Imaging with the 130pds

[StamosP]

This is my latest effort, M45 from a dark site just outside Athens, 

130Pds+SW x0.9 CC, Canon 600d Baader astro mod, HEQ5pro, ZWO Asi120mc+9x50 Finder scope

Phd2, BYEOS, DSS, Pixinsight

35x360s Lights iso800, 30 flats, 12 darks, 40 bias

It was pretty difficult during processing to supress halos-reflections especially those around Atlas and Alcyone. All opinions are welcome...

Skywatcher's coma corrector caused many reflections, large purple doughnuts, fortunately dithering every 2 images and stacking 35 frames saved my image, most of them were removed.

My review on CC: http://www.astroshop.eu/field-flatteners-other-photo-accessories/skywatcher-2-coma-corrector-for-newtonian-telescopes/p,18852#tab_bar_2_select

Edited February 13, 2016 by StamosP

[Ishan Mair]

Wow !!

[Owmuchonomy]

Well, thanks to @Nightfisher, I acquired my used 130P-DS in January.  Wednesday was the first time I could try it out.  I was very keen to see if I could get along with imaging with this scope because for two years I have battled with a 4" triplet ED refractor and finally this month I secured my full refund.  That is a story for another time and place and a few beers.  For that, I could have purchased 15x 130P-DS models.

So using my 60Da I grabbed 32 subs of the Pacman nebula region before the cloud drifted in.  My main objective was to see what sort of field and star shapes fell out of it.  Why didn't I do this in the first place?  I am quite happy to live with star spikes at this price point.  It was a complete doddle compared to battling with flatteners and orthogonality issues and the rest.  I must admit I have over processed it I think but for a first photon capture at f/5 I am very pleased with the set up.

Here it is in my obsy.

 

This is the image.  

I am not too worried about my processing failures but the star shapes for a first effort are way better than I am used too.  There is very slight coma in all corners but its even and that is just spacing to play with.  The focuser has taken a tiny 'pacman' style bite out of the top of my stars but that is also a well known issue with the stock focuser tube length.  Easily spotted and sorted.  Am I chuffed?  You bet; for the outlay on the OTA how can it be any other way.

[Epicycle]

Hi,

 

I append below my most recent image with the 130pds. It's ngc2903, circa 10hs in LRGB with Atik 460.

I think I said somewhere in this thread that it was a pitty that the focuser of this scope could not be upgraded. Actually that's not quite true, you can actually fit a Feathertouch focuser without problems. The secret is the adapter:

 

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-instruments-feather-touch-components/feather-touch-adapter-20-for-orion-sky-quest-xt-intelliscope-telescopes.html

(I think someone here at SGL mentioned this explicitly somewhere, but I can't find the post now.)

Obviously the cost of an FT is more than twice the cost of the 130, but I already had the FT in my RC. And that's the beauty of the FT focusers and their world of adapters, you can basically use one FT in all your scopes and if the FT is motorized (I have a Lakeside) then you can autofocus, so I can now run Sequence Generator Pro with all my scopes, 130 included

 

Cheers

Epicycle

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kirien]

On 12.02.2016 at 09:16, Uranium235 said:

Depending on what camera you are using (chip size), you will have about a 50% useable field - maybe a bit less (ie: you will end up cropping half of it out) without a coma corrector. It will get real ugly towards the corners.

I have eos 40d full spectrum mod. So indeed, the chip is quite big...

[Uranium235]

On ‎13‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 20:17, Epicycle said:

Hi,

 

I append below my most recent image with the 130pds. It's ngc2903, circa 10hs in LRGB with Atik 460.

I think I said somewhere in this thread that it was a pitty that the focuser of this scope could not be upgraded. Actually that's not quite true, you can actually fit a Feathertouch focuser without problems. The secret is the adapter:

 

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/starlight-instruments-feather-touch-components/feather-touch-adapter-20-for-orion-sky-quest-xt-intelliscope-telescopes.html

(I think someone here at SGL mentioned this explicitly somewhere, but I can't find the post now.)

Obviously the cost of an FT is more than twice the cost of the 130, but I already had the FT in my RC. And that's the beauty of the FT focusers and their world of adapters, you can basically use one FT in all your scopes and if the FT is motorized (I have a Lakeside) then you can autofocus, so I can now run Sequence Generator Pro with all my scopes, 130 included

 

Great image!

But, I dont think I could ever justify a FT focuser as they are horrendously expensive. I'd consider it if I was using an 8" f5 or a quattro, but buying one just for the 130 seems a little bit of an extravagance!

[Uranium235]

On 13 February 2016 at 07:58, StamosP said:

It was pretty difficult during processing to supress halos-reflections especially those around Atlas and Alcyone. All opinions are welcome...

Skywatcher's coma corrector caused many reflections, large purple doughnuts, fortunately dithering every 2 images and stacking 35 frames saved my image, most of them were removed.

My review on CC: http://www.astroshop.eu/field-flatteners-other-photo-accessories/skywatcher-2-coma-corrector-for-newtonian-telescopes/p,18852#tab_bar_2_select

I see you have discovered the limitations of the SWCC, it is less apparent in narrowband (and non-existant in Ha) - but it is a problem when it comes to handling bright stars.

Best way around that is to invest in the Baader MPCC MkIII, that has no reflections whatsoever. You can (as I did) swap and change between correctors according to your target - ie: if you have no bright stars in shot - you can use the SW.

[Thalestris24]

33 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

Great image!

But, I dont think I could ever justify a FT focuser as they are horrendously expensive. I'd consider it if I was using an 8" f5 or a quattro, but buying one just for the 130 seems a little bit of an extravegance!

The cheapo SW autofocuser works great on mine  It gives very fine control over focus adjustments and holds focus very well - one of my best upgrades!

Louise

[Viv]

Finally got my first image !!

Obviously M42 - imaged Sunday 14th Feb

45 subs at 200 seconds each. 400 ISO & Baader UHC Filter

HEQ5 / 130 PDS / Guided ST80 QHY5 / Canon 7D

Processed with DSS, Pixinsight & Lightroom

I'm fairly chuffed with this & well worth the full evening of imaging.

Cheers

 

 

 

[Uranium235]

Good for a first go! Your flats need sorting out, and a bit of balance on the background to sort out the blueness - but I'd say youre well on the way!

[richyrich_one]

53 minutes ago, Viv said:

Finally got my first image !!

Obviously M42 - imaged Sunday 14th Feb

45 subs at 200 seconds each. 400 ISO & Baader UHC Filter

HEQ5 / 130 PDS / Guided ST80 QHY5 / Canon 7D

Processed with DSS, Pixinsight & Lightroom

I'm fairly chuffed with this & well worth the full evening of imaging.

Cheers

 

 

 

Very nice image, well done.

Did you use a coma corrector?

[Viv]

48 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

Good for a first go! Your flats need sorting out, and a bit of balance on the background to sort out the blueness - but I'd say youre well on the way!

Thanks Rob, it was a right battle with that blue & not blowing the middle out ! ?

Get a few more targets done, & I'll re-visit.

its back to that huge learning curve ??

[Viv]

22 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

Very nice image, well done.

Did you use a coma corrector?

Cheers Rich.

no - I don't have one, it's on the wish list........

[jnb]

1 hour ago, Viv said:

Cheers Rich.

no - I don't have one, it's on the wish list........

Besides being a very nice image and well documented for exposure times, focal rations and camera speeds (I'm amazed how many people don't mention those when they post images) it's a nice example of coma. I'd be interested to see the same image done with a skywatcher and baader coma corrector. I have a 150p-ds on order and was wondering how much I need a CC and whether the baader is worth the premium (or a revelation worth the discount)

 

[Viv]

Cheers,setting & details are the thing I always wonder when I see an image.

sounds like it could be worth getting a coma corrector - but, I'll be searching the differences between the 2 & if it's worth getting.

 

[Epicycle]

4 hours ago, Uranium235 said:

Great image!

But, I dont think I could ever justify a FT focuser as they are horrendously expensive. I'd consider it if I was using an 8" f5 or a quattro, but buying one just for the 130 seems a little bit of an extravagance!

I agree, but I already had one so it made sense to get the adapter and try. The versatility of the FT makes its price a bit more tolerable.... And autofocus is something I do appreciate now.

[Pompey Monkey]

On 15/02/2016 at 21:24, jnb said:

Besides being a very nice image and well documented for exposure times, focal rations and camera speeds (I'm amazed how many people don't mention those when they post images) it's a nice example of coma. I'd be interested to see the same image done with a skywatcher and baader coma corrector. I have a 150p-ds on order and was wondering how much I need a CC and whether the baader is worth the premium (or a revelation worth the discount)

 

You'll end up either needing or wanting a coma corrector for sure

A lot of posters don't mention camera speeds because they use CCDs...

Awww - what the heck - it's only 20 mm more - here's my Rosette with the 150 PDS and Skywatcher CC

 

Edited February 17, 2016 by Pompey Monkey

[robmichael81]

On 2/15/2016 at 18:50, Viv said:

Finally got my first image !!

Obviously M42 - imaged Sunday 14th Feb

45 subs at 200 seconds each. 400 ISO & Baader UHC Filter

HEQ5 / 130 PDS / Guided ST80 QHY5 / Canon 7D

Processed with DSS, Pixinsight & Lightroom

I'm fairly chuffed with this & well worth the full evening of imaging.

Cheers

 

 

 

Fantastic image Viv, I have been itching to use my 130PDS and got to use it in anger for the first time a few nights ago. Not as good as your image but I thought I would post mine up and hope to get some advice on how to improve. This thread is great for us newbies to get an idea on how to take such great images.

SW 130PDS

HEQ5 Pro

Canon 40D (Light pollution filter)

DSS

Gimp

30 x 30" @ ISO 800
30 x 25" @ ISO 800
30 x 25" @ ISO 1600
10 x Darks
10 x Bias

 

Edited February 17, 2016 by robmichael81

[beamer3.6m]

M44 Beehive

5 x 300 second subs

No darks or flats

[DarkKnight]

On 2/15/2016 at 05:50, Viv said:

Finally got my first image !!

Obviously M42 - imaged Sunday 14th Feb

45 subs at 200 seconds each. 400 ISO & Baader UHC Filter

HEQ5 / 130 PDS / Guided ST80 QHY5 / Canon 7D

Processed with DSS, Pixinsight & Lightroom

I'm fairly chuffed with this & well worth the full evening of imaging.

Cheers

 

 

 

What a top first attempt.

As already mentioned a slight WB adjustment to back off the blue cast and give your LR Dehaze slider a little tweak. I think you will be pleasantly surprised with the result.

PS: I've recently been working on WB so I had a fiddle with your image. Hope you don't mind. As I suspected there is a whole heap of recoverable data by using LR's Dehaze slider.

Edited February 18, 2016 by DarkKnight

[richyrich_one]

A couple of quick ones while tweaking the MPCC and PA...Just wanted to get something while I was out. Processing in PI and Neat Image. Constructive criticism welcome

M101

9x300 + 1x900 lights, 20 darks, 30 flats, 30 bias

M3

20x60 lights, no darks, no flats, 200 bias

[Uranium235]

Looks bang tidy!

Only one odd thing, the M101 has a little bit of coma in the far corners - while the M3 has none at all (I pixel peeped both images). Maybe you did something between the two images (slightly different focus or adjustment?).

[richyrich_one]

14 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

Looks bang tidy!

Only one odd thing, the M101 has a little bit of coma in the far corners - while the M3 has none at all (I pixel peeped both images). Maybe you did something between the two images (slightly different focus or adjustment?).

Thanks Rob.

They were different nights but pretty sure the only difference is 1.4mm. Invested in some delrin spacers, if only they did them in M48.

[Owmuchonomy]

2 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

Thanks Rob.

They were different nights but pretty sure the only difference is 1.4mm. Invested in some delrin spacers, if only they did them in M48.

Primeluce Labs do M48 X 0.75mm spacers for a few Euros. I bought 3 for my now defunct frac but they are like gold dust.

[Uranium235]

11 minutes ago, richyrich_one said:

Thanks Rob.

They were different nights but pretty sure the only difference is 1.4mm. Invested in some delrin spacers, if only they did them in M48.

Well, whatever you did to fix it - dont touch it again!   (or at least remember exactly what you did...lol)