Witches Head Nebula fail....

[laser_jock99]

....took one sub, thought I'd captured nothing and decided to move on to brighter things. Having looked at the one sub on the PC there was actually a fair bit of signal in the blue channel. I now wish I had persevered and taken more images- doh!

IC2118 180s blue channel data 12" F2.9, Fuji S5 Pro DSLR

[Uranium235]

Interesting.... and I thought this one was purely the preserve of those with many hours to spare, and you managed to pick it up in one sub!. I may pay this part of the sky a visit over then next couple of months, looks like a mosaic jobbie though.

[symesie04]

Blimey you got that much detail in 1 3min sub?  I to thought this was an incredibly faint nebula in the imaging realm of those with CCD and narrowband only. Hmm once i get the astrotrac wedge repaired i may just give that a go, as i am fascinated with it for some reason. Think because its one of the few nebulas that instantly resemble their name.

[ollypenrice]

It's certainly not a narrownband object. It's a reflection nebula, so broadband all the way, though it lies in the collapsed side of Barnard's Loop so there is attractive Ha signal in the background.

Note that this was in an F2.9 system. Your mileage may vary!!  F2.9 is over four times as fast as F6.  

Besides the faintness and the enormous size on the sky the other problems are horrendous flare from Rigel and an incessant stream of satellites... but apart from that it's a peach!

No, it's a wonderful object and well worth a go.

Olly

[laser_jock99]

It's certainly not a narrownband object. It's a reflection nebula, so broadband all the way, though it lies in the collapsed side of Barnard's Loop so there is attractive Ha signal in the background.

Note that this was in an F2.9 system. Your mileage may vary!!  F2.9 is over four times as fast as F6.  

Besides the faintness and the enormous size on the sky the other problems are horrendous flare from Rigel and an incessant stream of satellites... but apart from that it's a peach!

No, it's a wonderful object and well worth a go.

Olly

Olly's not wrong about the satelites here- in my there are three geostationary satelite trails in the top right.  And it's a big object at 800mm in my image all you see in mainly Witches Chin! 

[Quatermass]

I was looking at this for my next target and wondering if the canon 350d could get anything worth the effort might just give it a try later on now.

[symesie04]

Thanks Olly, yes i did have a nose around after i posted and had come to the conclusion she is a "narrowband not required" target. Its just that it seems to be a rarely imaged object i just had always assumed it to be in the realms of the cutting edge crew. Take your point about the F2.9, I was thinking 400mm at F6 would be my mark but realize its going to take a lot of time on target, but hey you gotta ho with what you got. I can also see the Rigel is going to be a huge pain, if only i could find a way of switching it off for a while. 

[steppenwolf]

F 2.9 is VERY fast but this is still good for a single sub. You really do need to re-visit this one and capture some more data! Pity about the satellite passes but it is in the nature of the game, sadly.

[laser_jock99]

 I can also see the Rigel is going to be a huge pain, if only i could find a way of switching it off for a while. 

 Rigel being so close is a nuisance but also provides the illumination for the dust- otherwise it would be a dark nebula!

I'll definately have another go at this now I know it can be imaged. At the time I wasn't confident the scope was pointing in the right place so didn't want to waste time imaging an empty star field. I should have more confidence in my GOTO system........

[ollypenrice]

This was the target which showed me the improvement in the Sigma routine between AstroArt 4.0 and AA 5.0 because in 4 the satellites remained visible. In 5 they vanished. There were an awful lot, too, in literally all my 15 min subs. Tom confirmed these findings and went up top 5 himself. We were both imaging the Witch around the same time. I could frame it in one with the Baby Q and reducer but got flare from RIgel. Without the reducer I didn't so I did a 2 panel.

Olly

[Gina]

Amazing shot    Yes, you need to come back to this one - should be good