Most bang for the bucks. Don't think a triplet was on the table. Costly. And I wouldn't go under 800mm for a dedicated galaxy rig, regardless. 800-1000mm would suit the slightly older Canon cameras like the 450D, 600D and 5D MkII. I see that 1200mm might be a little long for those.

All completely valid points. I was just trying to highlight to the OP that FL was not necessarily critical and in most cases, over about 800mm you will not gain resolution (but you might get improved speed).

On 01/04/2023 at 22:29, Rallemikken said:

The Sky-Watcher Explorer 150PDS (750mm) will be short for galaxies. I have a 200 PDS (1000mm) and I would like to have an additional 200-500mm

You do need to consider the quality of the seeing. I have a 115mm refractor and an RC8 with about 2x the focal length. In reality the quality of the image is similar with both, with the RC8 binned x2 to give around 1"/pixel. The RC8 just ends up faster due to the larger aperture at the same pixel scale.

The two images below are examples. The first is the RC8, the second the 115mm triplet. Ignoring the colours and processing, the detail is similar on both.

Startools has a synthetic diffraction spike option - but you would have to buy the software. However, there is a free trial so you could give it a go first to see what you think of the results.

I think that with the Skymax at F12 and the mount you are using, in particular without guiding, you are going to really struggle. The combination you have is OK for lunar and planetary imaging with a motor drive- but not really good for DSO's. It would appear that you do have the core of M81 in the image, but it is difficult to see much more. It is also very noisy.

Personally, given the limitations of your mount, I would suggest trying some widefield shots. Even at much shorter FL's you may still struggle. Unfortunately, in AP the mount is the critical part, and the EQ3-2 is probably not up to the task.

Well done - that looks much better. At the end of the day, the data capture is the 'easy' bit - the processing is the thing that takes time to master. I am only 3 years into my AP journey, and I still consider myself a novice when compared to many others.  With longer integration times there is no reason why you shouldn't get some excellent results. Keep it up!

If you add some weight to the bottom of the tripod it will help to stabilise it. Providing it is not windy, I think it should be fine. Just keep it as low as you can.

As @Beardy30 says, try it and see.

35 minutes ago, wesdon1 said:

I did my first ever galaxy imaging a few nights ago. I only manage just over 1 hour of integration.

I think you need to lower your expectations slightly with only an hour of imaging. Decent galaxy images will take hours of integration in most cases. Check your calibration frames and add more time.

On 08/03/2023 at 00:50, Quetzalcoatl72 said:

I was impressed with the blue and red contrast, being an amateur I only do short exposures this was about 2 hours ish, i used to do only 1 because I wanted as many objects on my capture list as possible, but seeing what an extra hour can do I had to change.

I think you need to be more realistic about the integration times you are using. One or two hours will give you very little to work with in terms of signal, especially on dimmer targets. There are a few exceptions where minimal exposure will be enough, but for most this is not the case. As a rule, I would give a minimum of 6 hours to most targets I image and often much more. As you say, going from 1 to 2 hours made a large difference - take that to 8 hours and it will be even more. Obviously, it depends on what you are aiming for in terms of quality of image. If quantity is more important, then that is fine.

I would suggest you look at some of the images from bortle 8 skies and you will see what is possible. You might need to go 'un-natural' with NB (dual), but I think it would be worth it.

9 minutes ago, Astro74 said:

It will be the 224 - it’s the best I have at the moment

Apologies, I thought you were looking to get a camera - not one you already had.

21 hours ago, Astro74 said:

Cam wise I’m looking at the zwo224

Hi,

The only thing about this camera is the sensor is pretty small so will limit what you can see. Given you will be using a wide field scope, something a little bigger might be better?

1 hour ago, tomato said:

I just need a run of transparent, steady, cloudless, moonless nights

The things we dream of........ One or two would be nice though.

Great image despite the low elevation.

6 minutes ago, Trippelforge said:

What will be tough is finding out what actually is binding since it won't be freezing

I assume this problem is occurring when it is below freezing? I have found with my mounts (specifically the HEQ5) that occasionally one of axis sticks slightly. I am pretty sure it is because the metal surfaces are very close together and a bit of condensation has got in and frozen. Normally I can just release the clutch and free it by hand - it then works fine. If yours rotates by hand with the clutch off, but still has the problem - the disassembly option may be your only choice.

18 hours ago, CraigD1986 said:

Celestron Travel 70 scope that is very light and about 400mm focal length

I have the SW equivalent of this, and it is not a good guidescope. There is a lot of play in the focuser. I use an ST80 for guiding my RC8 and 115mm refractor which is much better. I have flipped between OAG's and guidescopes at longer focal lengths and come to the conclusion that I prefer the scope option. Firstly, even with an ASI290 I have sometimes struggled for guide stars - some areas of sky seem pretty devoid of them. Secondly, every time you have to turn the camera for better framing you need to re-calibrate PHD2.

Have you considered using a standard 9x50 finder as a guidescope using the adaptor? Gives a longer FL and guides well:

Astro Essentials Sky-Watcher 9x50 Finder to C Adapter | First Light Optics

21 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

The trick is to be impossible to live with

That's normal. I'm not sure another reason would be acceptable🤣

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

The mighty Mesu has no backlash

I'll have two please.😄

Not sure SWMBO would approve.🙁

Works well until your meridian flip. Then you have to move the weight. As I leave my rig outside to remotely image while I am tucked up in bed, I have to keep it balanced.

16 hours ago, Carbon Brush said:

Sorry but I completely disagree.
I have seen for myself too much cheapie chinese kit with under-rated mains cables, fake fuses, too high rated fuses, extracts from regulations posing as test certification.
Obviously not all in the same equipment! But far too much for anyone to claim it was a bit of bad luck.
When I have challenged chinese suppliers on this, they have lied - and no it was not problems with translation.
You could add to this similar horror stories from test houses and other professionals.
If you have a known brand purchased via a traceable path you are generally safe.
If it is from an ebay seller, amazon marketplace seller, alibaba, sunday market...Enough said.

I have to agree with this. I made the mistake of buying some poor power supplies (even though they claimed to be EU spec). I got a nasty shock from one and the other literally blew up when I plugged it in.

I now use a 13.8V regulated supply, similar to the Nevada one sold by FLO. (I got it from a radio suppliers in the UK). The 13.8v is fine for all my kit and alleviates the risk of any slight voltage drops.

I think as an imaging starter / widefield scope it would be pretty good. The 80mm FPL53 doublets has been around for a long time and are good performers. This one has a R&P focuser and decent tube rings for attaching accessories so should be a solid buy. The SM kit I have is certainly good for the money. I used to have the Evostar DS PRO version from Skywatcher and it was excellent for imaging. This one is a slightly lower F ratio so there might be a small amount of false colour - but it should still give good results. You don't say what mount you have, but you will obviously 'need' a reasonable equatorial tracking mount for imaging purposes.

I sold my ED80 - something I now regret. As well as imaging, they make great grab-and-go scopes.

I had a crack at this galaxy a few nights ago. Unfortunately, too much moon ruined most of the subs so I got rid of the data - it was that bad! Yours has come out much, much better. It's a nice target so I might try again without the light pollution😀.

Having spent hours and hours trying to get a decent image of C/2023 E3, I have finished with this. The background is still not good, but despite my efforts I cannot get it completely clean without losing comet detail. I might return to it at some time in the future - I am sure there is a better way to process this. (I did follow various guides, but the slight star trails remained regardless). If anyone knows of a fool-proof method of comet processing, please feel free to point me in the right direction.

83x30s subs with Rising Cam IMX571 OSC and 115mm triplet. Processed in PI and affinity.

OK found it. The adaptor is one of these:

T2 Male Astronomical Telescope Adapter T2 Male Thread To M48X0.75mm NDE | eBay

The outside thread is M48x0.75 and the inside is M42x0.75 (T2). The other end is M42x1 to attach to the camera. If you exclude the thread depth on the camera side, the depth is just under 6mm so should work. Alternately if you use the M48 connection it will not add any length to the imaging train as both threads will be used.

On 10/03/2023 at 21:29, Phil said:

My problem is not increasing the distance, it would already be too long. The problem is finding an M42x0.75(T2) to M42x1.0 adapter that adds less than 7mm to the optical path. I already have a set delrin spacer rings but to use them I need a shorter adapter.

I found some on fleabay from China. I can't remember the exact specification, but I used them to put my M42 lenses on my astro camera. I'll check the size when I am at home, but I'm certain they add less than 7mm.