Squid

[tooth_dr]

The Squid and Flying Bat, heavily downsided to disguise what can only be described as an agricultural attempt at processing.

I used the NBZ filter in the APM 105/650 scope with a 0.75x reducer and ZWO 2600MC.  I took a good few 300s subs at Gain 100 over 3 or 4 nights.

I'll definitely come back to this when I brush up on my processing, and I've addressed some tilt issues since I took this data, so looking forward to a good season ahead 🤞

 

Adam.

 

 

[Sunshine]

A wonderful image!

[paul mc c]

That's class... 

[Craney]

Well done Adam, that is such a difficult target.

I have had 5 hours of OIII with my Samyang 135mm and not a trace of the slippery beast.

[tomato]

An excellent Squid,  may I ask what a ‘good few 300 sec subs’ amounts to in total integration time?

[tooth_dr]

17 minutes ago, tomato said:

An excellent Squid,  may I ask what a ‘good few 300 sec subs’ amounts to in total integration time?

I think it was about 16 hours. I did have an additional 20 hours with my Epsilon in pure Oiii (4nm) with the mono camera but there wasn’t a hint of it.  So I’m not sure whether it was imaging in Sii instead or something wrong with the filter. 

[tomato]

Thanks, I got 4 hrs on it last year from my Bortle 5 location with  a RASA8 and a NBX/QHY268c, but it was barely visible even after stretching it to death.

I am surprised that 20 hrs of Oiii with your Epsilon didn’t deliver something.

[tooth_dr]

1 hour ago, tomato said:

Thanks, I got 4 hrs on it last year from my Bortle 5 location with  a RASA8 and a NBX/QHY268c, but it was barely visible even after stretching it to death.

I am surprised that 20 hrs of Oiii with your Epsilon didn’t deliver something.

I was very disappointed, I'll see if I can upload it later for opinions, but I'm fairly certain (cant be 100% certain as I didnt open the wheel and check) that it was on Oiii, as I was imaging over 4 night, and the first night Ha worked ok.  I've sent the filters back and will replace them with the normal narrow version. 

[tooth_dr]

@tomato

Image 1 is the Oiii data stacked, from the Epsilon QHY268 mono, F2.8, 4nm bandpass

Image 2 is the Oiii data stacked, from the APM 150/650 ZWO2600 colour, F4.85, wider bandpass.

100% the Epsilon should have a ton more data, but it doesnt.

 

 

[gorann]

That is a great squid Adam, especially at f/4.6! The ASI2600MC - NBZ combo is really something else. But it is of course very odd that your Epsilon did not do better with a mono version of the same sensor. Was the 4nm Oiii filter made for fast telescopes? If not the Oiii may have fallen outside the bandwidth.

PS. I recently had an attempt on processing Telescope Live data from Spain on the Squid. It included 37 hours of Oiii with a Tak 106EDX4 (f/3.6) and a FLI PL16083 CCD. It was more noisy and showed less details than my 6 hours with the RASA8 - ASI2600MC - NBX.

Edited September 22, 2021 by gorann

[tooth_dr]

4 minutes ago, gorann said:

That is a great squid Adam, especially at f/4.6! The ASI2600MC - NBZ combo is really something else. But it is of course very odd that your Epsilon did not do better with a mono version of the same sensor. Was the 4nm Oiii filter made for fast telescopes? If not the Oiii may have fallen outside the bandwidth.

Thanks Goran. 100% it was your experience of the NBX/NBZ that prompted me you but it. Yes it was the special ultra narrow high speed CMOS filters designed for Epsilon etc.  I’ve returned them, unfortunately skies didn’t clear to test again.

https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/baader-3.5--4nm--f2-ultra-highspeed-filter-set-–-cmos-optimized-(h-alpha--o-iii--s-ii).html

[gorann]

24 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Thanks Goran. 100% it was your experience of the NBX/NBZ that prompted me you but it. Yes it was the special ultra narrow high speed CMOS filters designed for Epsilon etc.  I’ve returned them, unfortunately skies didn’t clear to test again.

https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/baader-3.5--4nm--f2-ultra-highspeed-filter-set-–-cmos-optimized-(h-alpha--o-iii--s-ii).html

Good to know - I was almost tempted to get some of those CMOS optimized although I have hard to understand how a filter can be optimized for CMOS rathern than CCD.

[Adam J]

32 minutes ago, gorann said:

That is a great squid Adam, especially at f/4.6! The ASI2600MC - NBZ combo is really something else. But it is of course very odd that your Epsilon did not do better with a mono version of the same sensor. Was the 4nm Oiii filter made for fast telescopes? If not the Oiii may have fallen outside the bandwidth.

No something would have to be more significantly wrong than just that as the low speed filters will still pass the centre of the light cone and so should do as well as the slower scope. Remember it's all to do with the angle of incidence on the filter and the light cone covers a range. Hence it would not be optimised but you would still expect to see something. 

[tomato]

Indeed, it looks like a lot more of the available light is being blocked on the first image.

[Adam J]

7 minutes ago, gorann said:

Good to know - I was almost tempted to get some of those CMOS optimized although I have hard to understand how a filter can be optimized for CMOS rathern than CCD.

It's just marketing. Basically CMOS sensors have higher surface reflectivity and so benefit more from better AR coatings (which are still better on AD and chroma anyway). Hence they have attempted to improve those. The naming is simply marketing to convince you that you need to upgrade, when if you are not suffering from reflections in the first place the benefits of the wider set at least will be marginal. 

Edited September 22, 2021 by Adam J

[gorann]

33 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Thanks Goran. 100% it was your experience of the NBX/NBZ that prompted me you but it. Yes it was the special ultra narrow high speed CMOS filters designed for Epsilon etc.  I’ve returned them, unfortunately skies didn’t clear to test again.

https://www.baader-planetarium.com/en/baader-3.5--4nm--f2-ultra-highspeed-filter-set-–-cmos-optimized-(h-alpha--o-iii--s-ii).html

Adam, maybe you could post a tif-file of the Epsilon Oiii data - maybe someone can find a squid in it. It would be a fun challenge.

[teoria_del_big_bang]

What a great image, I love this target 🙂 

Steve

[tooth_dr]

16 minutes ago, gorann said:

Adam, maybe you could post a tif-file of the Epsilon Oiii data - maybe someone can find a squid in it. It would be a fun challenge.

SQUID_QHYCCD-Cameras-Capture_300sec_1x1_-10C_gain_56_268_033-2.fit

Here it is

[gorann]

10 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

SQUID_QHYCCD-Cameras-Capture_300sec_1x1_-10C_gain_56_268_033-2.fit 50.44 MB · 2 downloads

Here it is

You are perfectly right Adam - there is absolutely no Squid in that data. I did 8 incremental stretches until I hit severe noise and also checked each stretch with Equalize in PS. Maybe your initial suspicion of accidentally using a Sii filter could be correct?

[tooth_dr]

27 minutes ago, gorann said:

You are perfectly right Adam - there is absolutely no Squid in that data. I did 8 incremental stretches until I hit severe noise and also checked each stretch with Equalize in PS. Maybe your initial suspicion of accidentally using a Sii filter could be correct?

Thanks for checking Goran, much appreciated.  It is most likely that it did choose the wrong filter, but I do find it hard to believe that a perfectly working filter wheel can choose the wrong filter 3 separate nights in a row.  I'll never know now though!

[Adam J]

On 22/09/2021 at 15:32, tooth_dr said:

Thanks for checking Goran, much appreciated.  It is most likely that it did choose the wrong filter, but I do find it hard to believe that a perfectly working filter wheel can choose the wrong filter 3 separate nights in a row.  I'll never know now though!

To be honest looking at relative star brightness I think they are both OIII. The red giant  star to he 2 o'clock of the central bright star would be much brighter if this was SII and not OIII. 

[tooth_dr]

13 minutes ago, Adam J said:

To be honest looking at relative star brightness I think they are both OIII. The red giant  star to he 2 o'clock of the central bright star would be much brighter if this was SII and not OIII. 

Cheers Adam, I cant think how it could be anything other than Oiii.  One night perhaps erroneously the wheel could have went to the wrong position, but not three separate nights.

[TakMan]

Hi Adam

I too took a look at your uploaded .tif file. Both in APP and Ps and found nothing....

I presume (looking at the noise in it), the .tif was a just a single frame and not the combined stack..?

Is it really plausible that the FW travelled to different positions on different nights.... even after a computer restart each nightly session (I wouldn't think you'd keep the gear running continually)..?

Does your wheel 'click' like my Atik..? If so, I bet you've already tested it to see if it lands back in the same place after multiple moves - the Atik EFW3 'double clicks' at the beginning of each new revolution....

I decided to send the 3 filters back (wasn't happy with the Ha hard edged halo nor the massive OIII halo thing. The SII actually appeared to perform quite well, but just decided to get my money back and formulate a way forward... probably an expensive Chroma purchase!)

Good ole Steve/FLO/Ann for their excellent customer service as usual.

Hope you find your new set better.

Damian

Edited September 24, 2021 by TakMan

[Adam J]

It's a funny thing as the old Baader narrow band filters where always really reliable and although not the narrowest they had some advantages over the likes of optolong and ZWO, out of band blocking for one. It would not be good if they have removed the old filters and replaced with a less consistent offering. 

[gorann]

On 24/09/2021 at 19:51, Adam J said:

It's a funny thing as the old Baader narrow band filters where always really reliable and although not the narrowest they had some advantages over the likes of optolong and ZWO, out of band blocking for one. It would not be good if they have removed the old filters and replaced with a less consistent offering. 

Maybe Baader messed up and put the wrong filter in the wrong holder or box?