Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
After a pretty dreary September and part of October, I was finally able to get out with students to do some viewing. Here are some of the objects viewed over two nights using Starlight Live software on my Borg 77edii (f/4) and Borg 125SD (f/5) with a Trius 694 mono camera. In most cases an IDAS NB-1 "nebula" filter was employed to help with the suburban light pollution in our skies. The first night (mainly 125SD) was much steadier and drier, but along the coast we take what we can get when it isn't raining! ;-D
It's so much fun to see these objects from less-than-optimal skies... I often intend to quit much earlier, only to find myself saying (over and over!) "... oh, look, <object> is coming up... I should just have a look at that before I pack up." And then another hour goes by!
- Greg A
Eastern & Western Veil
Comparison of FOV between two scopes on the NA Nebula
Again, FOV comparison on the Elephant Trunk Nebula
And again, with the Rosette Nebula
Pacman Nebula through the 125SD:
And Crab Nebula:
And the Cocoon Nebula:
Finally, a few wider shots of objects using the Borg77: Flame/Horsehead, California Nebula, Pelican Nebula and Andromeda Galaxy:
I bought my first telescope, SW 150pds about 6 months ago with the purpose of astroimaging "when i feel ready". So far ive used my Nikon D810 for that, and I'm now planning on taking the step buying my first AP camera.
My targets would be DSO's, and not planetary. I want a mono-camera, not color.
I want to get away with a very good camera to a reasonable price (wouldn't we all...) and in this regard I've been drooling on the ZWO ASI 1600MM Mono for some time. The price for it is in the upper part of my budget, but I'm willing to if its worth it. I've seen from other treads that sensor-size isn't everything, and dynamic range and gain and all is just as important, but i have trouble understanding it all 100% when it's all new to me, but in my experience i am a practical person who learns things much better and faster with the gear in my hand. So without getting to technical, and staying as objective as possible - please help me with;
1. Is this a good camera to go for?
2. It's sold with options of filters 1.25", 31mm or 36mm - Why these options, and what determines what i would choose?
3. Would you go for another camera in this price range, and why? - Or to rephrase it a bit; If you were in my shoes, which camera would you og for?
I'd appreciate any help:)
I might add, that i understand that with my lack of experience, buying a mono-camera with filters and all might seem premature, but for some strange reason. I enjoy these "way over my head"-projects and figuring out things as time goes - I just need some guiding in the right direction.
The Lightwave 0.8x focal reducer gives an 0.8x reduction in F-Ratio for faster exposure times, as well as a correspondingly wider field for astro-photography. Designed primarily for refractor telescopes of F6 or longer focal ratios, however also known to work with RC telescopes.
- Reduces and flattens phtographic field.
- 38mm Clear aperture
- Integral T-Ring adapter thread.
- Requires back-focus of 55mm to CCD Chip.
- For DSLRs a standard T-Thread adapter of approx. 10mm thickness is required.
- The standard 2" OD barrel will fit any 2" format telescope like an eyepiece.
- The base of the 2" OD barrel is threaded for 2" filters.
- CNC machined body with gloss black anodized finish.
- Includes a CNC machined T-threaded end-cap to protect against dust on the rear lens element which is more exposed than the front element. A plastic dust cap is included for the 2" OD front barrel.
Paypal byuer pays the fees
Postage expenses are on me
Shipping from Athens Greece
I scrapped all the Oiii and Sii data I previously took during a full moon (about 15 hours worth) and retook it all when the moon was a bit smaller at 76%. Ha was taken during 98% and 67% moon. All the lights were taken on the following nights: 12th, 19th and 20th September 2019.
Integration times, all in 600s subs unbinned:
Ha = 28.33 hours
Oiii= = 5.67 hours
Sii = 5.67 hours
The Ha data is really nice, and unsurprisingly the Oiii and Sii is not as strong (or nice).
I'm missing that (vital) step in my processing routine of getting the Sii and Oiii properly stretched to match the Ha, before combining. I dont really know how to deal with the weaker data properly. Any pointers would be appreciated.
What I do currently:
All the data is loaded into APP into separate channels/sessions.
The data is stacked and registered against the best Ha sub
This produces individual stacks of Ha, Sii and Oiii that are all registered
Each channel is processed with DPP in APP and then saved as a 16bit TIFF
Each is opened in PS
Stars removed with AA and any remnants removed and tidied up
I then open a blank RGB document in PS
I paste Ha into Green, Sii into Red and Oiii into Blue
Adjust the selective colour settings to get 'Hubble palette'
Adjust levels, curves, saturation until looks ok
All the Ha Sii Oiii data is then combined together in a single 'super' stack in APP using quality weighted algorithm to create a 'luminance'
That luminance layer is adjusted using levels, curves, and NC tools such as local contrast enhancement and deep space noise reduction (using masks to apply as required)
The luminance is pasted onto the above colour layer, and incrementally added using gaussian blur
Cropped and saved.
Here it is anyway I haven't intended on any more exposure time for this one, but will consider it, if the expert opinion dictates otherwise!