Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

C9.25 for galaxies?

Darren Knight

By Darren Knight
in Imaging - Discussion

Recommended Posts

swag72

swag72

Posted
Posted

Using an Avalon you'll be fine for the mount - It's what I'm using and I'm pleased to say that at 2350mm it's a peach. So with that most difficult and important part of the puzzle solved, I say go for it - Of course you can image with your C9.25!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply
PhotoGav

PhotoGav

Posted
Posted

Not jealous of your set up at all Darren....... Go on, finish me off - tell me it's all housed in a beautiful observatory!

As for whether to do it or not - most definitely do and you'll get some spanking results!!! Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darren Knight

Darren Knight

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Gav,

yeah it is......sorry :-( But if it's any consolation, since I've had it there's been a permanent cloud sitting directly above it. That's one of the reasons I chose to purchase the SCT. At least I can do some planetary work in-between the gaps. Admittedly, I've been very fortunate to acquire some nice equipment over the last 12 months, but boy, this has been the hardest learning curve of my life. All the gear no idea!? Still, I'm working hard on this crazy hobby and so hopefully it will start to pay off soon. I do have a Flikr account at D M Knight 68. When I was with Olly, we acquired some data on his rig and I processed it. (After he gave me a tutorial on how to do it correctly) It blows my other attempts out of the water. God that mans good (but don't tell him).

Regards,

Darren

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhotoGav

PhotoGav

Posted
Posted

It is indeed one heck of a steep learning curve. I've only been trying to take pictures of the night sky for about a year and with the SCT since January, so have a very long way to go. However, the thrill of when it works is second to very little!

Your flickr pics look great! Interesting that the March Jupiter is not nearly as clear as the February Jupiter - is that really down to the seeing going massively downhill? I've been trying to get some shots of Jupiter, but have found the recent pics to be very blurry, especially compared to the first one I did in mid Feb.

Would love to have some time in France with Olly. He's been very generous with his help on this forum and a masterclass would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

You have the mount. That's fine.

Now the Atik 490 has tiny pixels which, unbinned and at native FL, would give you 0.32 arcseconds per pixel. This is not workable. You would never reach that resolution through the atmospheric seeing and each pixel would get very little light, so it would be slow. Binning 2X2 would give you 0.65 arcsecs per pixel. This is still possibly finer than the atmosphere will allow but it isn't impossible. (Yves and I were around this point with his 14 inxch ODK.) You would be making more demands on the mount than Sara is making, though. Binning 3x3 would be a serious option and would give you just under an arcsecond per pixel. Resolving through the atmosphere around this level should be possible. You could consider binning the L 2x2 and the colour at 3X3. Experiment.

The reducer would make matters easier in the context of your pixel size.

Olly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Space Bat

Space Bat

Posted
Posted

I have an M51 in my gallery - to get the best out of a CPC you do need to spend extra on the wedge....you can't substitute F/ratio and compete with faster scopes, however the 925 will give the contrast and will prove capable once on a wedge....I am telling myself this as I will be getting one in the post next week lmao.

But seriously - with longer exposure and the added benefit of the contrast and resolution the 925 gives it will prove worthy and compete with faster scopes of similar aperture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kirkster501

kirkster501

Posted
Posted

I am going to have a go at this.  The C9.25 is my planetary scope and, if i can get long FL images from it, may allow me to offload the RC8.

Sara, How did you get the Atik 460 connected to the Visual back of the C9.25 please?

EDIT:  I have always been a huge fan of the Celestron C series SCT scopes.  They are wonderful.  I love the C9.25 especially.  It must be possible to get this scope going on Deep sky!  Its got to be!!!!! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swag72

swag72

Posted
Posted

Sara, How did you get the Atik 460 connected to the Visual back of the C9.25 please?

I have a Celestron Radial guider with a female SCT thread - Hey presto!! If I didn't have that, I've got a load of SCT threaded adapter so have probably got something that would fit anyway. Easy peasy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Owmuchonomy

Owmuchonomy

Posted
Posted

I am going to have a go at this. The C9.25 is my planetary scope and, if i can get long FL images from it, may allow me to offload the RC8.

Sara, How did you get the Atik 460 connected to the Visual back of the C9.25 please?

EDIT: I have always been a huge fan of the Celestron C series SCT scopes. They are wonderful. I love the C9.25 especially. It must be possible to get this scope going on Deep sky! Its got to be!!!!! :)

If I can do it, it must be easy!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Owmuchonomy

Owmuchonomy

Posted
Posted

So the challenge is set then.... Must have a go.

I used my Canon 600D at prime focus on a unguided HEQ5 pro. Used the Celestron T adaptor and focused in live view. 20 x 120s subs plus darks, flats and bias.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.