Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.


Sign in to follow this  

Save me from myself

Recommended Posts

Already spent my Christmas money, and then some. Ordered a William Optics GT81 APO triplet f/5.9 with field flattener/reducer that makes it f/4.7. It has a 2" 1:10 Crayford 2-speed focuser. Now, I'll be able to image at f/4.7, f/5.9, f/6.3, f/7, and f/10, depending on what I want to shoot at.

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no cure, as Oscar Wilde said, the only way to deal with temptation is to yeild to it, nice scope BTW, congratulations.

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you start down the path to the darkside, forever will it rule your destiny.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really want to be saved :evil6: Enjoy your new toy and let's all hope for those illusive clear skies.

Seasons greetings and good luck for 2018.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now all I need is a three-headed coin to help me decide which one to use on a given night. I love my SCT's, but I'm worried it might become a menage a trois in the meadow on clear nights. :hello2:

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't look like you need saving from anything...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can often persuade scopes to operate beyond their nominal capabilties! :)

I suppose I'm more into Focal Lengths than f-number? [grin] :p
Some of my scopes are not (to say the least) "blisteringly fast".
I've arrived at a stage where I don't need (to many) more...  :D

Edited by Macavity

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Macavity said:

I suppose I'm more into Focal Lengths than f-number? [grin] :p

Well.......if you put it that way, I can image/view at 478mm, 945mm (effective), 1400mm (effective), 1500mm and 2000mm. I'm just thinking of all the different fields of view I'll have at prime focus. This one will be the LAST. Period. No more. I swear. Now it will be guiders, CCD cameras, processing programs, laptops.....:help:

Edited by Luna-tic
  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By R26 oldtimer
      Well, not all just the sw ed80 and ed120.
      I have acquired a taste lately for flat fields and round stars edge to edge. I've never bothered with ff/fr so far, I'd rather spend the money on an extra scope, but I feel I can justify one. But which one, as I would like to improve both my scopes. So it boils down to this: has anyone used either the dedicated sw ff/fr for the ed80 with the Ed120 or the ff/FR for the Ed120 with the  ed80 and got good results? And when I say good, I don't mean great (as with the dedicated one), just better than using the scope with out one.
      If so, which ff/FR did you use to match one scope and slightly improve the other, the ff/fr for the ed80 or the ed120? Perhaps a third party one? (but not too expensive, because it would beat the purpose of buying both the dedicated ones). Something like that: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/stellamira-telescopes/stellamira-2-0-8x-reducer-field-flattener-with-m48-adapter.html ??
      P. S. I am using a Canon 600d dslr
    • By Chinapig
      Have decided to sell my trusty Equinox ED80 refractor.  Sharp optics, smooth two-speed Crayford rotatable focuser, fitted with a finder shoe, and complete with the original Skywatcher case and tripod-threaded mounting bracket.  A 3D-printed Bahtinov mask is included, along with a pair of mounting rings and a Losmandy dovetail plate.
      Collection preferred (Sussex coast, not far from Brighton), payment by bank transfer or cash on collection.
      Looking for £325.00 

    • By tooth_dr
      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!

    • By Stardweller
      I own a Vixen ED-80 refractor which is used with a custom focuser by Telescope Service.
      (pictured below)
      A Celestron f/6 SCT reducer corrector did not provide decent images either because it is not appropriate or because I did not maintain the correct distance. 
      I am thinking of buying the Sky-Watcher .85x Reducer/Flattener instead, as it is made for similar ED80 telescopes. 
      I do not know what is the correct distance of the SkyWatcher reducer for my setup and more important, I do not know if it will focus with the custom TS focuser.
      Do you have any similar setup that you have used successfully?
      Clear Skies!

    • By Miguel1983
      i seem to have a dirty lens on the telescope side of the lens.
      Anyone disasemble this before ?
      I already checked the camera, filter, and focal reducer seperatly, the "staines" are from the telescope-side of the lens (already cleaned the outside of the lens to)
      Flat frame

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.