Is this the limit of my 200p?

[Redpaul]

Hi folks,

I have had my 200p on an EQ5 mount for almost a year now and I am still being amazed at what I can see with it. During that year I have also been doing lunar and planetary imaging, firstly with the stock 2x barlow and a Philips 840k and now with a Tal 2x and SPC900. I've also got myself a Celestron X-Cel LX 8mm which gives excellent views.

My question is this, judging by the shot below is this the limit I've reached regarding imaging? I've collimated as best I can and focused as best I can but I just can't seem to get the features clear.

Jupiter 19th November 2012 by Paul S Wharton, on Flickr

Any advice appreciated,

Paul

[Mr Q]

I'm not into imaging but after seeing many images of Jupiter, I can assure you that your pic is up there with the best Ive' seen. To get any further resolution, try a star test to see how good the collimation is. The below link shows examples of the effects of bad collimation on the Moon and planets as well as how to do a proper star test (only takes a few seconds without any tools needed). You may get some more details but I doubt it and the star test will give you the answer you seek.

COLLIMATION

[StuW]

I think your scope is capable of much more, It's your camera that is reaching it's limits in my opinion. I just upgraded from a SPC900 to a purpose made planetary/lunar/guiding cam and there's no comparison to my previous images.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[Redpaul]

I think your scope is capable of much more, It's your camera that is reaching it's limits in my opinion. I just upgraded from a SPC900 to a purpose made planetary/lunar/guiding cam and there's no comparison to my previous images.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

I was thinking that too. I'm hoping to get an Imaging Source camera soon. I'm also hoping to get a Celestron C9.25.

Paul

[StuW]

Have a look at the ZWOptical cameras, although they are fairly new they are giving DFK/DMK performance at QHY5 prices. Kothka man's recent thread shows what is possible.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

It may also be the limit of the Barlow. with a 2x barlow you get just F/10, whereas in my experience Jupiter is best captured at F/20-F/25 on the SPC900 (and DMK21).

[Pete Presland]

to be honest that's a pretty good image.

i would agree that it will be the camera and the barlow that are the limiting factors.i switched to a imaging source a while back and the comparison was well worththe extra money.i have know switched to a monochrome and when seeing conditions permit, the detail in fantastic.well worth the processing of 3 AVI'S per image! looking forward to posting some on here when finnished

regarding the seeing conditions if they are poor you will struggle whatever camera you are using.

[rwilkey]

Hi Paul, that's a great shot indeed. I am not an imager, but I believe this is probably the limit of your current set-up. To get any better you would have to spend many pounds on a new mount and DSLR. Well done, the 200P is a great scope isn't it?

[leelee970]

Great image, but I’m almost sure you can get more.

A lot is simply down to practice, practice, practice – oh and weather

I’ve a similar set up and only in the last few months am I suddenly improving.

A lot will also depend on your webcam settings.

I use WxAstroCapture, a Bahtinov mask to get precise focus (on a star, then move back to planet)

I’m also using X3 and X5 Barlows and adding extra tube length between to increase image size.

Here is my initial setting for my SPC900

Frame rate 5 FPS or 10FPS (nearly always 10FPS) don’t go higher with the SPC900

Resolution 640x480

Auto white balance “ON”

Brightness 50%

Contrast 32%

Gamma 0%

Saturation 70%

Shutter speed 1/25 1/33 1/50 or more

Gain 60% ( no less than 50%)

If image is too bright increase shutter speed

Lee

[leelee970]

I was meant to add this

[Redpaul]

Thanks for all the replies.

I'm going to look into upgrading to an imaging camera to replace my webcam. I've also got an Imagemate 4x but since I got it 6 months ago I've never been able to get a decent focus. I'm sure it's just down to bad seeing but I've pretty much given up with using it.

Paul

[leelee970]

Thanks for all the replies.

I'm going to look into upgrading to an imaging camera to replace my webcam. I've also got an Imagemate 4x but since I got it 6 months ago I've never been able to get a decent focus. I'm sure it's just down to bad seeing but I've pretty much given up with using it.

Paul

I too have a X5 imagemate and had bad result - but for some reason I tried it last night and had a great result (no award winner but still fantastic)

the SPC900 is more than capable but I too will invest in an upgrade (one day)

what are you using for post processing?

[Redpaul]

I too have a X5 imagemate and had bad result - but for some reason I tried it last night and had a great result (no award winner but still fantastic)

the SPC900 is more than capable but I too will invest in an upgrade (one day)

what are you using for post processing?

I use either AutoStakkert 2 or Registax 6 then finish in Photoshop.

Paul

[Spanishfly]

Redpaul - I think that is a brilliant pic of Jupiter - one of the best I have seen. And shows that you can get brilliant images without a EQ6.

[Welrod50]

Paul, to be fair I think you are doing yourself an injustice here as the original image you posted is very good in my view. I have tried with Jupiter myself and never got anything as sharp, albeit that is down to my scope and the fact I'm using AVI video's on a DSLR presently. It is understandable to want to push yourself further (as do I) but it isn't like your efforts thus far are poor by any means!

I would maybe suggest making a Bahtinov mask to get tack sharp focus. I made one myself for my 130 OTA and spent a good hour with a scalpel cutting it out but it works an absolute treat and saved me £15 odd.

I would imagine it will work with your camera and may help a little.

Good stuff though !!

[LukeSkywatcher]

Lovely image................

Having seen so many images of Jupiter with the same setup, yours can do more.

[ollypenrice]

I think the image is good but I doubt that it's at the limit of the kit because the left hand side of the planet is not as sharp as the right hand side. I'd get this on the planetary board and ask the experts for a once over.

It's great that you want to even better and I'm sure you'll succeed in doing so. Get the planetary gurus to look at the picture. If AP is a dark art theirs is a sight darker than deep sky if you ask me!!

Olly

[chiltonstar]

Magnifying up the images of the two moons, you can see they are blurred NE and split spectrally (Jupe too near the horizon/poor seeing??) - you could align the colours in Registax to sharpen it a bit, but when I've had similar results with a much smaller scope, it's usually been poor seeing.

Chris

[Capricorn]

I will go with Robin, you could get more but not sure by how much, eliminating all factors should help, basically collimation to be spot on. Seen Kothka man's images but he uses a big SCT and a better camera, so comparison is difficult.

"Standard" newtonians have often been said to have "soft" images compared to a refractor. Somewhere in the image/data you will still have diffraction from the secondary spider. A parabolic mirror is good, much better then a spherical but still not the ideal so coma is also in there. They all contribute to a little less definition. Before jumping up and down if a newtonian were precise why are there Imaging Newtonians?

So yes there is better, just I suspect not as much as you may want. Swapping both camera and scope is not really getting better from what you have.

[DMouse]

Hi, I have a skywatcher 200p and used a Celestron 1.25 inch 2x barlow to get this jupiter the other night. So I would say that you can get better images with your setup. The camera was a Canon T2i.