Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
Complete beginner here, with this being my first post to the forum.
I recently bought my first scope and I've had a couple nights so far with just viewing. I've now decided to try my hand at utilising my camera and hoping to try stack images and get a decent shot of the moon. The issue I'm having at the moment is that I can't seem to get the moon fully in frame. Using a T ring adapter and Barlow lens attached to my scope I'm essentially cropping out edges of the moon, however when I remove the actual barlow lens and use only the adapter, T ring and my scope as the prime, I can't seem to focus.
This may be a pretty basic issue, so apologies, I haven't had much luck with google yet. I'm unsure if I require some sort of reducer or if I'm perhaps overlooking something.
For reference I'm using the following:
Celestron 130 EQ Fujifilm XT3 (APS-C) Barlow adapter/lens Kipon T2 Adapter for Fuji
Really appreciate any guidance or advice you can offer.
By Cosmic Geoff
Early this morning (1 May) I imaged Jupiter, Saturn & Mars with my C8. (Celestron C8 SE, ASI120MC, ADC).
When I tried processing the image videos, at the 'wavelet' stage in Registax6, Registax would not improve the blurred image at all on the Jupiter and Saturn images. (0.100 sharpen, 100%) I have had this happen before and put it down to poor seeing and poor raw images. The raw images here looked rather blurry.
However the Mars images, taken under the same conditions, turned out quite well, with a fairly sharp planetary edge and a real-looking dark patch. Not bad considering the small size (about 10") and the low altitude (about 10 deg) and the indifferent seeing.
Can more experienced imagers suggest the problem with the Jupiter and Saturn imaging? All three planets were imaged within an hour, with a 1000 frame .ser video (converted to .avi with PIPP because Registax did not accept the .ser files) and processed in Registax6. Initally I focused on a Jupiter moon, and I refocused for Mars on Altair, at which point the focus seemed close.
UPDATE: I tried processing again with different settings, and got the Saturn images up to the standard of my previous efforts. The Jupiter images improved, but remained poor, showing just the two principal cloud belts (but it was low when imaged).
I am new to Registax 6. Tried stacking lunar eclipse photos (used JPG images, could not get right exposure with video). Used stock settings and reduced points to only 40. I keep getting ghost images after stacking.
What can I do to eliminate this?
I'm pretty new to this whole astrophotography thing, specifically the whole image resolving and stacking part. I've been using registax 6 to edit the videos, and I think I'm pretty much done with an image of Jupiter I've been practicing on from a video of Jupiter I found on the internet. I was wondering what I should do to get rid of those weird ring things around the edge of Jupiter and maybe clean up and sharpen the edges all together. Any other tips you have that could make the image cleaner are very much welcome. Thanks!
Yesterday I was reading about dark frames vs in camera long exposure noise reduction, and something caught my attention. As far as my (so far little but growing) knowledge goes, the best you can do is to take the calibration frames right after the imaging session. This can be a pain in the A, and as I read yesterday, many takes these frames separately, when there is nothing better to do, like on a cloudy afternoon. This is allright, it's a good idea, you can create different master darks and other master calibration frames on different temperatures (room temp, cold, hot etc), and use these when stacking images from your light sessions according to the temperatures the lights frames were capured at.
But. As far as I know, my darks should have the exact same settings and focus that my lights have. If I know I use for an example a prime wide angle lens at F2.8 all the time, with ISO 1600 to capture the milky way, that's okay. But what if something changes? What if I use ISO 3200 for some reason? What about the focus (okay, inifinity, but not exactly the same all the time when manual focusing)? What if I use a zoom lens on different focal lenghts? What about the other calibration frames?
It's definitely not impossible to be prepared for every scenario, but when you use lenses instead of telescopes, there are more variations.
Extra info, if that matters: I'm using a Nikon D5500, which is "ISO invariant".
I'm really curious about your replies, as this could greatly improve my image's quality, if It's possible to take calibration frames this way.
Thanks in advance!