ASI 1600 vs ASI 2600

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, ONIKKINEN said:

Well that i dont believe, there will always be starcores visible in any kind of condiitons. I image mostly from B6-8 type skies (depending on Moon, transparency, direction of imaging etc) exclusively with 30s subs and there are always stars. Also imaging with an 8 inch F4.2 newtonian and an OSC camera. Also, i have an in progress project where i try to image IFN from the afore mentioned conditions. At 5 hours in i can separate the IFN from the background but it is obviously very noisy and requires at least double or triple the exposure to reach a decent result. You can do the math yourself how long that would take for a hard Bortle 8 location and figure out why people dont do that. But not impossible.

Honestly i think you're trolling here. You have been given evidence left and right and it just seems that you want to move the goalposts so outrageously to your favour that nobody can actually prove their point to you. I mean you can see extremely faint signal in your own profile picture (assuming you took it yourself) that would be impossible from your arguments.

Profile image….no lum.  I did not say 30 sec.  I said less than 10 sec I have trouble aligning.  I am no longer following that thread so don’t bother responding to me.  Have at it with others

[Xilman]

9 hours ago, Rodd said:

Why lapalma. Why not from our soupy skies?

Because my kit is permanently mounted in an observatory there. See www.astropalma.com for more detail.

[Xilman]

9 hours ago, Rodd said:

Could be an accident. It might be a blob coincidentally in the right spot

Given that the other blobs in the image which are of similar intensity can all be matched up with stars and background galaxies visible in the likes of SDSS and POSS2, it would have to be a most remarkable coincidence.

I went to quite a lot of care with the analysis of that image.