Unsuccessful Iris attempt

[Yoddha 532]

Hello,

The Iris nebula is one of my favorite objects Almost two years ago I managed to get a good image of it during my very first attempts to guide. So decided that it is time to give it a try with my MN190.

The night was 16th, the sky was quite good... the humidity was 91%. It is around the normal levels at this location and till that night, it didn't make anything bad to my Tak EM-200. An hour after started the imaging the mount lost connection with the PC and it was the end of the imaging session I was very afraid that the mount is broken but after (as was advised here ) left it drying for a week it is in good shape again and now am thinking how to prevent such problems in future...

All that was gathered is only 6x7min at ISO 1600 (modified 550D, MN190 and EM-200, no darks - only dithering). To make the things more fun in 3 of the images there are 2 satellites and one plain...

Here is the result:

http://www.ideiki.co...es/iris_new.jpg

A link to the old attempt:

http://www.ideiki.co...ry/ISS_Iris.jpg

It was made in 2010 using:

Scope: WO ZS 110 + LXD-75, guide ZS 66SD

Camera: Unmodified Canon 1000D

Exposures: 4h 24min (36x5min + 10 darks frames, 12x7min + 14 dark frames)

The advantage of the bigger and faster scope is clear, I wish there were some more data from it... The plan was to gather almost 3h that night... Definitely there will be a new attempt

[carastro 4,930]

That's not at all bad Ivo for only 42 mins. Glad your mount is OK, was it the PC or the cables that got dewed up?

Carole

[Cloudwatcher 66]

They are both excellent but I think the old one is the better of the two.........all in the eye of the beholder of course.

[Yoddha 532]

That's not at all bad Ivo for only 42 mins. Glad your mount is OK, was it the PC or the cables that got dewed up?

Carole

Thanks Carole! The dew was on the scope and the cables. This time I put the PC in a box which kept it dry

Edited June 27, 2012 by Yoddha

[Yoddha 532]

They are both excellent but I think the old one is the better of the two.........all in the eye of the beholder of course.

Thanks CW! I also think that the old one is better 4.5 hours and 42mins can be compared...

[Black Knight 153]

Nice one Ivo . Shame about the dew, but I'm glad everything worked out ok for your mount. Great star colours in both images, and the dusty stuff is showing up really well in the older image, and just beginning to show on the new image. It'd be great if you could add some more data to it

You didn't take flats? Wow, great result. I couldn't get away with taking no flats!

Edited June 27, 2012 by Black Knight

[Yoddha 532]

Thanks Andy!

I had planned to make flats - bought a XL white T-shirt and washed it manually, but was very upset by the mount problems to make other experiments... Also didn't think that will be able get something from the data at all.

The MN190 has quite flat field and after the collimation it looks that gives enough light for most of the FOV. Next time will make some flats to see how it will change the picture

[RikM 2,568]

I think they are both realy nice. The colour is good in the old one, but you can clearly see the potential that the new one will be the better image when there is more data.

I am glad the equipment is okay again after drying out.

[Yoddha 532]

Thanks Rik!