M81-M82 RGB with ASI6200

[Xplode]

Here's a lighly processed image taken with the new ASI6200.

It consists of just RGB data, i have around 15 hours luminance data, but i really like the RGB image alone and it didn't take much work to get to this point.
Getting the LRGB version really great will take many hours to process and won't be ready for a few days.

Mount 10 Micron GM2000
Telescope TOA150B with 645 flattener
R 69x120s
G 63x120s
B 102x120s
Imaged from Askvang Observatory owned by Tommy Linnerud

 

Thanks for any comments

 

Please check the full version, do take note that the full version is half the resolution of the original image, the original is in my opinion too big to upload at over 100MB.

 

M81 crop

 

M82 crop

 

A bunch of galaxies near M82, all the yellow spots are galaxies far away so there's more galaxies than stars here! (this is a crop from the full version)

 

Edited February 22, 2020 by Xplode

[DaveS]

How are you finding this camera? Does it live up to the spec (I nearly said "hype" but it isn't really) regarding amp-glow etc.

I'm really trying to avoid buying one of these as I know I can't truly justify it, but images like this make it very hard.

[Xplode]

The camera is great!
There's no amp glow.

There's 2 problems i need to mention
I see some reflections from brighter stars, i'm pretty sure they come from the cameras front window since they aren't the right size to come from the filters.
I  also found a problem with the filter wheel, the standard driver is set to bidirectional so it doesn't always rotate the same way, this causes stop position to be a little different so flats won't match, it's better when set to unidirectional, but i'm not sure if it's perfect, time will tell.

Something else that isn't really a problem with the camera, but should be taken into consideration is that one needs a powerful computer to process the files, everything takes 4x as long as with 16mpix files most many people are used too so it's time consuming just to wait for the processes to finish when doing changes.

[Laurin Dave]

Very impressive Ole...  Luminance next I assume?   Don't you miss the little diffraction spikes around your stars ..  the reflections on your M45 image are so small they must be off the window,  have you checked with the dust donut calculator?  

Dave

[tomato]

Absolutely stunning widefield image, and plenty of fine detail in the crops, the best of both worlds👍

I can see me raiding the pension pot again, only trouble is I would need two of them, and bigger filters, and a new PC...

[gorann]

Great image(s) Ole Alexander! That camera clearly performs - you just have to live with the file size and be patient

[jjosefsen]

Good lord that is something else!

[Star101]

The imaging is impressive. A lot of detail over a large area. Very nice

Much though I would LOVE one of these large format cameras. My only concern with these large full frame cameras 50+MP stems from when Canon brought out their 50MP DSLR they stated that many lenses were not good enough. Basically the camera showed the flaws in the inferior optics. Extrapolating from this, am I right in thinking that one would need a very good quality optics on the scope to benefit from their large format cameras?

What scope was used to take this image?

 Dave.

Edited February 23, 2020 by Star101
there, their and the're

[Xplode]

35 minutes ago, Star101 said:

The imaging is impressive. A lot of detail over a large area. Very nice

Much though I would LOVE one of these large format cameras. My only concern with these large full frame cameras 50+MP stems from when Canon brought out their 50MP DSLR they stated that many lenses were not good enough. Basically the camera showed the flaws in the inferior optics. Extrapolating from this, am I right in thinking that one would need a very good quality optics on the scope to benefit from their large format cameras?

What scope was used to take this image?

 Dave.

It's taken through a TOA150B with a TOA-67FL flattener which has a 90mm image circle.
The small pixels and large sensor will definitely need good optics to get sharp stars to the corners.


Thanks for all the comments

[DaveS]

The figure to think about is arcsec / pixel. As an example, for my 130mm f/7 at 910mm I get 0.85"pp. Can your mount guide to half this value? My DDM60 can, and the DDM85 most certainly can.

Also I dare say most camera lenses have so many compromises that they return a Strehl value that would be treated with derision on this forum.

 

The other think to consider is binning, at bin 2 this gives a more manageable 1.7"pp and around 15 mp resolution.

Edited February 23, 2020 by DaveS

[Xplode]

1 minute ago, DaveS said:

The figure to think about is arcsec / pixel. As an example, for my 130mm f/7 at 910mm I get 0.83"pp. Can your mount guide to half this value? My DDM60 can, and the DDM85 most certainly can.

Also I dare say most camera lenses have so many compromises that they return a Strehl value that would be treated with derision on this forum.

Some scopes don't have good enough field flatteners/focal reducers for very tight stars in the corners.

The system this was taken with doesn't use guiding, i've seen RMS 0.21" over a 5 minute period when testing guiding through the ASI6200, haven't really tested much more than that time thou.
It's certainly more than good enough for running unguided at 0.7" which TOA150B/ASI6200 gives.

[DaveS]

Sorry Ole, my question was rhetorical and aimed at a general audience. My DDM mounts don't need guiding either and are certainly capable of that sort of tracking accuracy.

[Xplode]

Thanks for all the comments!
A HaLRGB version should be ready in a couple of days