Next Step - advice please

[bobro]

I've just started in imaging, intending to image deep sky objects. My very basic setup is a Meade Polaris 130MD reflector (tube shortened for DSLR focus) with EQ2 mount and simple motor drive and (unmodified) Canon 1000D.

I've tried to locate M44 and M81 as starting objects, but only succeeded with M44. I assume only having cheap 10x25 binoculars is preventing me from seeing M81 (the telescope has a red dot finder). When I purchased the telescope the Orion nebula was in the sky and would have been great to practice on, but I just managed a fleeting image whilst starting to understand my equipment.

Attached is my image of M44, consisting of a small number of stacked 30 second exposures. I can obtain 30 second exposures with the simple motor drive without too much in the way of trails.

I'm thinking about purchasing an Orion 50mm mini guide scope to use as a finderscope (standard 1.25" eyepiece) and potentially as a guide scope at some future time if required. This seems a better bet than purchasing improved binoculars as that would still leave the problem of pointing the telescope.

A couple of questions to help me with the best way forward whilst keeping equipment purchases down :

1) How to improve the image of M44? E.g. longer exposures, more exposures or better processing.

2) Is the Orion 50mm mini guide scope a good choice to allow me to locate deep sky objects (and potentially use it in the future with my Microsoft Cinema webcam and modified RA motor for tracking)?

Any other useful advice gratefully accepted.

[almcl]

A 50mm finderscope should help and, with a webcam, will allow quite a few DSO's to be tracked.  Nearly all the images in my album were obtained with tracking from a 50mm Skywatcher finderscope and webcam.  I did upgrade to a RACI finder for star hopping - couldn't get used to the stars moving in the wrong direction - but also use a red dot finder  for ease of locating the 'start' point.  

A year and a bit on, I am still learning how to process, hopefully getting a bit better, so if you have only just started you will certainly develop your skills - but you seem to have done pretty well already.  Things you might want to consider in the future, a heavier duty mount, declination motor, astro mod for the Canon,  dedicated guidescope, dedicated guide camera, but for now guiding will allow longer subs and needn't break the bank.

 

[MattJenko]

In a weird way, shorter exposures and more of them would help with M44. The cluster stars themselves are bright, as can be seen in your image, and keeping things short will result in tighter stars because of less trailing and with more exposures you can start to make inroads into reducing the noise.

Also, I would look into how to obtain great focus, not just good focus, as you have things in focus, but it could be crisper.

In terms of processing, there is colour there, but you need to bring it out more and you have gone a little big on the black point, as the background is totally black, which indicates clipping in processing.

[happy-kat]

Eq2 mount adding extra weight might make the mount wobble more.

Also think lots more light frames. Don't forget your calibration frames. Don't extend the tripod legs fully. Make sure the telescope is balanced. Try not to black clip your final image. Possibly reduce your exposure length the stars are a bit elongated in shape. If taking shorter exposures you want lots more images. Hopefully you are already using a intervalometer. 

Even if using GIMP our other programs the video guides on processing on www.budgetastro.net help with getting started.

How about trying a globular cluster like m5.

I too like pushing the limits in what I already have.

 

[bobro]

Thanks for the really useful comments and advice. I've enjoyed the online tutorials looked at so far.

If I understand correctly, the idea is to have a good number of images to keep the noise down. That means the image can be expanded to show the 'hidden' detail. Proper 'calibration' of the whole imaging setup is essential for the best final result.

So I've tried again : more lights, shorter exposures (stars still not quite circular) and keeping detail in the dark part of the final image. No doubt the result is a bit over processed, but I was both surprised and pleased to see colour coming out in the stars - and so many stars!

It's great that I want to do more.......

[happy-kat]

That has so much more in it, great stuff.

I don't know the technical reason why but I see that the stars all elongate outwards particularily at the corners. There might not be anything you can do about this. Do you know if your telescope has a parabolic mirror?

 

[bobro]

A good question about the parabolic mirror - I had tried to check this out previously but came to the conclusion that a parabolic mirror variant (offered by Skywatcher rather than Meade) would be more expensive than the £150 I paid for the Meade Polaris 130 with motor drive. The Meade scope isn't advertised as parabolic so I assume it isn't. No complaints though - a great value package, especially as the scope wasn't expensive and I happily cut 40mm off it to allow my Canon 1000D to achieve focus.

[happy-kat]

Are you going to collect some more images for this target?

[bobro]

Yes - I'm hoping to collect a much higher number of images at a shorter exposure. Any thoughts ?

[happy-kat]

You can still combine the new set of image data in DSS but keep the collection sparate.

I do not know how long the exposure was on your first compared to the second to put context on the time differences.

It will be perhaps down to your choice on which length you use versus star shape. Though th more the better regardless :-)