Sol in H⍺ - 18 March 2022

[Hughsie]

Presented below is a selection of active regions on the solar disc during the morning of 18 March 2022.

 

Equipment

- Lunt 60mm DS TH⍺/B1200CPT solar scope.

- Celestron AVX mount.

- ZWO ASI174mm camera.

- Tele Vue 4x Powermate.

 

Software

- Sharpcap Pro used for data acquisition.

- AutoStakkert3! for stacking of individual frames.

- ImPPG used to invert images.

- Remainder of processing was undertaken using PixInsight. 

 

Image 1 - The full solar disc revealing the active regions and some nice proms on the south west limb. Exposure time 5.5ms, gain 50.

 

 

Image 2 - AR12965 decaying and drifting out of view. Classified FAO, this region at its peak contained 34 sunspots but today this had reduced to 6. Exposure time 21ms, gain 189.

 

 

Image 3 - AR12967. Classified AXX, this region contains just a single sunspot. Exposure time 18.5ms, gain 189.

 

 

Image 4 - AR12968. Exposure time 19.5ms, gain 189. Apologies, but I have incorrectly labelled this as AR12970.

 

 

Image 5 - AR12971. Classified BXO, this region consists of two sunspots. Exposure time 21ms, gain 189.

 

 

Thank you for dropping by.

 

John

 

[Sunshine]

Fantastic images!

[MosquitoMk30]

A very impressive set of images; thank you for sharing.   I’m curious to know what criteria you use to determine whether or not to use the Lunt versus the Quark (having just ordered the latter.)  I guess you could describe me as a pre-noobie, having only just started to assemble the necessary hardware and about to start my journey into Ha solar imaging. I suspect one Ha imaging “rig” will never be enough. 
 

Kind regards,

Richard

[Hughsie]

2 hours ago, MosquitoMk30 said:

A very impressive set of images; thank you for sharing.   I’m curious to know what criteria you use to determine whether or not to use the Lunt versus the Quark (having just ordered the latter.)  I guess you could describe me as a pre-noobie, having only just started to assemble the necessary hardware and about to start my journey into Ha solar imaging. I suspect one Ha imaging “rig” will never be enough. 
 

Kind regards,

Richard

First the Quark will provide you with the opportunity to capture some great images. I have one and should use it more but here are the reasons why I prefer the Lunt;

1) The Quark has a built in 4.2x telecentric Barlow. Depending on what refractor/camera you pair it with, full solar disc imaging may not be possible and so you need to produce mosaics and combine to achieve a full disc. My Lunt and ASI174mm produce full discs straight off the bat.

2) Flexibility. I start my imaging session taking a full disc image. I then add a 2.5x Powermate to capture closer but ‘wider fov’ images of areas of activity, stepping up to a 4x Powermate for closer views. The Quark just has its internal Barlow. I guess you could add another but I have rarely seen this done.

3) Tuning. With a pressure tuned Lunt it’s a simple case of turning the knob to achieve the darkest measure on the histogram for a given exposure/gain. When double stacked, I then adjust the histogram to achieve the lightest setting after adding the extra filter. Sounds complicated but it can be done in under a minute. With a Quark you have 6 or so settings and the filter needs to get up to temperature. This can take 10-15 minutes. When trying to image on a partly cloudy day this can be a pain when the sky is clear as the Quark warms up then you find it’s cloudy when it hits temperature.

4) Ambient temperature. In the Summer the Quark can shift off band as the filter further heats up. You then have to re-adjust tuning and wait.

5) Filter lottery. The filter inside the Quark are not necessarily the best. I have read stories on this forum and others of not all Quarks being created equal. I have not personally experienced this.

6) Energy Rejection Filter (ERF). I have used my Quark on both a William Optics Z61 and Z103 APO refractors. I would not want to use a Quark for any long period observation on the Z103 without adding an ERF on the front of the scope. A good quality ERF will cost c£500 to fit a 100mm aperture, admittedly cheaper for smaller ERF’s. It’s not a mandatory purchase but something worth considering if you are pairing the Quark with a quality APO refractor.

7) Double stacking. The cost is horrific to add another filter to the Lunt but once you bite that bullet, wow the level of extra detail puts a smile on my face every time. 

In summary, the extra cost of the Lunt provides more flexibility and convenience but it doesn’t fit everyone’s budget. Richard, if the Quark fits your budget stick with it as now the Sun is firmly back into its active cycle it will give you great views of our star.

Looking forward to seeing your images soon and welcome to the ‘light’ side!

[MosquitoMk30]

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to respond; it’s most generous. I’ve been seduced by the slightly high(er)-res images and for that reason chose to dip a toe with a relatively low cost Skywatcher Evostar 120 ED DS Pro, ASI 174MM, IR/UV cut filter, tilt adaptor and hopefully, a reasonable example of a Quark with a small-ish budget. I certainly foresee a time when I absolutely “need” to have a Lunt DS (financial controller permitting) but in the meantime I have a lot to learn and mistakes to make. I’m looking forward to everyone of them. Thank you again. 
Cheers,
Richard

[skybadger]

On 20/03/2022 at 07:35, Hughsie said:

First the Quark will provide you with the opportunity to capture some great images. I have one and should use it more but here are the reasons why I prefer the Lunt;

1) The Quark has a built in 4.2x telecentric Barlow. Depending on what refractor/camera you pair it with, full solar disc imaging may not be possible and so you need to produce mosaics and combine to achieve a full disc. My Lunt and ASI174mm produce full discs straight off the bat.

2) Flexibility. I start my imaging session taking a full disc image. I then add a 2.5x Powermate to capture closer but ‘wider fov’ images of areas of activity, stepping up to a 4x Powermate for closer views. The Quark just has its internal Barlow. I guess you could add another but I have rarely seen this done.

3) Tuning. With a pressure tuned Lunt it’s a simple case of turning the knob to achieve the darkest measure on the histogram for a given exposure/gain. When double stacked, I then adjust the histogram to achieve the lightest setting after adding the extra filter. Sounds complicated but it can be done in under a minute. With a Quark you have 6 or so settings and the filter needs to get up to temperature. This can take 10-15 minutes. When trying to image on a partly cloudy day this can be a pain when the sky is clear as the Quark warms up then you find it’s cloudy when it hits temperature.

4) Ambient temperature. In the Summer the Quark can shift off band as the filter further heats up. You then have to re-adjust tuning and wait.

5) Filter lottery. The filter inside the Quark are not necessarily the best. I have read stories on this forum and others of not all Quarks being created equal. I have not personally experienced this.

6) Energy Rejection Filter (ERF). I have used my Quark on both a William Optics Z61 and Z103 APO refractors. I would not want to use a Quark for any long period observation on the Z103 without adding an ERF on the front of the scope. A good quality ERF will cost c£500 to fit a 100mm aperture, admittedly cheaper for smaller ERF’s. It’s not a mandatory purchase but something worth considering if you are pairing the Quark with a quality APO refractor.

7) Double stacking. The cost is horrific to add another filter to the Lunt but once you bite that bullet, wow the level of extra detail puts a smile on my face every time. 

In summary, the extra cost of the Lunt provides more flexibility and convenience but it doesn’t fit everyone’s budget. Richard, if the Quark fits your budget stick with it as now the Sun is firmly back into its active cycle it will give you great views of our star.

Looking forward to seeing your images soon and welcome to the ‘light’ side!

I think this is a fair appraisal but... you can of course set the temperature on the quark to warm up at any time so its ready to go, typically at the last setting you used it, it hardly changes but moving blue/red is slow.

I find my quark goes off band through self heating  - it really needs that UV/IR pre-filter but I also found that made the image more blurry.

 

 

[Pete Presland]

A fine looking disc, very nicely captured.