Imaging with the 130pds

[Adam J]

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

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.

Oh I cant afford it right now, its more something that is on my wish list for 6 months time if I can still get hold of one. 

[RolandKol]

Hmmm quite a list!!!
https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/product-category/discontinued-product

I hope they are not planning to "Close the Shop" completely!

[Uranium235]

5 hours ago, Adam J said:

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

Noooo that would generate far too much data, im already running low on storage space as it is!

[Susaron]

For galaxy hunting with the 130PDS I am waiting for the QHY550M cooled, but it seems to be QHY dedicates more time to make big sensors than to this small camera. ☹️

[Atreta]

hello everyone, i'm trying to get back to using the 130pds as i was struggling to get it collimated. this week i gave the no tools collimation a try and it looks better, but i don't know much about it.

could someone please check if the collimation is ok in this picture?

 

thanks a lot.

[carastro]

The best way to check the collimation is to look at a defocussed star.  If the rings are all concentric and the width all round is even then the collimation is OK.

Something like this.  (N.B. The bite out of the star was before I had my focusser shortened, so ignore that).  

 

[RolandKol]

4 hours ago, Atreta said:

hello everyone, i'm trying to get back to using the 130pds as i was struggling to get it collimated. this week i gave the no tools collimation a try and it looks better, but i don't know much about it.

could someone please check if the collimation is ok in this picture?

thanks a lot.

As Carole said,  de-focused star will show all the collimation problems.

Try keeping it in the center of the frame as you do not use Coma Corrector and even the perfect Collimation will look Off if your star will be on the corner or even halfway.

So if you will target a rich star field, central de-focused stars are the ones you need to look at and ignore the ones close/midway to the corners.

Your 8 sec sub has slightly prolonged stars even in the middle.

If you were guiding, - you probably had the tilt of the camera in the focuser, - or guiding was very bad, which I doubt.

So also, keep an eye how you place the camera in, -  it has to be stiff and have no play towards any direction.

 

 

[matt_baker]

11 hours ago, carastro said:

The best way to check the collimation is to look at a defocussed star.  If the rings are all concentric and the width all round is even then the collimation is OK.

Something like this.  (N.B. The bite out of the star was before I had my focusser shortened, so ignore that).  

 

Are all 130's like this is you don't shave a bit off the focuser?

[RolandKol]

19 minutes ago, matt_baker said:

Are all 130's like this is you don't shave a bit off the focuser?

Yep, all Newtonians will have this shadow with Focuser fully in.

I had to circumcise mine also... Not difficult at all, but I cannot use scope for visual after.

Please note, not all cameras are focused on the same spot, - so if you are lucky enough and your camera is focused with focuser Out, your images may not suffer from the shadow at all.

[Uranium235]

30 minutes ago, RolandKol said:

 

I had to circumcise mine also...

Ouch...   

[Startinez]

Crikey, I think I've got my next scope sorted... I currently have a 90mm f/10 refractor so I think the two would make a good pairing.

 

Out of curiosity, if I can afford the 200PDS should I go for that over the 130 or are there other things to consider than how much light will be collected? Same focal ratio. I guess one thing to consider is that when adding a coma corrector into the mix you're throwing another £100 on top of the scope price.

[Uranium235]

1 minute ago, Startinez said:

Crikey, I think I've got my next scope sorted... I currently have a 90mm f/10 refractor so I think the two would make a good pairing.

 

Out of curiosity, if I can afford the 200PDS should I go for that over the 130 or are there other things to consider than how much light will be collected? Same focal ratio. I guess one thing to consider is that when adding a coma corrector into the mix you're throwing another £100 on top of the scope price.

The 200pds? Hmmm nope  

It's the weight and bulk you have to consider (its heavy when loaded up), and it will catch the wind like a sail. It's easier to just get more out of shorter focal length by using a camera with smaller pixels (as long as you don't over sample the resloving power of the optics).

[Uranium235]

Not to say that the 200 cant make a good image (because it can). But the difficulty is in a different ball park compared to the 130.

Plus your choice of targets would be limited by the fov available from a 1 metre focal length.

[Startinez]

Great, thanks for the explanation. I guess it's narrowed down to 1 then! ?

[Atreta]

14 hours ago, carastro said:

The best way to check the collimation is to look at a defocussed star.  If the rings are all concentric and the width all round is even then the collimation is OK.

Something like this.  (N.B. The bite out of the star was before I had my focusser shortened, so ignore that).  

 

Thanks for the reply,  Carole.  I only get an image like that one way of the focuser, i don't if I'm explaining it right. If i move the focuser inwards to become out of focus, i get an image just like that one you showed, but if i move it outwards i get a different one. I'll try to take a picture tonight and post again. 

13 hours ago, RolandKol said:

As Carole said,  de-focused star will show all the collimation problems.

Try keeping it in the center of the frame as you do not use Coma Corrector and even the perfect Collimation will look Off if your star will be on the corner or even halfway.

So if you will target a rich star field, central de-focused stars are the ones you need to look at and ignore the ones close/midway to the corners.

Your 8 sec sub has slightly prolonged stars even in the middle.

If you were guiding, - you probably had the tilt of the camera in the focuser, - or guiding was very bad, which I doubt.

So also, keep an eye how you place the camera in, -  it has to be stiff and have no play towards any direction.

 

 

Thanks for replying,  yes, guiding was off when i took this one. I'll try to get the camera square with the focuser. 

[Drunk Coler]

Going to ordering an AZ GTI shortly for my 90 mak, may order a 130pds as well. 130p is supplied in a bundle so the pds version isn't that much heavier and I will only be using a zwo120 so will still be under weight limit of the mount and the mount can now be used in eq mode.

[RolandKol]

Hi Guys,

Has anyone managed to find something like 2" Baader ClickClock or any other 2" eyepiece clamp which would enable to achieve Focus using Canon or ASI1600?

[Uranium235]

Just a quick 2 hour pop at M51, no proper calibration though so its a bit on the rough side. Also had a bit of flex somewhere, but I will track that down and eliminate it.

(taken with the ASI178MM cool)

[Susaron]

1 hour ago, Uranium235 said:

Just a quick 2 hour pop at M51, no proper calibration though so its a bit on the rough side. Also had a bit of flex somewhere, but I will track that down and eliminate it.

(taken with the ASI178MM cool)

I would like to see this with color anytime

[JP50515]

10 hours ago, Uranium235 said:

Just a quick 2 hour pop at M51, no proper calibration though so its a bit on the rough side. Also had a bit of flex somewhere, but I will track that down and eliminate it.

(taken with the ASI178MM cool)

Uranium it's good to so you're still here in this thread after all these years. Honestly mate I chuckle at one of your earliest comments regarding Skywatcher paying this thread commission for uptick in 130PDS sales...more like paying you commission! I think your images are the reason that a large number of us landed on this scope, and to this day I am beside myself to understand how you pull such amazing data off a cheap imaging newt mounted to an EQ6. 

[matt_baker]

1 hour ago, JP50515 said:

Uranium it's good to so you're still here in this thread after all these years. Honestly mate I chuckle at one of your earliest comments regarding Skywatcher paying this thread commission for uptick in 130PDS sales...more like paying you commission! I think your images are the reason that a large number of us landed on this scope, and to this day I am beside myself to understand how you pull such amazing data off a cheap imaging newt mounted to an EQ6. 

I can agree with this for sure. 

One of the reasons I got a 130P-DS was seeing a few of Uranium's images and thought there's no way such a cheap scope could grab stuff like that.

I'm more of a lurker and don't post too much but here's my latest M81 M82 pic here. I can post acquisition if people want but it's late aha. 

I also need to use APT for dithering because I'm hating this raining noise

Edited April 12, 2019 by matt_baker

[BigRD]

14 hours ago, matt_baker said:

I can agree with this for sure. 

One of the reasons I got a 130P-DS was seeing a few of Uranium's images and thought there's no way such a cheap scope could grab stuff like that.

I'm more of a lurker and don't post too much but here's my latest M81 M82 pic here. I can post acquisition if people want but it's late aha. 

I also need to use APT for dithering because I'm hating this raining noise

This is impressive. Can you post acquisition data and processing please? 

I'm using a Nikon D5100 on my 130PDS/HEQ5 and would love to achieve the colours you've pulled out. I've just started experimenting with dithering and so far so good but stretching in PS is pulling out too much noise. I'm impatient for results as well which doesn't help

Cheers

[Davey-T]

12 minutes ago, BigRD said:

I'm using a Nikon D5100 on my 130PDS/HEQ5 and would love to achieve the colours you've pulled out. I've just started experimenting with dithering and so far so good but stretching in PS is pulling out too much noise. I'm impatient for results as well which doesn't help

If you purchase Noels Actions for PS there are a couple of good noise reduction actions in it.

Dave

[Uranium235]

23 hours ago, JP50515 said:

Uranium it's good to so you're still here in this thread after all these years. Honestly mate I chuckle at one of your earliest comments regarding Skywatcher paying this thread commission for uptick in 130PDS sales...more like paying you commission! I think your images are the reason that a large number of us landed on this scope, and to this day I am beside myself to understand how you pull such amazing data off a cheap imaging newt mounted to an EQ6. 

 

21 hours ago, matt_baker said:

I can agree with this for sure. 

One of the reasons I got a 130P-DS was seeing a few of Uranium's images and thought there's no way such a cheap scope could grab stuff like that.

 

Thanks guys

But we have to take a number of things into consideration if you want to get the best out of it.

Starting off with the mount, the 130 is quite light so it never bothers an NEQ6 (not even close...lol).

Secondly there is the camera, that is were the magic happens - which as we all know can only be achieved with a mono (yes... there, i said the M word ) CCD or the one of the recent crop of cooled CMOS cameras because you need very low noise to get good data. This point would need a lot of consideration in regard to sensor size and/or pixel size, and what you want to image.

Then, its the 130pds - probably the simplest way to deliver photons to the sensor..... no fancy-dan glass required  (barring the coma corrector) - just a couple of small mirrors... its as uncomplicated as it can be

Lastly, its guiding, choice of target, framing and mosaic planning and total integration time.

But at the moment, its my only telescope - so its going to get used a lot, especially now I've got it bagging galaxies with some decent detail. With the ASI178 though, ive found it takes a 100+ short(ish) subs to get a very clean image.

[matt_baker]

On 12/04/2019 at 15:27, BigRD said:

This is impressive. Can you post acquisition data and processing please? 

I'm using a Nikon D5100 on my 130PDS/HEQ5 and would love to achieve the colours you've pulled out. I've just started experimenting with dithering and so far so good but stretching in PS is pulling out too much noise. I'm impatient for results as well which doesn't help

Cheers

I used 45x180s exposures along with 20 darks, flats, bias frames

DSS for stacking

I did use PixInsight for post-processing however since changing from PS, as it helps loads. So unfortunately I can't help you there but I know Trevor from AstroBackyard does really good photoshop processing tutorials.

If you would like to know how I went about processing in PixInsight, then just ask

As Dave said, Noel's actions will help greatly and it is worth the investment 100%