Primalucelab f65, first light.

[MARS1960]

After much deliberation and processing (this is V4) iv'e decided to post it anyway, hopefully a few pointers on processing will be forthcoming.

Also my stars seem a little triangular, strange, what could have caused this?

It is of course the Flaming Star Nebula.

Canon 600D, Primaluce f65 quad. 

15 x 900s, 20 flats, 20 bias.

[gnomus]

Hi Mark

On the full size image available here, your stars do seem to be triangular all across the field.  My first WO Star 71 had the same problem, though even more pronounced.  I sent mine back.  

[MARS1960]

17 minutes ago, gnomus said:

Hi Mark

On the full size image available here, your stars do seem to be triangular all across the field.  My first WO Star 71 had the same problem, though even more pronounced.  I sent mine back.  

Wow, that doesn't sound good, i will be be on the phone tomorrow requesting a return, thank you.

[Davey-T]

Agree with Steve, doesn't look right, send an image back with it.

Dave

 

[MARS1960]

Just now, Davey-T said:

Agree with Steve, doesn't look right, send an image back with it.

Dave

 

Thanks Dave, will do. 

[gnomus]

I suppose it is worth double checking that this isn't some weird stacking/processing artefact.  Do you have triangles on individual subs? 

[MARS1960]

2 hours ago, gnomus said:

I suppose it is worth double checking that this isn't some weird stacking/processing artefact.  Do you have triangles on individual subs? 

Just had a look and yes Steve, it's even more evident on the subs.

[gnomus]

Well you shouldn't have this.  When I showed my 'shuttlecocks' to the chaps at FLO, they took my WO Star 71 back without any further ado.  

[MARS1960]

4 hours ago, gnomus said:

Well you shouldn't have this.  When I showed my 'shuttlecocks' to the chaps at FLO, they took my WO Star 71 back without any further ado.  

Quick update, they have agreed to accept a return with a full refund, but only after pointing out that the issue was with my guiding and not optics .

[The Admiral]

As a novice I bow to all your collective experience about the star shapes, but to me it is reminiscent of trailing. I'd be interested to know why it's put down to the scope rather than the tracking?

It's a gorgeous image though, if you don't use a magnifying glass!

Ian

[MARS1960]

12 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

As a novice I bow to all your collective experience about the star shapes, but to me it is reminiscent of trailing. I'd be interested to know why it's put down to the scope rather than the tracking?

It's a gorgeous image though, if you don't use a magnifying glass!

Ian

I too thought that initially but if it was a guiding issue (and i have had a few ) then i would expect the usual eggy stars with a single point, but they have three points and really do resemble a triangle, i have never seen that before even on my poor newbie trailing/guiding images.

Thanks for the kind words about my image Ian.

[DaveS]

Yup, triangular stars usually indicate pinched optics somewhere. Possibly the cell is a bit undersize for the lenses.

[gnomus]

4 hours ago, MARS1960 said:

Quick update, they have agreed to accept a return with a full refund, but only after pointing out that the issue was with my guiding and not optics .

I don't claim to be an expert, but I would have thought a guding issue led to trails, not to triangles.  You could check this out easily though.  Eliminate guiding.  Just take a short exposure shot (5 seconds or so).  You will still be able to see bright stars and if they are triangular then this would suggest an optical rather than a guiding issue.

The main thing is your getting a replacement or return.