Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Flame & B33 Horses Head Nebula

Darth Takahashi

By Darth Takahashi
in Imaging - Deep Sky

Recommended Posts

Darth Takahashi

Darth Takahashi

Posted
Posted

I've struggled with this target for a long time now. It seem that a lot of things have conpired against me, including the weather. Anyway this is my best attempt so far at capturing the Flame and Horse Head Nebula.

Telescope : TOA130F

Camera : D1MIII

Filter : Astronomik CLS

Integration : 5x 20min subs

11895_normal.jpeg

(click to enlarge)

I'm also sure that I'm running into my processing limitations...

Most of this was processed using MaxIm DL5 (Calibration, Alignment & stacking) and then finished in PhotoShop (Curves & layers)

I hope you like it, Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brendant

brendant

Posted
Posted

That's a really nice image Neil :thumbright: , there is lots more data in there to be extracted.

Hope you don't mind but had a quick tweak in Photoshop. In "Channels" tweaked the midpoint of up to enhance the reds and ran through Noise Ninja to reduce the noise.

Brendan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Takahashi

Darth Takahashi

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the replies and adjustments to the image so far. For the record, I don't mind anyone adjusting the images that I post so long as you let me know what you did of course. Thats why I'm here - to share and learn too.

I'm not convinced that more subs will help me? The reason is that I'm sure that I'm running in to the limitation of my unmodified camera. The 1DMIII makes an excellent jobs of the brighter M42 but it doesn't seem to be able to cut it with IC434 & B33. I'm never going to mod the 1DMIII but buying a second hand 400D isn't out of scope.

The question that I'm asking myself now is what would a modified camera bring to the table, just how much more detail could I expect to see? Especially with these predominately H alpha regions?

Is anyone using a modified Canon and what would be your advise?

Neil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Takahashi

Darth Takahashi

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have followed the link, its very interesting, however wouldn't it be good to place three images side by side...

STD DSLR, MOD DSLR & RGB CCD

Your image of IC434 & B33 is better than mine since it definitely has more contrast. The question for me is does it contain more detail and if so how much more? Finally, how does that compare against a comparable CCD (large sensor) camera?

I have seen a lot of these modified camera's on the internet for sale and I just wonder whether or not its appeal will last?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brendant

brendant

Posted
Posted

Neil, as Billy says hard to fault a modded camera if bang for the buck is what you are after, you get a relatively sensitive instrument with a large sensor relatively cheaply (specific models such as the Canon 20Da or modded 40D's are superb instruments). Of course a good CCD is going to beat it for sensitivity but as with most things you get what you pay, The results achievable from DSLR's given enough exposure can almost match CCD's but certainly require significantly more exposure for a given object.

I definitely think your image can get more depth and detail with more exposure, I don't think you have reached the limit of diminishing returns yet, more exposures of shorter duration may yield a better result combined with longer exposures. There is a thought that with DSLR's that you need at least 40 subs to average noise properly to maximise the SNR. given your 5 x 20min subs your kit is certainly first class, don't see many people using D1's so it is an interesting combination,

It would be even more interesting to see what a modded version of this camera was capable of, an expensive camera to modify, would certainly be a better bet to buy a dedicated CCD given its cost.

Brendan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Takahashi

Darth Takahashi

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Billy and Brendan,

Thanks for your inputs, I'm listening, its just given all the variables of astrophotography its a difficult decision to make!

Its interesting what you said about averaging 40 subs because I've being going in the opposite direction, striving to get the longest exposures possible. Perhaps the only thing I'm achieving is to raise the background signal. Its just with our weather we don't get many opportunities to gather our image data.

Anyway, I've decided to try and pickup a second hand 450D in Japan and mod it.

The only thing I'm still undecided about it whether or not to mod it myself :)

Cheers Neil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psychobilly

Psychobilly

Posted
Posted

go for it...

I did my 350D myself... the 1000D is even easier to mod and has much lower noise levels and better battery life ... havent done my 1000D.......yet.....

My latest thinking sub wise with the modded DSLR is 180s at ISO800 and lots of them....chuck in a few at 360S ISO800 and perhaps some 180 and 360s at ISO1600...

Billy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brendant

brendant

Posted
Posted

An excellent decision Neil, the 450D is a very capable camera for Astro work, as to modding it is just a question of how brave you are or wheather you pass the risk to another. Generally the optimum ISO range on the Canon's is ISO400-800, with your tracking capability ISO400 will yield less noise albeit requiring longer total exposure.

Brendan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.