Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
So, although I had some issues with my auto guiding (which I found out afterwards) I did manage to get 9x180s exposures and 5 darks of Andromeda and give both stacking (using DSS) and processing (using GIMP).
My first attempted DSO....
I am pretty sure that people could get far more information out of the TIFF file from the stack.
Hopefully I will get another clear night soon. I am in a heavily light polluted area so I do have a clip in filter on my DSLR which I think took a lot away.
More practise needed!
Having had to move to an apartment where I could not use my CPC 1100, I decided that I have to see what I could do with my NexStar SLT 102 (alt-az achromatic 102mm f6.47 refractor). Setting up on my narrow balcony was challenging and the altitude bearing was so loose that it almost moved from the weight of the Canon 700D. I could not see M31 in the estimated 3.5 magnitude sky so I did a two star alignment and used the live-view to focus on a bright star. I then took a 15 second exposure after slewing to M31 which allowed me to see that I had it in the field of view. After a few more 15 second exposures and playing with the motion controls I managed to get it centered. The resulting picture is from 39 subs of 30 seconds at ISO 1600, 9 flats. The images were stacked and stretched with Siril and then I played with the curves on Gimp, cropped and scaled. Not too unhappy.
Hey.. So last night i went to a beach that had one side completely dark ,and the other filed with light pollution . In the dark side,the milky way gqlaxy was pretty obvious and the sky was full of stars. Andromeda was rising and i wanted to take a peak, however , it was low on the horizon and had a slight haze(skyglow).It wasn't visible with the naked eye and in my 10x50 binoculars i could just resolve the core.
I heard Andromeda would be visible with the naked eye as its mag 3.3. But the milkyway was and Andromeda wasnt.What went wrong?
I have just joined and have been looking around, and putting in various searches to find the answer to my question(s).
I have already found some valuable information, but i can't find a specific answer to a question i have relating to exposure times.
I have shot the milky way several times before, from a tripod and a wide angle lens. I am aware of and understand the "500 rule" and that worked fine for me at first when i was shooting with my Canon 6D Mark II. When i moved over to the Sony A7III i noticed significant trailing using the same rule and that led me to the NPF rule (Via the photopills app incase people dot know).
I am heading back to Tenerife once again in about 6 weeks time and want to buy a star tracker so i can get some really detailed images.
I have done a fair bit of research and in principle, the whole thing doesn't seem to be too daunting or difficult.
I have purchased the Polar Scope Align Pro app so i can align Polaris as accurately as possible, i will practise putting the unit together and familiarising myself with the different parts etc, but it is the exposure times that i do not understand.
My best glass is the Carl Ziess 50mm F/1.4 Planar, the 18mm F/2.8 Batis, the Sigma 35mm F/1.4 Art & the IRIX 15mm F/2.4 Blackstone.
I currently do not own, nor have i ever used a tracker, and I cannot find any information relating to which aperture, ISO and Shutter length any of these focal lengths should or could be shot at.
Is there anything similar to the 500 rule or NPF rule that relates to using a tracker with varied focal lengths? or is it just a case of stepping the lens down for sharpness and then trial and error?
Thanks in advance,