Redcat Help

[ThomasF1234]

Hi I have the redcat 51 and use a canon 650D. I took this picture of the Orion Nebula but when I compare it to everyone else’s photos (even people using a redcat too) it looks much more zoomed in on the nebula than mine. Is there something I’m not doing right or is it a matter of zooming in when editing? Thanks

[happy-kat]

It might be a case of more data needed to be able to stretch out the extended detail

Though when comparing star positions your image looks wider still. I did select a canon 700d as there wasn't a 650d in the list but I think the sensor and pixel size are the same, I think I'll check again.

Edit. Same size pixels

 

Edited March 2, 2021 by happy-kat

[scotty38]

For what it’s worth here’s one I took on my GT81 at 380mm with flattener and aps sized sensor.  I accept its slightly longer than a Redcat but not that much longer really....

 

 

[ThomasF1234]

2 hours ago, happy-kat said:

It might be a case of more data needed to be able to stretch out the extended detail

Though when comparing star positions your image looks wider still. I did select a canon 700d as there wasn't a 650d in the list but I think the sensor and pixel size are the same, I think I'll check again.

Edit. Same size pixels

 

I did think that as I only took 25 5 second exposure photos maybe longer exposure and more photos will do the trick 

[ThomasF1234]

53 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

For what it’s worth here’s one I took on my GT81 at 380mm with flattener and aps sized sensor.  I accept its slightly longer than a Redcat but not that much longer really....

 

 

Very nice, when I compare to mine, my image seems really sort of zoomed out compared to yours. Is there some sort of trick to getting it more like yours?

[scotty38]

Nope I don't think so, its size is as it was shot so that size sensor and scope should give you that size image if you see what I mean., I've not cropped it or anything like that.

[ThomasF1234]

52 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Nope I don't think so, its size is as it was shot so that size sensor and scope should give you that size image if you see what I mean., I've not cropped it or anything like that.

The only thing I can think is to take longer exposure images to try and capture more of nebula or maybe it could be down to light pollution I’m not sure, I was happy with the image just I would like to see more of the nebula in it 

[Astro Waves]

Hiya, 

I'm also a redact user shooting on an unmodded Canon 5D MK III. I always do a bit of cropping as 250mm focal length is very wide field in astrophotography terms. Its always worth having a look at tutorials online and watch peoples processes with the same telescope and see what they do, I find that a good starting point of what to shoot. Chances are you're always going to be cropping into an image some what. You've also got a crop sensor on the 650D which I would say helps as well.

 

For reference this is a cropped in image I got the other day of the Orion Nebula, this was about 25 minutes of integration time. Subs were 90 secs.....I think.

[ThomasF1234]

1 hour ago, Astro Waves said:

Hiya, 

I'm also a redact user shooting on an unmodded Canon 5D MK III. I always do a bit of cropping as 250mm focal length is very wide field in astrophotography terms. Its always worth having a look at tutorials online and watch peoples processes with the same telescope and see what they do, I find that a good starting point of what to shoot. Chances are you're always going to be cropping into an image some what. You've also got a crop sensor on the 650D which I would say helps as well.

 

For reference this is a cropped in image I got the other day of the Orion Nebula, this was about 25 minutes of integration time. Subs were 90 secs.....I think.

Very nice! I’m starting to think my exposures weren’t long enough only 5 seconds which would explain why I cant see most of the nebula and only the centre which made me think it was more ‘zoomed out’

[scotty38]

Apologies, I'd not spotted they were only 5 second exposure so yeah I'd say you need a fair bit more to start with. Mine were 5 minutes I think.

[Astro Waves]

Thanks

I'm also starting out on this awesome journey that blows my mind!

I'm always comparing what I've done to other people, which is good so you can see what can be done but also can sometimes feel a bit disheartening but personally I feel half the battle is  definitely the editing side of things, which I'm still getting used to. I'll try various tutorials from different people to see what works on what image, its just as time consuming as the actually photography itself. 

Are you using a tracking mount? If not then you'll just have to take a lot a lot of shorter exposures and stack them. 

[ThomasF1234]

1 hour ago, scotty38 said:

Apologies, I'd not spotted they were only 5 second exposure so yeah I'd say you need a fair bit more to start with. Mine were 5 minutes I think.

Yeah thanks!

[ThomasF1234]

1 hour ago, Astro Waves said:

Thanks

I'm also starting out on this awesome journey that blows my mind!

I'm always comparing what I've done to other people, which is good so you can see what can be done but also can sometimes feel a bit disheartening but personally I feel half the battle is  definitely the editing side of things, which I'm still getting used to. I'll try various tutorials from different people to see what works on what image, its just as time consuming as the actually photography itself. 

Are you using a tracking mount? If not then you'll just have to take a lot a lot of shorter exposures and stack them. 

I used a ZWO 120mm guide camera using PHD2, it was my first time tracking so I was quite pleased with that side of things. Sometimes it can be disheartening but when you finally get the results it’s so rewarding. For editing I would like to use photoshop but for the minute I use gimp. There is some good tutorials for there if you haven’t already checked it out!

[scotty38]

Also have a look at Affinity Photo as it now has astro features included and it's about £25 at the minute I think.

[Astro Waves]

46 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

Also have a look at Affinity Photo as it now has astro features included and it's about £25 at the minute I think.

Totally agree on this. I use Affinity Photo, there's also some super great tutorials on astro editing by James Ritson specifically for Affinity Photo. Anything that is subscription based paying like Photoshop really not a fan off but that's mainly on principle. You get the free updates and its a one off payment.

 

I haven't moved onto the guiding stage of things yet so can't really comment on how easy or difficult that is but hopefully soon!

 

 

[scotty38]

Yep James’ tutorials are pretty good, he definitely knows the products inside out.

[ThomasF1234]

14 hours ago, scotty38 said:

Also have a look at Affinity Photo as it now has astro features included and it's about £25 at the minute I think.

Thanks I will check that out