Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

tompato

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    97

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by tompato

  1. tompato
    I might be missing something but I'm not really sure why you need spacers at all with the EvoFF V2 (55mm back focus) and a DSLR (Canon is 44mm and a standard T Adapter should make 55mm). I have that setup and I just have it connected via a T Adapter and it's fine. Also there's some 3D printed stuff you can get for the 50ed like a Bahtinov and tube clamp rings for a sturdier mounting than the supplied rings. Here's a couple of snaps from the other night.
  2. tompato
    As the post title suggests, these are the results from the first clear night I have had with the Evoguide 50ed with the Starizona EvoFF V2 field Flattener. I just did an hour's worth of data on Andromeda and Pleiades. I forgot to use my new light pollution filter with the Andromeda photos and it meant I had to refocus for the Pleiades which also meant my flats I took the next day could only be used with the Pleiades but I think it came out okay anyway. Andromeda - ISO 800, 40 x 90secs, 20 darks and bias frames, stacked in DSS, processed in GIMP. Pleiades - ISO 800, 40 x 90secs, 20 dark, flat and bias frames, Svbony UHC clip in filter, stacked in DSS, processed in GIMP. I don't think my Skyguider unguided at 242mm focal length can really manage 90 secs with my alignment anyway. I think in future I'll go back to 60 second photos, as I did get some oval shape stars in these. But I do think it shows how the Evoguide 50ed with the EvoFF field Flattener is a capable little budget setup.
  3. tompato
    Thanks for this Heather, I'll probably grab one of those and mount it if I can't figure out a good way of attaching my Rigel!
  4. tompato
    Yeah, I think this might be the best solution. I notice Scopestuff do a hot shoe adapter for the Rigel mount plate, but I don't think anyone in the UK sells it, so I'll try rigging something up myself
  5. tompato
    Ah yeah, this looks like something that would be useful to have. I have a Rigel Quick finder thing and contemplated mounting that to the Evoguide but I don't think I would be able to slide it in and out of the rings with that mount on it.
  6. tompato
    I'm using the Evoguide as an astrograph, as the main lens with the EvoFF field Flattener and my Canon 600d. I think it's just the smaller FoV I need to get used to, as I've only used up to a 85mm camera lens up until this point.
  7. tompato
    Small follow up here, maybe the best option would be to get one of those hot shoe handle grips with lots of 1/4 and 3/8 threads on it and mount a small finderscope or red dot finder to help. Seems like a relatively cheap solution to not being able to mount one to the Evoguide 50ed rings.
  8. tompato
    I'm just wondering if there were any tips to finding targets and framing with a star tracker like the Skyguider Pro and short focal length telescope? I've previously just had an 85mm lens on a ballhead with my DSLR and so my technique was roughly point it where I think the target is, take a photo, adjust based on star position and then away I go. However I've just tried finding a simple target with my Evoguide 50ed which is 242mm focal length and using the Dec adapter and after getting used to the weird way you move in RA and Dec to point at your target, I really struggled to find things, even Andromeda (a target I can find in about 5 seconds with a pair of binoculars). I did the same technique of taking a photo and then checking the stars against an app to see which way I needed to adjust but I got so frustrated with it - I think the smaller view hindered me in matching up stars and getting the app to show a similar magnitude of stars to what I was seeing. Is it a case of astrophotography being far less frustrating with Goto or are there some techniques to using these manual star trackers with small telescopes?
  9. tompato
    An Evoguide 50ed from Flo and an EvoFF v2 from 365 - hoping to use this as a cheap (relatively) astrograph setup with my Canon 600d as a step up from my camera lenses.
  10. tompato
    I used Deep Sky Stacker to do the stacking. I did try Siril but it all seems far more complicated and I wasn't quite sure on settings etc, on DSS it seemed a bit more straight forward.
  11. tompato
    Oh yeah, they were at ISO 800! Yeah the moon was out so I think I might have needed shorter exposures like you say. I was hoping to get more shots in but the trees weren't having any of it! I haven't done any flats yet in my couple of sessions I've done, I'm not sure the best way to do them other than to leave the camera out til the morning which I can't really do. Are there any good tips or tricks for doing flats? I got one of those clip in filter holders that I can screw a 1.25" filter into from someone on this forum actually so I think I'll try and get one as there is a bit (not a massive amount) of light pollution.
  12. tompato
    I couldn't quite figure out how to do basic levels and things in Siril but the background tool thing was super useful. So in the end I edited it in Siril and then finished it off in GIMP and I ended up with this after a bit of a crop, which I feel is an improvement on my original attempt.
  13. tompato
    I had a go at my first nebula with my 600D and an old Canon 50mm F1.4 a couple of nights ago on a Skyguider Pro (love hate relationship polar aligning this). I did around 45 x 45s and my target went partially behind a tree which was frustrating. It was at f2.8 if I recall correctly and then a stacked, cropped and did some basic levels and tweaks in GIMP. (Edit - ISO 800) It's not much but I'm fairly happy with an old lens and an old camera which I had laying around. I think I might be getting the bug...really not sure what to buy next 🙈
  14. tompato
    That's cool, I'll give Siril a go!
  15. tompato
    I don't have PS so I'll go down the route of trying to make an artificial flat file. Next time I'll definitely take some flats hehe.
  16. tompato
    Does anyone have any tips on processing an image like my Andromeda one where there's a glow from one side. Every time I tried stretching it too far the blew out the shot a bit too much.
  17. tompato
    So it took me a little bit of time to get everything setup, accessories plugged in and the mount polar aligned (turns out the Skyguider Pro polar scope is not particularly spectacle wearing friendly in terms of eye relief) but I got there. I then point it up at Cygnus to see what I could capture. I was using the Samyang 85mm f1.4 AS IF on my Canon 600D. I forgot to focus my first shot, but I think my focus was okay after that. Some of my frames were good, some did have a small amount of trailing. I did 30 x 60s of Cygnus (at least I think it was, I think I can see some nebula of some description in the top right) at f4 and then I tried 30 x 60s of M31 Andromeda at f5.6 as well. I've also never done any image processing before so downloaded GIMP and did some basic curves and levels with that, and a star map on Cygnus, but that's about it. I stacked them both with 20 dark frames and 20 bias frames in DSS. Attached are both images. Andromeda was quite low and over light pollution so there's quite a pronounced glow that made image processing tricky. Overall I'm happy woth my first attempts, but I realise I could improve tracking, take longer and defintely more frames next time and also probably not be lazy and do more darks and some flats next time around.
  18. tompato
    Just want to say this is a lovely image, if I can produce something half as good one day I'll be a very happy man.
  19. tompato
    People seem to rate the astro essentials f4 guidescope and pair it with an ASI 120MM. I've just bought one to try it autoguiding with my DSLR so I can't comment on it yet but I'm hoping it'll be okay.
  20. tompato
    I have been looking at getting something to dabble in some astrophotography on my Skyguider Pro but I want to keep it simpler and wider focal length to begin with. I also need a new Finderscope for visual use on my 6 inch Newtonian and I have seen that the FMA 135 can be used as a Finderscope/Guidescope. Would this kill two birds with one stone? (Or possibly three stones if I use it as a guidescope in future). Am I right in thinking that this combined with say an 18mm eyepiece or something would provide about 7.5x magnification and a fairly wide field? I understand it won't have a crosshair or anything like a normal Finderscope but it should work okay I'd have thought? Has anyone used it as a Finderscope?
  21. tompato
    Yeah I'll give both of those a go at some point. At least it's still attached so I can use the mount tonight 🤣
  22. tompato
    It was only little, it wasn't even what I'd consider hand tight yet. It really has no business having a large flathead on it though because I could have been using a bigger screwdriver on it. The whole design is poor tbh, I don't know why it doesn't just have a small Allen grub screw. The £5 aluminium knob from eBay had better which is a little bit alarming. I'm not sure I'll even buy or get a replacement as I'd just be constantly worried it'll break off again. I'll have to try and find an alternative make of slow motion cable.
  23. tompato
    Yeah they do those little punches with a thread on for getting broken bolts out don't they, that could work. They'll have to be small tho as the screw isn't big.
  24. tompato
    @Steve Clay I gave that a quick go and there's just not enough sticking out to get a good grip on.
  25. tompato
    The slow motion cable breaking I don't mind too much, as I can just get a refund but it's now permanently stuck to my Scopetech Mount and I'm not sure what I can do to get it off tbh. It's not like Skywatcher are going to refund me £375 for the fact they've potentially buggered my mount. I could hope it loosens over time, or I could try drilling it but it's such a small screw I'm not sure I'd find much to screw into it to remove it. Maybe I could crack the metal casing at the end of the slow motion cables but although their screws are apparently made of butter the rest does not. Ill move this to its own thread as it's not a problem with the mount anymore, just Skywatcher's shocking quality control.
×
×
  • 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.