Clarkey

1 hour ago, jackp93 said:

I even accidentally bought a auto focuser

I'm always accidentally buying things too.🤣

However you process you will never be completely happy with the result - trust me. I reprocess again and again but I have yet to get the perfect image... Great outcome though. You should be pleased.

3 hours ago, 900SL said:

Not harsh.. just accurate, in my experience

Fair enough. Maybe yours was a particularly poor Friday afternoon model.

3 hours ago, 900SL said:

pot metal

This is true.

10 hours ago, 900SL said:

Convinced me never to buy a Skywatcher product ever again

I think this is a little harsh. They are built to a price point, but quite a bit of SW kit is ok. Yes the mounts are a bit agricultural, but given the photo's produced they cannot be that bad. Yes, both my mounts needed some settling, but right now the 10 micron is just out of reach😆

9 hours ago, Enceladus Dan said:

I think I should have a go at a full strip down, clean and re-grease

I think you should talk to the retailer first. If it is only a few months old it should not need much more than a bit of adjustment. Set to gear is expensive and should at least work. (OK so I have stripped down every reflector scope I have before it has seen first light, but that's me being fussy).

14 minutes ago, Enceladus Dan said:

12 to 1 maybe just after before any movement happens

If it is that much backlash there is seriously something wrong. I try to tune my mount until I can 'feel' no movement - and certainly nothing I can see. Are you sure everything else is right as this seems really excessive. It maybe there is a broken gear tooth or similar if it that bad. 

You can measure the backlash using various methods and software - but if it as bad as you are describing there is no need.

11 minutes ago, Enceladus Dan said:

I can't reduce the backlash as much as I would like without getting binding

I think it will depend on what level of backlash there is. EQ5 mounts are built to a price and the QC is not the best. There will always be a little bit of play in the system, which in the case of my HEQ5 needs regular fettling. Certainly if it is excessive then contact FLO, but you probably need to quantify it first.

56 minutes ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Easiest place with a DSLR is to get a clip in filter that fits in the camera

This is an easy place for the filter but the negative is if you change camera. The advantage of a standard 2" filter (assuming you need it and it fits) is you can use it with any camera or even for visual use.

Great shot. We have all been beginners - I still put myself in that category after 2 years of imaging. I still have the nights fighting with the kit, but it does get easier. As for questions - if you don't know the answer then it's not dumb!

Regards advice.... Don't rush the processing or at least go back and see if you can improve. I've gone back over my earlier data and there was loads more detail that was previously missed. Keep at it - this is a great picture.

13 hours ago, AKB said:

I presume that doing something like this to it would be going over the top

I agree with Powerlord - the second image is too sharpened. The first one is excellent and certainly looks more 'natural' to my eye.

On 22/11/2021 at 02:53, CCD-Freak said:

low end of Bortle 2.

I have dreams of Bortle 2🤣

Great image - I love the 3D appearance of the central bright area.

32 minutes ago, powerlord said:

H: 60 mins

S: 50 mins

O: 85 mins

I must confess that I am somewhat gobsmacked by the detail you have got with such a short integration time. Especially with a long FL scope. Makes me wonder what I'm doing wrong! Nice image.

Why do you want to study peoples lumpy heads?

Oh no, wrong 'ology' 🤣

Last night I managed to get some additional integration time on this, giving a total of 13 hours (66x5 Ha, 49x5 OIII and 41xSII). The result is below. Bit better background and less gradient. I also managed to get a better depth in the OIII. I would have liked to get a bit more, but unfortunately the coma corrector suffered from dew problems.

I would like peoples opinion on the level of saturation and contrast. I'm never sure whether to exaggerate the colour and contrast or leave it as a more 'natural' look?

Critical comment welcome.

15 minutes ago, paul mc c said:

any ideas how to sort this.

If you go into the Toolbox for Eqmod and go to the Ascom connect option. You should be able to search for the comma port there using the little binocular symbol. Once found it should connect.

8 minutes ago, Budgie1 said:

So I thought I'd give it a go and have to say it's brilliant. 

I recently brought the software and I have to agree with you. Used carefully it is really very good for noise reduction. I have found you need to be careful not to over-do-it or you can get some funny star artefacts.

After what seems like months without any clear sky, I managed to get set up last night. Unfortunately the full moon really was not helping, neither were the occasional passing clouds. However, I did eventually manage about 7.5 hours of usable data - hopefully I can add to this at a later date as it really could so with another full night of data collection.

Taken with a TS Photon F4 newtonian using a ASI1600mm pro and ZWO narrowband filters - hence the bloated blue channel. Approximately 3.5 hours of Ha, 2 each of SII and OIII all in 5 minute subs. I had trouble removing the gradients, largely down the lunar glare which is why the back ground is not so good. Processed in APP, Affinity and finished with Topaz Denoise. I feel it is a little 'over the top' in terms of processing but given the conditions I am not too displeased with the result.

Comment and processing guidance gratefully received as always

@MKHACHFE There is an ED80 and flattener of Astro Buy and Sell at the moment for £350. I says collection only but you might be able to negotiate arranging you own courier. It is a bit bigger, but a good deal.

U.K. Astronomy Buy & Sell (astrobuysell.com)

In fact having had a closer look there are some other options such as an ED66 and some other ED scopes within your budget.

9 hours ago, Shimonu said:

When you say the GPU is fussy, you mean even caliper measurements won't give you any guarantees

You might be Ok with calipers, but I used the standard 55mm spacers and I needed to add another 0.25mm. I purchased some of the Baader delrin spacers which worked fine. The GPU also needs pretty perfect alignment with no tilt. Obviously I am doing this for an f4 scope - at f5 it might be less fussy.

9 hours ago, Shimonu said:

Currently I'm looking at the TS Optics 6" f5. I see you have the f4, did you ever consider the f5?

Yes, but I wanted an optically fast scope to 'replace' the ED80 but with a similar FL. The ED80 with reducer was F6.3 with a FL of 510mm. I would have actually preferred even shorter, but it does not exist within my budget. One thing to consider about the TS scopes is the poor focuser. The monorail is poor and either slips or 'rebounds' with small changes. I changed it for a Baader Steeltrack which was a bit of a faff as the OTA is really too small. Other people have made similar comments. Personally, if you are happy with F5 I would consider the SW 150 PDS as the stock focuser is better.

You are right about collimation. F5 is easier than F4. However, as I have managed ok with F5 and collimated an RC8 too, I felt it would not be too much of a challenge. Also, I have a cupboard full of collimation aids. For the standard F5 a Cheshire should be fine. 

2 hours ago, Shimonu said:

What are the differences here?

The GPU is certainly a better corrector than the MPCC but at F5 the Baader should be ok. There are always plenty going second hand on Astro Buy And Sell so you could try it and resell if you aren't happy. I have both and the GPU is better on my F4 but at F5 there is not much in it. The GPU is quite fussy on distance to the sensor.

WRT the guiding, the scope you have have should be fine to guide the 750 FL. If you are not getting good enough results look at the mount. Both my SW mounts needed fettling before they were acceptable. They do suffer from backlash when not fully 'tuned'. You could go down the OAG route but at 750mm you don't need to.

I use Svbony 5v USB heaters. The longest is 40cm but you can put 2 together. Good value and work well. All my 12v dew heaters are DIY.

Personally I just tape mine to the OT. As long as it is measuring the change in temperature the exact measurement is not critical. As long as it is not near anything that produces heat like a camera or dew heater it should be fine.

You can get an adaptor to allow you to use the hyperion eyepiece and barlow for eyepiece projection which might be a better solution. I have used the Hyperion barlow directly, but the spacing is a bit random and I have no idea what magnification it actually gave.

9 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

What's your reasoning?

My assumption is that if the filter has any effect on the light path, then the deviation will be very small at the point of leaving the filter. As the distance increases the distance will increase between the different wavelengths. It is not a scientific reasoning - just my logic.

16 hours ago, Rodd said:

Well I do.  If I post images and no-one comments or likes, there is no point in posting.

Why? You are sharing your image with others to learn from and appreciate. 

I think you are taking this all far too personally. There are thousands of users on the forum and most of them do not comment. That's fine with me when I post - what I am interested in is getting some suggestions for processing or parts of the image that could be improved. Often I will know the limitations of an image and will specifically ask how to improve it. For many who don't image or are new, they might not be confident or feel justified to comment.

FWIW I quite like your image but it looks a bit soft and the stars are a bit too blue and dominate the image. Maybe try to pull a bit more nebular colour to the front? 

1 hour ago, DaveS said:

I focus in L and apply any offsets, but when I checked my ODK and Chroma filters I found less difference between filters than between autofocus runs. Checking with a Bahtinov Mask showed that the focus was identical between R,G,B filters

Agreed. I only use 'cheap' zwo filters, but the difference in focus is virtually zero. I guess the fact that they are within a few mm's of the sensor will help keep them parfocal. If further away the difference may be more pronounced.