Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Andy56

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Andy56

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Location
    Newbury, Berks

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I second ddm4313. The flip screen is a real back/knee saver. I chose the 600D above some of the other cheaper s/h ones because of this.
  2. From my limited experience, the "Marks in the optical chain" look just like the dust on the sensor I had a week or two back. A sensor cleaning kit fixed it. They did not show on individual subs but accumulate in stacking. Cheers Andy
  3. Many thanks for the info. Now I feel a need to use dithering. Great hobby! Andy
  4. Hi Vlaiv, Reading you response I think understand the noise better as in your point that the noise accumulated slower than the signal. Also I've had a eureka moment. If I'm right (ignoring noise) the image will be LP + target so the difficulty with high light pollution is finding the right discrimination level (ie the black level) between the LP and target without losing the fainter parts of the target. Andy
  5. Hi, I'm new to all this and have even more questions. I tried some guiding the other night now that an adaptor arrived for the ASI 120MM + Sky Watcher 5x90. It ran well once I have found a bright enough star for the guider, in fact I got a 300 second sub with a tiny amount of trailing but I think some this could declination or PA error. Ok my question is: What is the purpose for the connection between APT and PHD2. I have a Star Adventurer so no Dec guiding. Many thanks Andy
  6. Hi, Thanks for the previous advice given. I'm starting to get to understand more, but I have another question because I'm not sure if my challenges are caused by my in/ability or whether the subs are just not good enough. If I have light pollution and possibly moon light, how can more subs make images better. My thinking is if background is as light or lighter than the nebulosity how can it be distinguished when processing. Longer/more subs will increase the pollution as much as the target. I'm considering this after stacking. Many thanks Andy.
  7. Clarkey: I have only tried GIMP so I can't compare. But it's like any other tool you have to read and try. I have found it very usable so far but some of the PS Youtube videos I've seen make PS easier to use. But then I've not looked for those features on GIMP. Cobberwebb: Nice picture. You seem to have smoother detail than me, but that could be the awful light pollution in my area. I'm finding it difficult to separate back ground noise/pollution from the nebulosity. What's the Bortle number for where you took this, it's supposedly 5 in my area but 6 is more likely given the number of str
  8. Hi Alan, By crushed I assume you mean it's too dark. I've learned a lot from tutorials today. I'll have another go so I can remember the methods. Cheers Andy
  9. This is good. I means it is very likely to be the t-ring and not the telescope/flattener. So I've processed M42 as well as I can with my experience: Overall I'm impressed. I think with more subs it would be less grainy. Cheers Andy
  10. Many thanks for the info. I've re-set it using your calcs and checked it with a digital calliper (14.53mm) so I'll use it like this and try +/- a couple of mm to see what's best. I managed 25 subs (5 darks at ISO800) last night and after stacking in Sequator and a quick stretch using Gimp I got: There are a few positional issues; a few twigs from my neighbours hedge causing diffraction, and light pollution from the town due south but much better. I think it's over exposed and there are tracking issues and the dark frames haven't got rid of all of the hot
  11. HI, I did the calculation on a spread sheet and did not copy them over correctly. Apologies. Should have been 67.7 - 44 - 9.77 - 0.3 = 13.63mm I've set the flattener to 13.63mm (or as near as I could get it using the marking on the flattener. So I checked the focus train and found the camera to t-ring was not good. I have wedged a single sheet of paper between the T-ring adapter and the camera at the bottom so it effectively lifting the back of the camera. I've also made sure the balance and focus were correct and I have achieved this : which to me is much bette
  12. Andy: On finding my T-ring is loose I've ordered the WO version. Alan: Thanks for the info. I couldn't work out whether the diagram was correct because it didn't seem to be for the adjustable version. Also I wasn't sure if it was A or B. So with a 1mm filter (my T-ring adaptor is 9.77 Astro Essentials): 44 - 9.77 - 0.3 = 13.63mm I haven't started on the Star Adventurer yet. I rejected 50% of 60sec subs the other night. I made a video of all the subs and it has periodic error. Not sure how much the guider will compensate for, when I can mount it sensibly. But lets get th
  13. Hi, I've just set the rig up and noticed that there is slack between the t-ring adaptor and the camera flange. All other joints/couplings seem OK. If it clears up soon I'll try a piece of paper in the bottom and to and see if the results change. If this fixes the problems I'll try the WO version it's £7 more. It's supposed to be clear from about 8 onwards but there will be a breeze. Regards Andy
  14. HI, Another question. The WO AF61A is adjustable but on their web page they say adjust it to 12.9mm. This assumes a lot ie the T ring adapter will compensate for all flange distances/cameras. Also the diagrams are for the non-adjustable one. So how is the calculation done? I remember reading about it some time ago but I can't find it now. Kind regards Andy
  15. Hi Alan, Many thanks for you great reply. Now that you've pointed it out, the stars in the bottom left are in focus and top left not so. Also it's more noticeable on the brighter stars at the top. I will take a photo of my set up each time now so I can relate focus to orientation. I've now check older images with camera lenses and they don't seen to show this as the mechanical coupling is much tighter. I'll set it up today and check for sloppiness. I took another look at the flattener and, oops, I forgot about the locking ring (newbie). It is set at approx. 13mm (I str
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.