Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

  • Announcements



Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

689 Excellent


About Jannis

  • Rank
    Sub Dwarf
  • Birthday 07/11/1986

Contact Methods

  • MSN
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Astronomy, Anime, Electronics and Photography
  • Location
    Gamle Fredrikstad, Norway
  1. Star Issues

    Ouch, that's not looking good at all! It looks like an optical issue, but hopefully someone else can point you in the right direction. First i would do though is to take 2 identical test images, both with and without the CC in place. If it was a reflector i'd ask you to check collimation, but.. Edit: I see you just updated with a before image while i was typing. That image does look OK to me, and so i'd expect the scope itself to be good. I'd try without the CC first, then without the filter. If you're not using an OAG i can't imaging a guider could in any way affect the image other then with the tracking.
  2. Is most of the sky this boring?

    Yes, i think its callled PAE, and no, it does not need 3 stars, but the more you add the better. I normally just create a triangle around target to be sure im spot on when imaging a dim target.
  3. Star Issues

    For me it looks kind of similar to my images when not using a coma corrector (lower left corner) or when i'm using a faster lens. Are you using a coma corrector?
  4. Is most of the sky this boring?

    I made a quick video to demonstrate it here on a single star. Sorry for the poor video quality and camera angles...
  5. Is most of the sky this boring?

    I suppose this is the 3 star alignment. No, this isn't the standard 3 star alignment i'm referring to. Correct me if i'm wrong, but a 3 star alignment in a triangle close to the target would be less then ideal since the 3rd star is to compensate for tilt (say if the mount is polar aligned well, but the scope is still pointing a bit up). I never usually do a new 3 star alignment unless i've released the clutches, changed the scope, lost power, or like here the other day when i managed to run my scope into the pier being overly optimistic with ignoring flipping... :'( You have the function on the SW controller (note that i use synscan V3 controller, i don't know if V4 is the same), and the target does not necessarily need to be a star). I use stellarium to control my SW controller*, and so it's very easy to quickly slew to a brighter star close to the target. Once slewed stellarium will show you the mount position to be dead on the star. If the mount is off, press and hold ESC for a few sec until "recenter last goto target" shows up** (wait until it stop flashing before re-center), recenter using the arrows (you can adjust the speed. You'll also see the mount move away from the star in stellarium) and press ENTER. If success, you'll now see that the mount jump back to the target in stellarium***. Proceed to another star if you feel it's needed. * Not needed, but it makes it a whole lot easier. Ever tried to slew to a specific star with the controller alone? It's a nightmare to browse... ** sometimes you might need to press and hold ESC two times. *** Sometimes it does not jump back to target. This usually does not happen, but it have happened a few times. It can either mean it did not save the position, or that stellarium does not show it. To confirm if position was saved, slew to same target again, the mount should not move. If it does, recenter it again.
  6. That's really quick it seems! How do you track it? Do you guide on the comet?
  7. Very nice! Looks like the lens is doing a good job, what brand and model is it?
  8. IC443 The Jellyfish Nebula

    That's a stunning image! I like the darker one best too, but they are both very nice.
  9. Is most of the sky this boring?

    Glad to see you finally found the target! And no, i mixed it myself, although i used a concrete mixer, so not by hand (i gave that up quite fast). I hope i will never have to remove it though, haha... Due to my pier height i didn't want to take any chances. I didn't get as deep as 1.5M, but then the last 6-7 years i haven't really been as cold as it used to be. I have to admit i haven't done a new polar alignment since the fall though, but haven't missed a target yet either. I usually just select "park to current position", shut it off, and next time i'm out the target is still well within FOV on my APSc and 1000mm FL.
  10. Is most of the sky this boring?

    200KG? And here i was worrying with my ~3000KG concrete pier... Level or not should not matter much on an EQ mount i think, naturally as long as it's polar aligned. I guess a new polar alignment will quickly tell if the frost have shifted your pier. Since i got the pier mount i haven't had much issues with goto, but whenever i'm in doubt or it's somehow off i select 3 brighter stars in a triangle close around the target and center them. I'd expect your EQ8 to be more precise then my HEQ5 with this though...?
  11. NGC 2403

    That's a really nice capture, and considering using an F/12 scope and a none-EQ mount?! I didn't even know you could do 8 min exposures at 1500mm with an alt-az mount! I see you also (now at least) have an EQ mount and brighter optics, did you ever come back to this target?
  12. M45 (close up)

    Really nice image with loads of details! Does it just look like it, or do i see loads of small fuzzy galaxies in the background?
  13. Would my Surface Pro 3 be considered a PC or a tablet...?
  14. Magic lantern may help with finding focus points in live view, but i dubt it's much faster then normal AF. I've used ML quite a bit with manual focus lenses though, and it does work well. I also use it all the time to increase live view exposure. Makes focusing with a focus mask and framing targets super easy! The contrast based AF is indeed slow on older canon DSLRs (600D and older), while the 650D and newer have an improved contrast based AF system in the sensor making it much faster.
  15. Thank you for the two comparing images. I see clearly now that the focus is in fact rather far off, and not just soft optics, so it's safe to say phase AF is not an option anymore. Well, at least not with fast optics. You say you had to do test shots and manually adjust, but did you test with contrast based AF (live view AF)? Also, if you stop down the lens a bit, say to F/3.5-4, is the focus still much off? I'm thinking for daytime imaging that stepping down the lens might just be enough to still use phase AF with an acceptable accuracy. F/1.8 @ 85mm is not normally used for "everyday photos" anyway, but F/3.5-5.6 is more normal.