Imaging with the 130pds

[RolandKol]

2 hours ago, astrosathya said:

How many hours is this? I too live in Bortle 8 skies, I have both the Baader 7/8.5 Ha-O3 filters.

It was  Ha / SII x 33, OIII x only 13 (around 40 OIII subs not used due to quality...), all 180sec, Total time 237min (4 hours - almost  )

P.S.

I am really puzzled why Baader included OIII 8nm in their Bundle (probably simple pricing tactics)... I think OIII  should be around 6nm to match the Bundle...
but then, -  probably SII would be too week and etc.

So try using your OIII while Moon is not in the way or even better, then it completely hiding... in my case, Moonless nights are  always cloudy

Edited March 12, 2019 by RolandKol

[astrosathya]

7 minutes ago, RolandKol said:

It was  Ha / SII x 33, OIII x only 13 (around 40 OIII subs not used due to quality...), all 180sec, Total time 237min (4 hours - almost  )

P.S.

I am really puzzled why Baader included OIII 8nm in their Bundle (probably simple pricing tactics)... I think OIII  should be around 6nm to match the Bundle...
but then, -  probably SII would be too week and etc.

So try using your OIII while Moon is not in the way or even better, then it completely hiding... in my case, Moonless nights are  always cloudy

For 4 hours you've got a lot of data. I must be missing something in myprocesing. I too got 4 hours on Rosette this season, but it hasn't turned out as vivid as yours.

[RolandKol]

14 minutes ago, astrosathya said:

For 4 hours you've got a lot of data. I must be missing something in myprocesing. I too got 4 hours on Rosette this season, but it hasn't turned out as vivid as yours.

I used Pix to sort Images by quality and stack them based on quality, - maybe it was a trick.

Plus, in Light Polluted areas, it is difficult to compare the quality of the subs as if you have a direct light falling on, - yours will be worse...

I am lucky, my spot ended up in the shadow.... But trees limit my view very strongly, so I am not able to use optimal 300sec exposure.

P.S.

My subs are all on Unity gain, ASI1600MM-Pro

Edited March 12, 2019 by RolandKol

[al-alami]

I believe this is my absolute favourite image I have taken so far! 

 

Telescope: Skywatcher 130PDS
Mount: Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro
Camera: QHY 163M
Filters: Ha + R + G + B 

Total integration time: 14 hours 15 minutes
Exposure:
Ha:
32 X 512 sec
Red:
91 X 128 sec
Green:
91 X 128 sec
Blue
91 X 128 sec

+ Darks + Bias + Flats

Processed in Pixinsight and Photoshop CC

Edited March 14, 2019 by al-alami

[Adam J]

17 hours ago, al-alami said:

I believe this is my absolute favourite image I have taken so far! 

 

Telescope: Skywatcher 130PDS
Mount: Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro
Camera: QHY 163M
Filters: Ha + R + G + B 

Total integration time: 14 hours 15 minutes
Exposure:
Ha:
32 X 512 sec
Red:
91 X 128 sec
Green:
91 X 128 sec
Blue
91 X 128 sec

+ Darks + Bias + Flats

Processed in Pixinsight and Photoshop CC

Congratulations on this one really like it, very different from the normal pallet, especially like the contrast in the fox fur. Your imaging has really come on leaps and bounds in the last couple of years.

[al-alami]

3 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Congratulations on this one really like it, very different from the normal pallet, especially like the contrast in the fox fur. Your imaging has really come on leaps and bounds in the last couple of years.

Thank you Adam.  It all began with this thread, and help and advice from people like you.

[RolandKol]

Hi guys, anyone knows if there is a difference if bahtinov mask is larger than the primary mirror? 

For example, 130PDS p.mirror is 130mm, but OTA is 150mm.

I want to make/3d print bahtinov with gaps covering full 150mm diameter, to allow more light in for focusing in HA.

[wimvb]

No problem. Bigger is better.

[RolandKol]

Just finished checking/testing.

No difference... Almost.

But the larger gaps actually do allow to use shorter exposure on the same gain/iso, 

So a bit faster.

P.S.

"Perfect" (if such is possible) focus difference between 150mm and 130 was around 70microns.... PDS critical focus range is around 50... So .... Mathematically, should be a difference.

However,

Seeing is not perfect today.

Not yet sure.

But 5min stack with 150mm bahtinov focus looked just, just a bit better...

Again... Seeing could be a factor.

[RolandKol]

P.S. my model is here if someone needs it by any chance.

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3514044

[vernmid]

Hi all,

Thought I'd share my latest 130PDS image of M81/M82.

All captured 24/3 on a modified 1100d.

30 x 300 seconds lights plus  20 flat and 20 bias. Stacked in DSS and tweaked in PS

All comments/advice welcome

Many thanks

Vern

 

 

 

Anyone know what the fuzzy on the left hand edge is? Is it an artifact or a galaxy? It appears to have a spiral structure

 

Edited March 25, 2019 by vernmid
Wrong image posted

[JohnSadlerAstro]

Hi,

Thats a really nice photo @vernmid! ?

The small fuzzy is UGC 5302, roughly magnitude 15.

Here's its simbad page: UGC 5302

Ive found colour balance is very difficult on M81 and 82, you could try reducing the blue saturation in the background, though? I love the stars--what Coma Corrector are you using?

John

Edited March 25, 2019 by JohnSadlerAstro

[vernmid]

15 hours ago, JohnSadlerAstro said:

Hi,

Thats a really nice photo @vernmid! ?

The small fuzzy is UGC 5302, roughly magnitude 15.

Thanks John,

Amazed to have captured UGC 5302.

Coma corrector is a badder mpcc.

Will have another crack at processing  to improve background. 

Thanks again 

Vern 

[Hergerger]

On 13/03/2019 at 22:30, al-alami said:

I believe this is my absolute favourite image I have taken so far! 

 

Telescope: Skywatcher 130PDS
Mount: Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro
Camera: QHY 163M
Filters: Ha + R + G + B 

Total integration time: 14 hours 15 minutes
Exposure:
Ha:
32 X 512 sec
Red:
91 X 128 sec
Green:
91 X 128 sec
Blue
91 X 128 sec

+ Darks + Bias + Flats

Processed in Pixinsight and Photoshop CC

Wow!. You always take absolutely awesome and stunning pictures!!!

[pipnina]

Hi guys, took this image last night of M101 but it is in dire need of some flats as you can see.

What method do you guys use to take flats with the 130-PDS that minimises adding more tray light than you started with? last time I tried I got a gradient from one side of the image to the other...

[Stub Mandrel]

1 hour ago, pipnina said:

What method do you guys use to take flats with the 130-PDS that minimises adding more tray light than you started with? last time I tried I got a gradient from one side of the image to the other...

I use a cheap LED flat panel with a sheet of A4 taped over it and along enough lead so I can take 3 photos at each of eight positions. By rotating it any gradient is 'neutralised' and I find this works very well.

[Uranium235]

Good idea to rotate the light source. 

But if anyone is using a laptop or monitor for flats, it's worth making sure that it is square on to the OTA. Purely because computer displays don't do so well off axis (like trying to view a monitor from an angle isn't as good as being directly in front of it).

[Uranium235]

Being as galaxy season is here, I've switched to the ASI178 Cool, which turns the 130 into something of a galaxy hoover  

Leo Quartet - ARP316 (usually overlooked for the triplet), 30x180 - only darks applied. Needs probably 100+ subs and proper calibration to make it decent:

[JohnSadlerAstro]

8 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

proper calibration to make it decent:

Hi,

I'd say it looks pretty decent already! Really nice photo, I'm a fan of mono fuzzies.

Sadly these galaxies are just a little to small to be a realistic target with big 1000d pixels, but in my opinion they look better than the trio.

John

[Adam J]

45 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

Being as galaxy season is here, I've switched to the ASI178 Cool, which turns the 130 into something of a galaxy hoover  

Leo Quartet - ARP316 (usually overlooked for the triplet), 30x180 - only darks applied. Needs probably 100+ subs and proper calibration to make it decent:

Its a real shame ASI have stopped making this camera as I have always wanted one for a dedicated galaxy camera. 

[Uranium235]

18 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Its a real shame ASI have stopped making this camera as I have always wanted one for a dedicated galaxy camera. 

Stopped making it? Thats a shame.... well, I suppose there would be the QHY equivalent if youre stuck for finding one.

[Adam J]

3 minutes ago, Uranium235 said:

Stopped making it? Thats a shame.... well, I suppose there would be the QHY equivalent if youre stuck for finding one.

Yes. Although I did think about uncooled and using the short exposure high gain technique to try and get increased resolution by being under some of the seeing. 

Have you tried 1000's of 5-10 second exposures at high gain with this?

[vlaiv]

23 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Its a real shame ASI have stopped making this camera as I have always wanted one for a dedicated galaxy camera. 

According to TS, it looks like they will be getting one batch in a few days?

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8515_ASI178MMC-Cooled-Mono-CMOS-Camera---Chip-D-8-82-mm.html

[Adam J]

2 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

According to TS, it looks like they will be getting one batch in a few days?

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8515_ASI178MMC-Cooled-Mono-CMOS-Camera---Chip-D-8-82-mm.html

Not sure about that but ZWO no longer list it on their own web page. 

https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/product-category/dso-cameras

If you click on discontinued cameras then it is listed. 

Edited April 1, 2019 by Adam J

[vlaiv]

1 minute ago, Adam J said:

Not sure about that but ZWO no longer list it on their own web page. 

https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/product-category/dso-cameras

Could be that ZWO is no longer accepting customer orders because they stopped production, and above batch was ordered by TS some time ago.

Anyway, if you want that camera, I guess it's worth checking again after 9 days if it's in stock, or as suggested above - look at other vendors offerings.