Clarkey

Baader MPCC's regularly come up second hand for around £80 There are some on a Astro Buy And Sell now.

8 minutes ago, Newforestgimp said:

I’m in bortle 5 not sure if I need, maybe I should get just get a IR UV

I am in similar bortle 5 go 6 depending where the scope is pointing. Personally I don't use and light pollution filter and remove the gradients on processing. I did not like the colours with the filters.

I think you are definitely on the right track.

Ok. I have had a VERY QUICK go at this one. I have not done any star reduction just a bit of stretch, background correction and a bit of colour correction plus a bit of denoise. I'm not sure what you are expecting but the data does not seem too bad. I used 90% of the subs about as there were some with bad star shapes. I would say the following:

1. The tracking is not too good on some subs- but a EQM35 with an RC8 is asking a lot. O use my RC8 on the AZ-EQ6 as the HEQ5 is a push.
2. I would think about less filtering as you will be loosing some light and a difficult to remove green tint.
3. There does seem to be a bit a problem with the flats as the outer edges of the integrated result is very variable in brightness.
4. I think the collimation could be improved slightly

Having said all this, the actual data does not seem too bad to me. A bit more integration time will help a lot. There is also some banding - do you dither?

I would not claim to be an expert imager - far from it, but I am in the process of downloading. Is there any issues in particular that you are having?

2 hours ago, Knight of Clear Skies said:

Narrowband filters are also a good option for Moonlit nights, this was taken a couple nights ago

Agreed, this is always a good option. If using a DSLR / OSC there is always the option of a dual band filter such as the L-extreme or similar.

If it is any consolation I got all my gear out (2 complete AP rigs), got them polar a aligned and went inside to wait for full astro darkness and get the kids to bed. Half an hour later I went outside and it really was snowing. Layer of snow over everything! Soooo... I rushed about and got everything inside whilst grumbling under my breath.

Then everything cleared for a cloud free night. Aaaarrrrgggghhhh!!!

Great shot for the budget. I'd be well chuffed with that.

Great effort. The Ha filter and camera modification will certainly increase your range of targets.

I really like that image, particularly with a few stars. Great stuff. Strangely I was looking at something similar recently but my shortest FL is 180mm so it did not quite fit in without a mosaic.

5 hours ago, gorann said:

I am very impressed that you pulled this off with a DSLR! The background suffer as usual with a DSLR and distracts a bit. It struck me that a way to cosmetically fix this would be to somehow selectively blur the darker parts of the image so I gave it a try. This is what I did in short:

1) Made a starless version using Star Xterminator in PS.

2) Gausian blur (I think I set it at 12 pixels) in PS to make the sky more even.

3) Added the original image as a layer in PS using blend mode lighten, and then used a curve on this so that only the brighter parts came through (= the stars and structures in the nebula).

4) Used a curve to darken the darker parts (as I found the sky a bit too bright).

5) Run SCNR green in PI to remove the green cast.

Thanks Goran, certainly looks a bit cleaner. I did develop a starless version and denoise the background to this and a star layer but maybe I just needed to do it a bit more. I am always wary of overdoing any 'denoise' as it can end up looking over-processed. Maybe with the DSLR and the noise I might have to be a bit more willing to loose the clarity.

4 hours ago, Catanonia said:

I did a test run last night on this with the rasa and it is a very faint and difficult target

I am hoping this will be the justification to buy one. "Look dearest, if I had a RASA it would be MUCH better'. Somehow I think my accountant will not accept my argument😂

Bortle 5/6 so not ideal.

4 hours ago, Laurieast said:

Ran it through Topaz Gigapixel

I did a slight denoise in processing using Topaz - but as I said above, maybe a little bit more aggressive processing might work better.

6 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Do you use a large dither between subs? I'm not a DSLR astrophotographer but Tony Hallas recommends a large one of 12 pixels or so.

To be honest I have only just started to run with two rigs - one DSLR and one mono, so I am still experimenting. I normally dither around 10 pixels minimum, but maybe I'll increase this with the Canon to see if I get a better result. I do rotate the camera between sessions to try and reduce the banding.

9 hours ago, tomato said:

I presume if this was completed recently the moon has been around also, it’s a brilliant result

I managed to do most of it during the last two new moons - I might be daft enough to image this with a DSLR - but not with the moon as well!

Great shot with the background nebulae. Nice!

I have an FMA180 and this looks like a good wide field target for the future.

Slightly foolishly I decided to have a go at the Spaghetti Nebula with my Canon 600D and FMA180. I had a L-extreme filter so it was slightly more realistic than the stock colour only - but still optimistic. However, after 3 nights and just over 24 hours integration time in five minute subs, the result is far from astounding. This was one  of the hardest objects I have processed due to the large amount of noise and the banding issue on the camera. Processed in APP and Affinity. Anyway here is the result.

Any processing advice would be gratefully received. I would attach the file for anyone else to have a go but at 168Mb it is taking a bit too long.

Ignore. Late post...

21 hours ago, Peter Reader said:

I've noticed people collecting data for images across multiple sessions - I don't think I could do this as my diffraction spike position will surely change based on camera rotation and I have no way to fix the position...?

As long as the tube stays in place within the rings the diffraction spikes will remain in the same place relative to the sky. I have an RC8 with diffraction spikes and use it for multiple sessions.

21 hours ago, Peter Reader said:

I am also noticing that the center of my frames are brighter than the edges - why does this happen and can this be processed out?

Yes - flat frames should help remove the vignetting.

I put a Steeltrack on my RC8 (and I also have one on my 150mm TS Photon) and I think they are excellent. Yes, rack and pinion focusers are good for imaging as they won't slip, but they can have some backlash. The Baaders don't slip or have backlash - but it is at a price.

If it was me I would go for the Baader, but I think both would work.

It is a low power laptop and quite a large power tank. Even around freezing it does ok. The 12v supply is 105Ah. If it is really cold I have a small heat mat that I can use to warm the laptop.

Having said this - 99% of the time I use mains😁

7 minutes ago, alan potts said:

It's not impossible to hide Alnitak but it is a messing about

I might give it a go when I have some more time on my hands. There was quite a bit of micro-lensing on some of the channels which will add to the challenge as each of the channels is different.

Here is my version of the horsehead nebula from a few nights ago using the new StellaMira 90mm triplet. So far I am pretty impressed with the scope - certainly living up to my expectations.

Session was cut short due to early cloud and snow but......

Overall an hour each of R, G and B and 90 minutes each of luminance and Ha. Captured with an ASI1600mm pro and processed in Astro Pixel Processor and Affinity.

I decided against any star reduction as lets face it, trying to hide Alnitak is a bit of an impossibility.... There is some strange colour banding the top left - I need to look at where this is from. Possibly internal reflections?

Critical comments and suggestions welcome as always.

On 06/01/2022 at 13:00, Stu1smartcookie said:

rather snobby view that you need to spend thousands of pounds on equipment to gain acceptable results where photography is concerned .

I don't think this is really true. I am in the 'spending too much on AP group' - but this is because I want good images at a longer focal length. The only way to get this is with a bigger and more expensive mount. I have no issue with small portable outfits - in fact when I am lugging my stuff about I sometimes wish it was in the 'portable' category. It is not snobbery - just necessity in many cases.

I have a 12v supply for my astro gear and a separate 19V laptop powerbank for the laptop. The laptop is the weak link as even with the extra battery power it will only last about 8 hours which is just about OK for an imaging session.

One thing to consider is if you need to star adding any dew heaters as these are relatively power hungry.

6 hours ago, Adam J said:

Get an AZ GTI much better in the long run due to plate solving / goto

Would you not want an equatorial mount for AP?

I think there is a bit of tilt. The top left does not look too bad so that distance is probably about right. It might be the sensor or the optical train. Try turning the camera. If the image remains the same then it is the imaging train. If it moves it's more likely to be the camera.

I think the F5 Photon is great value for money. It is also easily portable which is a bonus. I went for the F4 for speed of capture (at the time I was using an ED80 at F6.3), but with hindsight I may have been better off with the F5 - especially as I already had the Baader MPCC.

I think the images from powerlord above are testament to the Photon's capabilities. To be honest for a true APO giving similar performance you would be looking at £1000+.