Maxrayne Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 First serious attempt at this after accidentally getting it at 55mm six months ago. It's not great, need a lot more data, but I'm happy enough for a first go. Apologies for the quality. Not on my laptop atm and my Lightroom isn't syncing with mobile properly. Technical Card: --------------------- Capture Date: 16/12/2018 Sky Quality: 5 Target: M101 Pinwheel Galaxy Location: Ursa Major Right Ascension: 14h 03m 12.6s Declination: +54° 20′ 57″ Apparent Magnitude: 7.86 Estimated Age: N/K Estimated Distance: 21 million light years Mount: SW SA Tracked/Guided: Tracked Guidecam: N/A Guidescope: N/A Imaging Device: SW ST102T Capture Device: Nikon D5300 (unmodded) Focal Length: 500mm Aperture: f / 9.5 ISO: 1600 Sub Length: 45 seconds No of exposures: 56 Darks: 5 Flats: Nil Bias: Nil Total Integration Time: 2520 seconds Capture Software: N/A Stacking Software: Sequator Editing Software: LightRoom Playlist: Sleeping With Sarah Brightman via Spotify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mc c Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 Nice one,and a faint fuzzy in the top corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demonperformer Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 Good start. As you say, needs a LOT more data. When I used a DSLR I was never sure if darks made things better or worse - if they are not matched to the chip temperature (which can vary during a session) they will add noise rather than remove it. Also, on my Canon, ISO 1600 was massively more noisy than ISO 800 - it might be worth doing some experimenting on how noisy a given sub-length is at various ISOs. I know reducing the ISO will mean increased basic imaging time, but with the reduced number of subs you need to get rid of the noise it may well work out to be time-efficient. But, bearing all that in mind, I repeat my original comment - good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxrayne Posted December 20, 2018 Author Share Posted December 20, 2018 2 hours ago, Demonperformer said: Good start. As you say, needs a LOT more data. When I used a DSLR I was never sure if darks made things better or worse - if they are not matched to the chip temperature (which can vary during a session) they will add noise rather than remove it. Also, on my Canon, ISO 1600 was massively more noisy than ISO 800 - it might be worth doing some experimenting on how noisy a given sub-length is at various ISOs. I know reducing the ISO will mean increased basic imaging time, but with the reduced number of subs you need to get rid of the noise it may well work out to be time-efficient. But, bearing all that in mind, I repeat my original comment - good start. Didn't even see that fuzzy up there. I know there's another one in the original image but it's lost in the vignette (not gotten around to learning flats yet) ISO 800 seems to be good for this Nikon when stacking, and the darks are definitely making a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.