NGC2392 Eskimo Nebula

[Sparrow]

In my mad dash round the sky last night, I thought I'd see if I could actually get anything worthwhile with this. As you can see from the main image, the image scale through the 8" F5 newt and DSLR is tiny which is why I've cropped and enlarged it. It has picked up a bit of detail but I think I'll swap over to the 1 1/4 inch nosepiece and stick a barlow in to get a better image scale (and hopefully more detail). It's quite bright so it shouldn't be a problem.

[Ags]

That nebula is fantastically small - especially as 1000mm is already a long focal length. Good luck with the barlow!

[Looking Up]

Very good detail for such a small object, good colour too, the barlow may be pushing things a bit, you'll have to post a side by side comparison!

Spencer

[West End Wendy]

Saw this for the first time visually the other day - just a distinct fuzzy blob but you can see the central star, which is certainly not true of the more heralded Ring with similar equipment/conditions.

Impressed by how much detail you've captured in such a small object.

Tim

[Moonshane]

I observed this with my 16" f4 last night. really nice with good definition between the two bands (the brighter centre and the fainter outer section). my visual recollection is very close to your image although I could not see the fainter detail in the outer section.

[Zul]

Nice! Great job!

[Quatermass]

Oh I like that one what a cool little nebula added to my list of targets thanks for sharing and well done it was freezing last night.

[Sparrow]

Oh I like that one what a cool little nebula added to my list of targets thanks for sharing and well done it was freezing last night.

It certainly was cold last night. I was glad to finish and get the hot water bottle and Horlicks in to play:). Cold again tonight and a bit breezy here in Chester. Transparency seems a bit better though.

[Quatermass]

Might need the hotwater bottle again tonight :-)

Sent from my GT-S5670 using Tapatalk

[Spikey]

Thats a nice Eskimo Sparrow. It's in a very good position for me but I don't think I'll bother with the ED80 and 1000D

[R Fisher]

Nice one,

Can be difficult to get any of the internal structure but you managed it on this one.

[Sparrow]

Yep it's cold again - and a bit windy tonight - playing havoc with the guiding.

Thanks R Fisher - yes I was quite surprised myself that I managed to get any internal structure. Wish I still had my F.10 schmidt - would have given me a better image scale for this one - sadly I had to sell it to justify buying my current scope and mount.

[prokyon]

Very nice, you captured this dwarf very well. It is still on my to-do list.

[FrankieValley]

Sparrow, a couple of questions if I may. How come you don't have any aberration at the edge of field? I ask because you say you will try a 1.25" barlow which makes me think you are not using a field flattener.

The second question is, how do you like the IR filter mod you did? I did the same just before Xmas and I am very, very impressed by the results - much better than expected.

Nice shot by the way

[Sparrow]

Hi David. I don't have any abberation because I have the MPCC coma corrector fitted which does an excellent job - only got it last week - just in time for this weekend's clear skies. This of course is on a 2" nose piece which I normally use. The reason I refer to a 1 1/4 nose piece is because I only have 1 1/4" barlows. Even with a 2x barlow, the Eskimo would only be right in the centre of the image, so I could afford to crop it heavily to lose the abberation as I wouldn't be able to use the MPCC on a 1 1/4" nose piece.

As for the mod - I'm delighted with it - it has dramatically increased the sensitivity in Ha. Only problem I've found is that when I point SE right over Chester city centre, the LP is so bad that even with the LP filter, I'm getting wash out very quickly from sky glow. Unfortunate as Orion is right in this area for me.

Thanks for the interest

Regards

John

[FrankieValley]

Hi John,

Yes, I too use the MPCC. I get your point if you're going to crop heavily. I think I'll give that a go myself as never really considered using a barlow with the DSLR. I'd like to try it out on the Crab Nebula. Thanks for the simple idea.

I was playing around this morning with a couple of images for comparison. One is with a Meade DSI Pro II (mono) and the other (cropped) with the modded 1000D (posted here). Perhaps the barlow will yield better results.

What LP filter do you have? I have plenty of LP, but not as much as you and Chester. I use the EOS clip filter.

[Sparrow]

Yep I'm on the same clip filter. Can't fault it. It's the damned wide spectrum of light pollution that's the problem. Especially as an increasing number of people on our estate have now decided to have outside lights on all night. Itr's their electricity they're wasting!!!

Hadn't thought of trying the barlow on the Crab - good idea - that'll be two targets in a session with the same set up.

[FrankieValley]

Especially as an increasing number of people on our estate have now decided to have outside lights on all night.

Make a dew shield out of a camping mat using self-adhesive velcro strips (Homebase). That will not only prevent dew for longer, but keep a lot of your neighbour's light out.

[Spikey]

Sparrow, Interesting comments about the 1000D mod. Did you replace the filter or just remove the whole thing?

[Sparrow]

Thanks David. Good idea. I'll give that serious consideration.

Spikey - I did the single filter mod - that is, just the filter nearest the chip is removed. Apparently this is what's recommended for the 1000D unless you want to do spectroscopy in which case the full spectrum mod removing both filters is necessary. With the single filter mod I've also found that it still auto focusses OK (although I don't intend to use it for normal photography).

Regards

John

[FrankieValley]

I did the single filter mod - that is, just the filter nearest the chip is removed.

Hi John,

Did you replace the filter you removed with anything?

I was confused with what mod was what, but it sounds like in removing the filter and not replacing it you actually did the full spectrum mod (without replacing with clear glass) and you will now need an EOS Clip LP filter which has IR cut in it, because you now have no IR cutoff. This may be why you are suffering over Chester. Alternatively, put the replacement UV/IR filter in the camera (which is the astro mod I did).

I did the astro mod, because the replacement UV/IR cut filter was £45, compared with £130 for a new clip filter plus the cost of the clear glass replacement (if required).

This image http://www.baader-planetarium.de/sektion/s45/bilder/vergleich_400d_baader_bcf_gross.jpg probably explains it best. The blue line is the Baader replacement UV/IR cut filter. Without it, you open everything up to 1100nm (save what the LP clip filter removes i.e. street lights).

[Spikey]

Spikey - I did the single filter mod - that is, just the filter nearest the chip is removed. Apparently this is what's recommended for the 1000D unless you want to do spectroscopy in which case the full spectrum mod removing both filters is necessary. With the single filter mod I've also found that it still auto focusses OK (although I don't intend to use it for normal photography).

Regards

John

Ah thanks for the info, wasn't sure if the filter was replaced or removed. I only use my 1000D for AP so I'm looking at self-modding (been putting it off for a while)

[Sparrow]

Hi John,

Did you replace the filter you removed with anything?

I was confused with what mod was what, but it sounds like in removing the filter and not replacing it you actually did the full spectrum mod (without replacing with clear glass) and you will now need an EOS Clip LP filter which has IR cut in it, because you now have no IR cutoff. This may be why you are suffering over Chester. Alternatively, put the replacement UV/IR filter in the camera (which is the astro mod I did).

I did the astro mod, because the replacement UV/IR cut filter was £45, compared with £130 for a new clip filter plus the cost of the clear glass replacement (if required).

This image http://www.baader-planetarium.de/sektion/s45/bilder/vergleich_400d_baader_bcf_gross.jpg probably explains it best. The blue line is the Baader replacement UV/IR cut filter. Without it, you open everything up to 1100nm (save what the LP clip filter removes i.e. street lights).

Have a look at this link from Astronomiser. The 1000D is dual filter, and I only removed the filter nearest the chip, so the front filter is still in place which has a sharp cut off for UV and IR. On that basis, no other filter is necessary.

Astronomiser - Automated Astronomy and AstroImaging Solutions

Regarding the LP over Chester - sadly, LP is not confined to a narrow wavelength so some of it is in the same wavelengths I'm trying to image - any filter that filtered it out would also filter the target data out as well. The EOS clip filter does a good job of filtering out the local low pressure sodiums lights but doesn't do much for the high pressure sodium lights ansd other general lighting. We do occasionally have the luxury of staying with a friend near Cockermouth in Cumbria and the sky is beautifully dark there - what a treat. I can actually see the Milky Way.

Regards

John

[FrankieValley]

We do occasionally have the luxury of staying with a friend near Cockermouth in Cumbria and the sky is beautifully dark there - what a treat. I can actually see the Milky Way.

I think we'd all move to Cumbria if we could

[FrankieValley]

Hi John,

I just got a couple of frames back from M51 with my 1000D on a x2 barlow and the stars look like paint splatter almost from the centre of the image. Also, doubling the f ratio means that exposure times would be way past my bed time.

I used a 2" barlow, but I wouldn't think that would be a factor in the paint splatter, would you?