Herbig-Haro 555 in bi colour

[PhotoGav]

An interesting post, Chris. I think that it is only a fair comparison though if you crop the image to a near identical portion of sky as Sara's image. You would then need to make the pixel dimensions of the image identical as well. That way the image sizes would be the same and resolution could be compared... At the moment they are oranges and clementines. Two lovely fruits of similar colour, but not the same!

[davew]

I think the post by Chris is very interesting but for the opposite reasons it was posted. We could talk resolution and scope size all day but I just looked at the two images on my laptop as they appear. I've got one of Sara's Ha images and downloaded Chris's image. Took them both into PS and carefully cropped the larger image down. Side by side they are as remarkably different as I would have thought. The SCT image shows detail in the dust instead of a broad smudge and the HH object is stating to show well in the SCT. There is a very light line and a dark line below it. Most images of this area don't reveal that these two lines are separated by space and not gas.

The stars are getting quite blocky in the Televue, as I would expect, but the SCT stars are actually better than I had previously thought ! Best eat humble pie because they look way better now I've looked more closely

The interest for me is that no matter how you may try to do otherwise, always use the scope / camera combination for the job in hand. The SCT for the tight detail it reveals and the Refractor for the beautiful wide sweeping views. ( All things being equal ! )

Dave.

[swag72]

So I'm not going mad then

[Gina]

This is the first time I've had a proper chance to use my Atik 460EX as I bought it last autumn not long before the 5 months of cloudy, rainy and stormy skies.  So far with the MN190 I've been amazed that all the problems I used to have with star bloat and magenta rings seem to have practically gone away.  I was over sampling at first with the MN190 at 1000mm FL and 4.5micron pixels (0.9" per pixel) but by binning 2x2 on the 460EX I got strong data and still good resolution (1.8"/px).

[PhotoGav]

That's very good to hear Dave and a bit of a relief that theory is upheld in practice!

Indeed - two lovely images for their own different reasons.