Mars with 200PDS 4/9/2020

[AbsolutelyN]

Had another go at Mars this morning after fiddling with EQMod for an hour trying to understand what was up with it... it lost all config so was pointing at ground thinking it was on the equator. 
This time used a 120MM mini with EFW and RGB and IR filters rather than one shot colour as I've never tried mono on a planet. The 850nm IR filter really adds contrast. Seeing was not particularly good, mars was bouncing about all over but grabbed a few clips and combined into this images with 4 colour versions and 1 IR. 

Currently using a 3x televue barlow so 3000mm on 200pds. Any idea if there would there be anything to gain by adding a 2x to the 3x or switching to a 5x barlow? 

Second attempt at best image:

Oriented correctly.

Edited September 4, 2020 by AbsolutelyN

[CraigT82]

Very nice set of images, nicely done. My preference is for the top left image as that seems to be least affected by the edge rind effect, which i think is worst on the IR and is being introduced by that into the IRRGB images. 

You could try combining the IR with the RGB but masking the limb so that it brings through the detail of the IR on the disc but not the edge effect? 

[AbsolutelyN]

4 minutes ago, CraigT82 said:

Very nice set of images, nicely done. My preference is for the top left image as that seems to be least affected by the edge rind effect, which i think is worst on the IR and is being introduced by that into the IRRGB images. 

You could try combining the IR with the RGB but masking the limb so that it brings through the detail of the IR on the disc but not the edge effect? 

Thanks. Yes that's the most natural. Processed them a bit quick before work, I'm wondering if that one is RGB and the others are IRRGB as I added IR to most. I'll have a go at re-processing later with a bit more control. 

[si@nite]

A lovely collection of shots there, agree with the above, top left is the best rendition imo well done!

[baggywrinkle]

Great images and better detail than with my colour camera. I have ordered some filters.

[AbsolutelyN]

Another version based on the best of above but I've tried to get more detail in from the IR image. Not sure if it's an improvement or not.  

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by AbsolutelyN

[skyhog]

Very nice set of images. 

Ed

[morimarty]

I think that is a cracking image. A 5x barlow should put you in the ballpark.

[MarsG76]

Great images.... way better than the rubbish seeing and transparency I'm experiencing here is letting me capture.

[AbsolutelyN]

12 hours ago, baggywrinkle said:

Great images and better detail than with my colour camera. I have ordered some filters.

My 224MC did a respectable job the other night and you can use an IR filter with it. I'm going to try colour again with the IR filter. 

[AbsolutelyN]

1 hour ago, MarsG76 said:

Great images.... way better than the rubbish seeing and transparency I'm experiencing here is letting me capture.

You should see the quick snap of Jupiter I just tried .... nothing more than a blob! Might try to wake around 3am again for another crack at Mars - at least that's quite high in the sky. 

[AbsolutelyN]

1 hour ago, morimarty said:

I think that is a cracking image. A 5x barlow should put you in the ballpark.

Thanks, I suspected I need more focal length to go forwards. I might need to save for one as just pulled the trigger on a 250PDS to get a bit more aperture, wish I could afford a C11. Might need to have a go with a 3x plus a 2x until then.  I keep seeing huge f numbers on really good images and I'm only at f/15 with the 200PDS. 

Edited September 4, 2020 by AbsolutelyN

[JamesF]

2 minutes ago, AbsolutelyN said:

Thanks, I suspected I need more focal length to go forwards. I might need to save for one as just pulled the trigger on a 250PDS to get a bit more aperture, wish I could afford a C11. Might need to have a go with a 3x plus a 2x until then.  I keep seeing huge f numbers on really good images and I'm only at f/15 with the 200PDS. 

As more sensitive cameras with smaller pixel sizes have become available I think those f-numbers have come down over the years.  I certainly recall that when I started getting into planetary imaging there were people quite regularly working on the high side of f/40.

James

[AbsolutelyN]

1 minute ago, JamesF said:

As more sensitive cameras with smaller pixel sizes have become available I think those f-numbers have come down over the years.  I certainly recall that when I started getting into planetary imaging there were people quite regularly working on the high side of f/40.

James

That's interesting thanks, which camera is a the best at the moment? I've always wanted a 183MM which I suspect would double up as planetary and deep sky.

[JamesF]

There was a time when the ASI290MM was considered the canine's cojones for planetary imaging.  I don't know if any of the cameras released in the last couple of years have improved on that.

Personally, and despite the assurances that they can be removed in processing, I've taken exception to the nasty amp glow and other artefacts present on many recent "deep sky" CMOS cameras.  I'll be sticking with my CCDs for a little while yet I think.  This is a purely personal decision though

James