SyedT

Agreed with the above. I'm happy to pay up to 70-75% of new price depending on the condition/age/rarity of the item. Also bear in mind that retailer prices do fluctuate over time, so that needs to be accounted for.

Might well be the data quality then. I'm still surprised as to how easily APP handles preprocessing, it has simplified my workflow so much.

Lovely work so far! Not sure which software you're using, but have you tried AstroPixelProcessor? I've not tried a mosaic with it yet, but it handles my integrations of varying angles with ease.

Despite being busy with the increasing number of orders due to lockdown, FLO's efficiency continues to be second-to-none. Ordered a part with a 7-10 day dispatch estimate on 15th June and expected it to arrive in July, received the item on 25th June. Well done to all at FLO for keeping up with orders in such an efficient manner!

Think there's an executable standalone version if I recall correctly! https://sourceforge.net/projects/starnet/files/ Anyway, I don't think Starnet is everyone's cup of tea, I only use it to create starless images for the "wow" factor. For actual processing, I tend to just use the raw data I have and control stars using masks. I may start using it in the future, but we'll see I guess.

Carol, Starnet's definitely not suitable for every single image, but I find it does at times do a very good job as a Pixinsight plug-in. See thread below which I posted a while back when I initially found Starnet, it did an excellent job on both mono Ha and a bicolour Ha/OIII image:

No problem! It's up to you, but to save £39 you could return the 5x1.25 FW, order a 5x36 FW and an extra carousel. The 5x36 FW is shipped in 4-6 days though, so depends on how impatient you are (I'd probably be impatient enough to get the 2 carousels if I'm honest!). In terms of the larger filter wheel, I've had experience of using two 5x2" carousels, and I found it annoying to have to exchange them whenever I needed to change from BB/NB, especially if it was in the middle of an imaging session in the winter!

I see! In that case, getting the 5x36 mm FW and an extra 36 mm FW is the best way to go for your particular setup.

If you buy the 7x36 and guide head then that's £449. Buying the 5x36 mini FW + an extra carousel would be £319, so you'd effectively be paying £130 more. In terms of design, I think the issue arises with the filter mounts themselves; I'm not sure if Astronomik make thinner filter mounts for example. I've been using 7x36 for a while now so can't remember.

This is always amazing to see, well done Alice and dad for taking up the hobby. Wish you all the best!

You'd have to purchase a 5x36mm carousel for the filter: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-xpress-accessories/starlight-xpress-5x-36mm-unmounted-filter-carousel-for-mini-filterwheel.html. Since you've bought these items new, you could contact FLO and ask for an exchange for a 5x36 mm FW (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-xpress-accessories/starlight-xpress-usb-mini-filter-wheel-5-x-36mm-with-oag.html) and 36 mm filters? The other thing I'm thinking of is the number of filters you have. If you're hoping to do narrowband work in the future, then it'll be a pain to open up the FW and exchange the LRGB filters for narrowband filters and you'll expose them to dust as well. If so, getting a full-size FW would be better as it can accommodate 7x36mm filters: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-xpress-accessories/starlight-xpress-usb-filter-wheel.html The OAG is extra and so the whole setup is £169 more, but depends on what your preferences are.

This was an interesting read: https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/blog/unmounted-filters-which-side-should-face-the-telescope/ Confirms that the non-reflective side should be towards the camera, and that the way they design the mounted filters would mean that putting them as you have in the first image is the only correct orientation. The only permanent solution not requiring experimentation with various ideas that I can think of would be to switch to unmounted filters as they sit right inside the carousel with a small portion jutting out.

There's a calculator here: http://astronomy.tools/calculators/guidescope_suitability Normally people say the ratio should be 1:6 or less between the imaging and guiding scope but I've heard of people succeeding with guiding well beyond these parameters, so I suspect there's a lot to do with your individual setup/seeing conditions etc.

Thanks Mark! M45, alongside the Orion/Monoceros constellation's gems have been something I've not had much success with, usually due to a combination of weather, a bright streetlamp in the way and the objects rising only for a while before disappearing behind the house. Now that I've got a setup which I can safely say I'll be keeping for a while, I'm all set to do these objects justice this coming winter. Big compliment coming from yourself Richard! I've previously overcooked a lot of images, and found that with some restraint I can actually manage relatively natural looking images. The M101 I posted was the first time where I felt I had done some degree of justice to keeping it looking as natural as possible.

From the archive! Took this LRGB image a year and a half ago when I still had a QHY163M. Ended up getting 3h of Lum, 1h RGB each; wanted a lot more data, but lack of clear nights/work didn't help. Made a good combination with the FSQ85-EDX and Chroma LRGB filters. I've done the bare minimum of processing here as I feel the "natural" look is much better. Becoming a big fan of the Topaz Denoise program, the AI does an excellent job.

Big improvement, lovely image for such little data!

Thank you, appreciate it!

Thanks Alan, really appreciate it! Temperatures have been odd these last few days here, luckily the thermal currents settle down relatively quickly so the Edge doesn't suffer too much later on. True darkness is also diminishing but I'm still able to get a reasonable 3-4 hours. Cheers!

Thank you, appreciate it!

No problem! Drop ZWO an email as well if you wish, they're very helpful in my experience.

You might find this useful: https://compare.astronomy-imaging-camera.com/

Found a discount code for it, gives 15% off all items! Code is rad15

"Like most astro tools each image requires it's own careful application of TD". Completely agree with this statement. I just trialled it out on multiple images. On Milky Way images the auto settings do a remarkable job. Less so for DSOs with variable dynamic range. I'll have a play with it, but I reckon this one's a keeper!

Incredible image as usual, Geof! I just had a play with Topaz Denoise, seems to do a very good job but creates a very smooth background, almost artificial-looking. What are your thoughts?

Cut a hole in the original cover.