Astrid

Hello, fellow stargazers! Managed to shoot the Milky Way a couple days ago (this being my first wide-angle shot with 80 exposures, each 15 seconds, ISO 1600) Stacked the images in DSS like usual but hit this problem: (Sorry for the green tint, I will edit in photoshop later... ) The trees are smudged and blurry unfortunately. I was very confused as to why this happens, but from what I can guess, either DSS interprets the leaves as stars or just doesn't care about the foreground. So, my question is, what are your solutions? Is there an option like in Sequator (a software which I tried, but didn't do literally anything to the image: the stacked image looked exactly like the original exposures...) where you can 'fix' the ground and let the software detect the stars in one particular area? I thought about using a mask with the ground in photoshop, but it's just way too time-consuming and it probably won't look that good due to the smudging being bigger than the actual trees, but I'm afraid this might be the only way around. Thank you very much for the advice and clear skies! 🤗

Wow!! Imagine the view of Orion you'll get using this beast! =))) Now jokes aside, this is a nice and creative lego set! I love the little details (I believe there's even a guiding scope).

Hi! I have an EQ5 on a pretty weighty 200 mm f/5 newt (8 kilograms to be exact), and I must say that the steel legs feel very sturdy and well-built. The only downside is that those steel legs are quite heavy and weird to transport, but you get used to it eventually. I heard that for the EQ3, the steel tripods help (but to an extend). If I recall correctly, someone asked the same question in a thread called astrophotography with the 150P and EQ3 (I couldn't find it though, but it must be somewhere) By the way, here's a link that might help http://www.stubmandrel.co.uk/astronomy/129-astrophotography-with-an-eq3-tripod My opinion is that you could do some wonderful things and you'll see a good improvement if get some steel legs (the same used in the EQ5 and HEQ5/ EQ6 I believe), but again, as others said- if you have the possibility, it would be great to wait and buy a Synscan EQ5 (though it would be kind of a pity since the Synscan EQ3 is an amazing mount, but you can always sell it with no problems). Regards, Astrid

Yup, I agree! My 200P reaches focus without any problems with my Canon 2000D.

perhaps you locked the focuser? that's what happened to me once: there is this little screw under the focuser that should be loose. Otherwise, you won't be able to move the focuser and obviously focus.

As I said, i'm not looking for professional results. I'm looking for an improvement and perhaps a bit longer exposures...

I wasn’t interested in GoTo since I want to learn the sky instead of relying on it. I guess the dual axis motors are worth it, if it would work without the polar scope too. For polar alignment I currently use an app called PS align and it works wonderfully for those-like me- that want a rough and quick polar align that is pretty accurate (clearly not professional AP level though)

Hi! My EQ5 did not come with a polar scope, since it was the manual version. My scope is an 8 inch f/5 newt. (200/1000). Pretty heavy 😕 Thanks!

Hello, fellow stargazers, and Happy New Year! These days the sky has been pretty clear here and I got the chance to shot the moon, but I'm starting to get bored by short exposures, thus I'm thinking about buying a dual axis motor drive for my mount (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomy-mount-upgrade-kits/dual-axis-dc-motor-drive-for-eq5.html), EQ5 (keep in mind that the scope used is an 8'' Newtonian, 8 kg). My question is, is it worth it? Or should I get a polar scope and stick with a good polar alignment? I obviously don't have very high expectations, since I'm doing this as a hobby (I know that some may argue that the min. for AP is HEQ5, but I saw and I believe that good results can come with some cheaper equipment too). So... I'm curious- from your experience- can an EQ5 with dual axis motor be good for AP or, at least, is the purchase an improvement from the manual version? Thank you and clear skies!

I just bought my fancy-pants equipment in September and guess what... ever since then it was permanently cloudy. I barely had 3 days to observe Jupiter (thru the finder scope), the Moon (which was absolutely stunning) and Mars. Personally I'm seriously thinking about giving up on AP :') So I guess... this thread is a safe space to complain about the terrible weather all across Europe (but not only). Clear skies! 😅

Both are great choice, the only difference being in the portability: the 150P is a bit harder to transport than the 80D but since it is bigger (the diameter is almost double) it can collect more light, which is essential in AP, but at the same time with long exposures you can solve this problem. There are both Reflector/Newtonian (150P) astrophotographers on this forum and Apochromat (80D) astrophotographers, so you will find both opinions here. The important thing in AP is the mount, if you want to do long exposures you need a RA/DEC motor or a GO-TO mount and a sturdy mount. Check the max payload capacity. For the 150P and the 80D if you can't spend 1000GBP I recommend the EQ5. A very very good and portable AP mount and that doesn't cost too much, and very good for people just getting into the hobby. The HEQ5 is kinda expensive and it is not worth spending too much when you are just starting. The EQ3-2 is good too, but the payload capacity is 5KG... (compared to 10KG for the EQ5 pro) Conclusion: in my opinion, the best choice within your budget would be a manual EQ5 and buy some RA/DEC motors separately https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-deluxe.html and https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomy-mount-upgrade-kits/enhanced-dual-axis-dc-motor-drives-for-eq-5.html You'll get some tracking errors, but this setup is the best especially if you just want good beginner results without any fancy stuff.

I have the 200P too, but I haven't collimated it yet so reading this gives me anxiety 😶

I have the same telescope, you shouldn't have problems if you use a DSLR. Lots of people I know do that just fine, and I'll try it too when the sky clears... Astrid

I know, I'm lucky that I'll image somewhere where there is little to no wind.

Amazing!

Hi! Is the barlow necessarily? I own a 2x one that has a T2 thread but I'm afraid that the field of view would be too small to fit big DSO like Andromeda or M42. (canon DSLR too).

I believe WOHBAFGKMRNS is the full version, but usually W, R, N and S types aren't that common, so those aren't used that frequently.

Captain! All de Rigging Seems Properly Polished using Cast-off BeetleJuice- All the major stars in the winter hexagon: Capella, Aldebaran, Rigel, Sirius, Procyon, Pollux, Castor, Betelgeuse. Dra Sid An Syn or DSAS - the period of time the moon revolves around the earth: Draconic, Sidereal, Anomalistic and Synodic. (in increasing order). And my all time favourite one that I think was already mentioned: Oh, Be A Fine Girl Kiss Me, for the spectral sequences (type O, B, A, F, G, K, M stars).

Well, I have the same issue! I just bought a canon DSLR and I have a T2 thread (from the 1.25''to 2''adapter) but no idea what T-ring I should buy for the camera.

There is this rule: use the eyepieces with the smallest number for planets and the eyepieces (EP) with the biggest number for DSO (deepsky objects). Why? Well planets are small but very bright, so in order to see their details you need EP that magnify by a lot. And deep sky objects (nebulae and galaxies) are very faint but big, so you need low magnification EP. Ex: the formula for magnification is the telescope's focal length divided by the eyepiece focal length. So do the math from here. By the way, I recommend checking the max magnification your telescope could approach. (the bigger the telescope, the larger the range of EP you could get). For example, with a small telescope a 5mm EP would do nothing but make the image bigger and fuzzier, without details. Here is a good calculator: https://astronomy.tools/calculators/magnification (the formula for the max mag of a telescope is the telescope's aperture in mm (diameter) times 2.5. I think this is an empirical formula - though i'm not sure- but it works.)

I have a 200P and it is huge (8 kg)! I can't imagine myself carrying a 250PDS... but the giant size of it will give you some amazing and sharp details and it would be worth it. Great choice for AP too! Good luck! Astrid

Yeah... at the moment i'm a bit confused regarding which T ring I need, but I'll do more research.

update: found a great deal for a 2nd hand Nikon DSLR, but dropped it because it was already sold and I heard that Canon cameras are better for AP than Nikon. Instead, found a good BlackFriday deal for a Canon 2000D (it doesn't have an articulated screen or other fancy stuff) but the sensor is the same as in the 800D).

Well, first of all the optical system (lenses). Make sure they don't have any dust or weird mold /fungi growing (trust me, I think a few months ago on this forum there was someone that bought a SH refractor and because it was stored in a humid room w/out sunlight mold started to form) Then the mount, move it up and down to make sure that it moves smooth and that the grease hasn't dried out) Check the eyepieces as well, just like the lenses of the scope. But don't worry, most SH scopes are amazing! Good luck! Astrid!

After a few months of getting used to my new 8 inch beast, I decided to start astrophotography (luckily today is Black Friday in most tech shops in my country). So I decided to drop the idea of buying a DSLR and started thinking about getting a webcam. The thing is that I want to try deepsky AP, so i was wondering, is there a webcam that could get me good results for DSO AP? Don't worry, I don't want anything too fancy because I'll be happy with entry-level images. (i saw some nice Andromeda pictures with 20GBP cameras on this forum so I'm confident that it would work). My budget is ±100 GBP, which in my opinion is more than enough for a good webcam . So... is it worth getting a webcam? Or is there something better? Should I wait and raise more money for a DSLR? Thanks a lot! Astrid