Jump to content

Banner.jpg.39bf5bb2e6bf87794d3e2a4b88f26f1b.jpg

Jupiter oct 15th


neil phillips
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought seeing was going to be great but for some reason ( i think its the cold shock problem i get around here ) causing the jitters, and the in and out of focus problem. I always know when its not the best as focusing becomes more of a challenge and i find myself constantly refocussing. Still im stubbon. Got a couple that havent come out too bad. Also got some jittery moon at f30 and f40 that i havent started processing yet. Cheers Goes out to Luis Campos. Who has been helping me figure what i was doing wrong in winjupos. Really silly actually i think i was telling the program the wrong orientation, hence it was splitting rather than joining the colour channels der. Cheers Luis your a inspiration. Still find some colour misalignment, though its far better than i was getting. will experiment with longer captures now ive got the program working these are 45 sec channels

01.47 UT 5x powermate heavy downsize ( just thought it looked better )

6249872946_d6b638511f_o.png

01:39 ut 100%. the avi was better on this so i thought 100% looked ok

6249339525_d4c93bd7df_o.png

Notice the tiny white streamer running along under the SEB interesting

A redo of one of my 2nd oct captures done using winjupos 100% capture size (Actually i may have downsized a little 5% i forgot )

A 5x red

6250136408_9b70258890_o.png

Edited by neil phillips
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Its the best telescope ive ever owned but ive not had a good C11 i had a bad one and this was better, ive had two meade 7" f15 Maks this was far better. a 16 meade dob. cant compare i didnt image with it. a 8" sct. this was better. a 12" Orion with 1/12th wave optics, this was better ( never did figure why ? ) the 12" had better resolution. but wasnt nowhere near as consistently sharp. I wouldnt sell it put it that way. its a rather oddball, as Orion optics 250 mm scopes are supposed to be just that. this one measures 245 mm ? the optics are good. But even 1/8th wave mirrors with a good figure no roughness or especially turned down edge can be just as good Luis campos images with hes 12" gso prove that. though im afraid in the world of cheaper chinease optics its a bit hit and miss i reckon. Even high end as i found out can be a bit hit and miss. I belive this includes SCTs too. Damien peach has seen the optics vary wildly when tested. think i remember him saying something like that. dont hold me to that. Just thought i remebered. If your after a good scope good luck is all i can say. Im parenoid about scopes, ive seen how they vary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neil

Some really nice images there. We did get some decent seeing last night. I'm a bit behind with processing so may be a while before I post them! I had also heard that C11s can be a variable in performance. A lot of it is that people don't know how to calibrate properly. It's really critical to get it right or the results will be mediocre. That said I'm sure there are good ones and bad ones as wth all mass produced equipment.

regards

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers Clayton. Hope your gearing up for take two with your new DBK

Hi Peter its odd all the indications were that good seeing was going to happen a slight mist no wind. But it was very far from that here, Ive noticed at my location as the Temp drops the seeing becomes much more inconsistent. Im surrounded by housees on all sides. And i think its the cold air with peoples heating disturbing the air above my site, I could be wrong, but i have seen this affect many times before and always with cold weather coincedence ? unlikely i think. The only thing i cant explain is others who have houses around them dont always report this effect on nights i get it. But anyway of course it wasnt terrible. or i would not have been able to power so high. But falls short of the seeing i got oct the 2nd. Look foward to seeing your images Peter. I always find what you do very interesting.

Jon erm tutorial me ? Not sure if you mean generally. or just winjupos. Ive only just got my head around it myself, it seems i was making a rather silly mistake of imcorrect orientation ( could swear i tried that too ? ) It seems i did not. as now its working. But when as you know your trying to teach yourself something. trying many new things at once, its easy to do something wrong that later you think, how could i have not got that ? easy done. I know Rik has done a winjupos tutorial. Its on the net. Not sure if youve seen that ? worth reading that first and see how you go. i would say the program is def worth using. its easy quick and effective. Which is what i kept reading from those that use it.

Edited by neil phillips
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks stuart, ive asked the team to consider in a different manner. But appreciated. Just wrote a message about your tests. Trust you. A part of you wants the little spc to better. which for variouse reasons occassionaly it can, as youve shown, hey i couldnt tell, and thats the truth, i thought it was the bottom DFK but only a impression. Those with little dosh take heed from what youve shown, Though for those that want to extract every last ounce of performance i think my ( rather long explanation, but you love me really x ) Does apply I HOPE lol

Edited by neil phillips
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow!!! I currently use my LX10 for the planets but have hit the limit of its capabilities so I was going to buy a 7" mak, but from your experience of different scopes it sounds like a good reflector is the way to go.

I have a 12" f5 skywatcher but its so heavy I am scared to put it on my EQ6,

I wonder how much lighter your 10" f6.3 is. I think mine weighs about 24kg.

Also how much difference do you think it makes to use teleview powermates vs the cheaper apo barlows, and the same question regarding my toucam vs dmk cameras?

regards

Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers Chris

Hi John one change ( other than winjupos ) i made, was to pay closer attention to the histogram balances, Not obssesive to the point of exactly the same ( i think its better to have a 5% drop on gain for the blue rather than maxed out, even though the blue histo was a bit dimmer for example. But i did try to balance the histo closer, this may be paying dividends on colour balnce im not sure, Winjupos certainly is.

Worth trying it John. Pm if you get any trouble. if you fancy a bash at it. Riks Tutorial is helpful on the net. Will try longer captures next time, Luis has said up to 2 mins a channel which seems wrong doesnt it, But i trust hes word. Experiment is what ill do with a couple of 2 min channels, and maybe the rest at 1 min channels. And see what happens.

Hi Lee It all depends on your collimation skill, Newts for high focal length work need at least reasonably good collimation, After setting the secondary under the focuser so its round, i use a laser in the feild everytime i image. I also use a glow in the dark colli cap to align the primary every time i image. If your up to this, then yes get a good set of optics, My f number is f6.3. others though can get faster newts to work well on planets, but collimation will likely need to be better still.

A good f6 10" will kill a 7" Mak stone dead. As mentioned i owned two 7" F15 Meade maks ( the original Meade ) and loved them both great scopes ( the first was a touch better i think ) But im afraid as soon i got this 10" running it knocked the Maks sideways on Saturn. The moon faired better with the Mak. but no, i saw enough to know good as a 7" Mak is, for the most part, in the same hands at the same location. a good well collimated 10" ( Actually just over 9/34 is what ive got ) will out perform a 7" Mak no question.

My 9/34 newt often Either out performs a C11 in this country. or matches it. yes Ive seen it beat in expert hands. but then i also have on occassion. Your 12" is not too heavy. John H uses a 14" on hes eq6 have you seen hes images, they are some of the best in the world in my opinion.

Same with the toucam question. i loved my toucam great camera, but no i wouldnt to be able to do what im doing here with a toucam. Lower focal length. yes i could get close.

But the new imaging source cameras are worthy of seriouse consideration, If you want to go all the way. Does your location occassionaly support that kind of thinking, because if it does not, Then you should just go with the flow. try what you have, get a spc 900. if you think it might and you want to get heavy into it, like some on here, then go for it. Everything matters scope camera location, skill at capturing, and processing, it all matters. weak links leave the top notch stuff just behind a bit, Depends what you want i guess. Nothing wrong with dabbling. Me im a nutter as you can see

Edited by neil phillips
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Neil

So in regards to the camera is the main difference that the DMK can do more fps and higher f ratios without getting too dim? + i am getting confused with all the different models DMK vs DFK?

I currently have a tal 4x barlow, 2x meade, 2.5x revelation apo and 5x revelation apo barlows, do you think the powermates are dramatically better?

I am trying to find the images by John H that you suggested on here without success.

Cheers

Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your barlows will be fine ive got good results with cheap barlows many times, thats not to say the powermate isnt good, but depends if funds are tight. if not, then why not. But your barlows should be ok to get up and running, you could experiment with better when up and running. yes the imaging source cameras are more sensetive and that means you will be able to go to a higher frame rate and higher focal ratio than a toucam. if your seriouse, and lets be clear this is pretty expensive stuff if your not. but if your seriouse and want the best. then a DBK would be a good choice. as would the mono DMKAU618.AS that i use. mono is better, but more hassle and more difficult. if your beginer its often better to go for a single colour camera. you wouldnt want to get so frustrated that you give up

Edited by neil phillips
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again Neil,

I am not a beginner, just want to go to the next level without spending a fortune!

Did you ever try a c9.25, I wonder how it would compare in the mix, as it would be a much lighter option for me.

Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No ive never tried a C9/25 no disrespect with 9.25 users, i would love to play with. but often i seem to get results closer to a C11. I would like a C11 to have a few shoot outs. I suspect they would both do good under different conditions. the C11 may win under very good seeing. the 10" i belive would be better on fair seeing nights, as it just copes even with pretty poor seeing. something C11s dont seem to like i dont think. If money is no option. Stuy on here has just got a 10" Mak man that scope looks a killer. with fans on it and excellent optics. Kept outside that would be a nice option. indeed the shots hes posted look promising. Though i know Damien peach has tried large Maks and says they never really cool properly. but i would sure like to try. Check Stuys images out. a couple of early mono shots it seems. The scope looks real good. If its perfomance at a realistic price its a tough one. I would go slightly bigger than a 9.25 i would get a 10" newt f6. or a C11 i think. both are portable quite easy to set up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a wonderful night looking at Jupiter and the moon on the 15th, the seeing for me was great. That first image is beautiful, it also brings back the memory for me of that night - although I have to think of it the other way up! Well done

Adrian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.