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.

stargazine_ep9_banner.thumb.jpg.05c1bdd298547fd225896a3d99c9bc17.jpg

Knighter

DSO with sky max 127 mak

Recommended Posts

i use the xyz mount on my binoculars with good results 

but thats nice image 🍻

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Knighter said:

Yes that’s what I thought I have a 7mm to 24mm zoom eyepiece and with the ezxyz phone mount with my iPhone got some great shots with the set up. I think if the zwo mini scope dosent work will bite the bullet and get the off axis setup and be done with it. I will let you know how I get on. 
this is as a picture if the moon with my iPhone and mount 

 

That's a really nice picture. Was this with the zoom eyepiece and if so, at what level of zoom was it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Paul M said:

I too will have a bash at guiding my 127 Mak with the ASI120mm and the 50mm spotter. I suspect it will be ok using my DSLR as the imaging camera but less successful with the ASI178 due to it's smaller sensor.

 

Why do you feel the smaller sensor would require better guiding? My guess (which may be wrong) is that you're thinking the smaller sensor makes you more 'zoomed in,' so giving a more detailed image. It absolutely does not. What matters is the difference in pixel size. In a given scope the system's resolution is controlled by the pixel size. Smaller pixels give higher resolution and so need better seeing and better guiding. If I'm missing your point, here, I apologize.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Why do you feel the smaller sensor would require better guiding? My guess (which may be wrong) is that you're thinking the smaller sensor makes you more 'zoomed in,' so giving a more detailed image. It absolutely does not. What matters is the difference in pixel size. In a given scope the system's resolution is controlled by the pixel size. Smaller pixels give higher resolution and so need better seeing and better guiding. If I'm missing your point, here, I apologize.

Olly

All agreed olly, my terminology is at fault here. I think my understanding is about right.

I was trying to describe my findings from the guiding tool I posted up the thread. I should have said better resolution of the 

That's why I posted the link to that tool; a picture paints a thousand words...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Victor Boesen said:

The FOV of the camera and scope at prime focus should be small enough so you don't need an eyepiece or barlow. Also, I don't even know if you can reach focus through an eyepiece with a ZWO camera?

Short answer: Yes:)

Perfect thank you for the advice 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, sputniksteve said:

That's a really nice picture. Was this with the zoom eyepiece and if so, at what level of zoom was it?

Hi yes it was I think that was around 17mm zoom. It’s difficult to tell as there are no fine markings on the zoom piece to determine the exact mark but roughly 17mm 

  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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