Leo Triplet with M3 side order

[Uranium235]

Im very, very bored of all this cloud now so Ive taken to processing what I was working on before being so rudely interruped by all this horrid weather. I had hoped to get a complete green channel on this but I just havent had the opportunity to grab it, so its synth green for this one. I would also like to reshoot the blue as it was taken in less than ideal conditions, hence the slight tinge of blue noise. We're rapidly running out of darkness now, so im not sure thats possible.... well, I can only hope. (EDIT: now reduced blue noise by clipping the BP on the blue channel a bit more)

Apart from the M3, which was a quick test of the 150P collimation (was getting stars with a "bulge"), im all out of data, nothing left to mess with

Really need some clear sky... "lack of sun or stars makes Homer go something something".....lol.

Leo Triplet:

40x360 (L), 12x360(R+, synth green

ED80 (0.85x), Atik314L+, CG5-GT

Flats and Bias used

Setpoint: -10

Thanks for looking

Rob

M3... just messing about

[Hawklord]

Can't see the Leo triplet, but the M3 looks lovely.

Darn this weather!

Can see the triplet now - it's looking very good already.

[Uranium235]

Sorry Wayne, was uploading the new version (it needed a blast of HLVG after clipping the blue channel). It should be visible now

[Skybrowser]

Stunning Triplet!

[Chris]

I love the look of edge on dust lanes, the one on your triplet looks amazing.

[peter shah]

Love those lion cubs, super job

[Doug]

well done Rob

Fabulous images, love the dark back ground and dust lanes

[Spikey]

Rob I think your M3 messing about is beter than my M3 serious

Nice triplet as well !

[Quatermass]

Great job this weather is a pain for sure.

Sent from my GT-S5670 using Tapatalk 2

[SkyJamie]

Fantastic images Rob

Jamie

[Shibby]

Very nice Rob! I know what you mean about the weather, I've also spent time fiddling with old data. I think we used up all our luck at SGL!

[MikeD]

Very nice work, the Leo trio look good even with the synth green.

Mike

[Gina]

They're beautiful - great images I'm cursing the weather with a vengeance!!! Really getting quite depressed!

[sulaco]

Those are great images, it kind of resolves me to move to the 150PDS having just bought a barely used 200p and EQ5 2nd hand for a cracking price.

[Chris]

Sulaco- well if you want a 150pds I wouldn't mind your 200p OTA, I'm only down the road:D

[Gina]

Those are great images, it kind of resolves me to move to the 150PDS having just bought a barely used 200p and EQ5 2nd hand for a cracking price.

I'm sorry but I don't understand that. If you have a 200P why would you want to downgrade to a 150? Or is it due to the size and weight?

[Chris]

I think a 150 would probably sit better on an EQ5 for imaging they are about half the weight.

[sulaco]

Hi Starfox,

I'll keep that in mind as I've not given it a proper chance yet, only picked it up last week but that's what I feel about the 150PDS being a better weight for the Mount. Thanks

[Shibby]

It also has a much better (dual speed crayford) focuser, the 150PDS

[sulaco]

I bought the scope and mount second hand for the mount alone really as I had intended to buy the 150PDS anyway but I thought I might give it a go with the 200 as I've not tried one.

[Gina]

Ah, I see. Thank you for the explanation - I was curious

[Chris]

Sulaco- He he I went for the same add wanting it just for the OTA, so the oppposite reason to you:D

I think the 150p and pds are really good for imaging, I've put up several adds over the months trying to get hold of one locally, now I've started looking at 200mm as there seems to be more about. I've decided that if I want a 150mm I will just get one new, I'm still considering a 150p as you can still achieve focus with them and its light enough that I could piggyback my zs66 for guiding and widefield, so I wouldn't have to keep swapping scopes.

[Uranium235]

Thanks for all the positive comments guys (and gal!)

Would have replied sooner, but I thought SGL was down since my usual shortcut was returning a 404 error.

Generally, the 150P has been pretty good for imaging (I upgraded mine to the dual speed focuser from Modern Astronomy). But the problems ive been having recently are:

1) Uneven illumination, and flats didnt seem to fix it well enough. Maybe due to an increase in local light pollution, maybe not a good idea to go without LP filters from now on when doing LRGB.

2) Really odd star shapes - see fig 1. It could have been bad tracking, but the PHD graph was flat. Hence my collimation test, not sure whether its the result of bad primary mirror cleaning or what.

3) Internal reflections when using the MPCC, really ugly on the Veil nebula (see fig 2). Could be fixed by putting the camera nearer the FW, and the MPCC further away from the FW (or vice versa). There seems to be a large black halo around the reflection, almost like a primary.

Though all three are problems any newt owner may encounter (or is it just bad luck on my part?...lol).

fig 1: Ugly stars (possible tracking error)

fig 2: Veilly nasty reflections

[RikM]

I get the same star shapes with my 150P and slanted in the same direction. I thought it was flexure in the finder guider but I haven't got to the bottom of it yet.

I don't get reflections from the MPCC with the DSLR but I do get nasty big diffraction patterns from the primary mirror clips. Have you had to do anything to avoid that? I was thinking of either flocking the ends of the clips, adding a circular mask to cover them or maybe even a silicone glue mod on the clips.

[Uranium235]

I think a 150 would probably sit better on an EQ5 for imaging they are about half the weight.

Thats almost right. last time I took it out, I weighed the entire setup on electronic scales and it weighed 7.4kg (right at the "safe" limit for guiding on the CG5-GT). Thats with the 150P, tube rings & dovetail, finderguider & bracket, plus the imaging train (MPCC, FW, 314L+).

A 150P and the EQ5 would be a much better match. But id be temped to get rid of the mount and keep the 200P