Jump to content

Narrowband

Help with my first attempt at the Horsehead.


Moonshed

Recommended Posts

So far my DSOs have been some galaxies and the Orion Nebula, all taken with my Canon using a tele-extender. I would now like to try to image the Horsehead nebula but not sure how. Should I carry on using the same set up as before or do I need anything different, such as a filter or different camera? One problem that I can see is that because the fov is wide the Horsehead will be very small in the image. Any advice welcome.

Edited by Moonshed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moonshed changed the title to Help with my first attempt at the Horsehead.
3 hours ago, newbie alert said:

Lots of people shooting the Horse head and the Orion nebula in the same frame.. look up imaging with the samyang 135

Are you using just a camera and lens?

No, I am using the tele-extender to attach my camera to my 8”Celestron, perhaps I should have made that clear. I think I will go ahead and treat the Horsehead nebula as though it were a galaxy and take a stack of images with the ISO at 1600 and the maximum exposure I can get away with which is about 2.5 to 3 mins, depending on how well the PA went. It will have to be the usual case of trial and error.

Thank you for your reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, newbie alert said:

So the total opposite of what I thought you were saying...

So a upfront and personal image of the Horse then? Have you got a Ha clip in filter for your canon?

 

No, my Canon is not modded and I do not have an Ha filter. Do I need to get one?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, newbie alert said:

A clip filter would be beneficial if you had a modded camera

Ha gives tremendous structure and contrast to the image 

I just looked at the cost of a 2” Ha nebula filter and it was £216. I’m sure for that money they must be very good but I’m not prepared to pay that much for a filter, especially as the size of the Horsehead I can capture will be so small in the overall image.

Thank you for your assistance, it is much appreciated, but I think I will just experiment with the gear I have for now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what clip filters cost, but NA was referring to one that clips into your Canon's body, not a 2" one that screws onto the lens.

The trouble is that your camera already has an infrared-cut filter that also strips much of the hydrogen-alpha emission at 656nm, this is by far the largest component of the emission that surrounds the dark Horsehead and gives it contrast. So adding an Ha filter would just eliminate everything else, such as the star color and any other emission or reflection light.

IC 434, the emission nebula, has tons of really interesting detail and tones, so a wider view should be quite nice to look at. This is hydrogen-alpha light only (hence the B&W), and I've always meant to go back and add more integration time to obviate some of the objectionable noise in the areas that I stretched too hard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, Moonshed said:

I just looked at the cost of a 2” Ha nebula filter and it was £216. I’m sure for that money they must be very good but I’m not prepared to pay that much for a filter, especially as the size of the Horsehead I can capture will be so small in the overall image.

Thank you for your assistance, it is much appreciated, but I think I will just experiment with the gear I have for now. 

Yes I'm all in favour of using what you have..

Edited by newbie alert
Can't be bothered
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

 

Yes I'm all in favour of using what you have..

When you say a 8 inch Celestron, are you talking about a SCT or a Newtonian?  A SCT image wouldn't be too small.. I've guessed that you're using a 600d and a reducer

I have an 8” Celestron SCT (all as per my signature 🙂). I fix the tele-extender directly onto the visual back and my un-modded Canon EOS 1100D straight onto that. That’s it! The only nebula image I have taken is M42 and this picture is how it came out, after a few trial and error attempts. I know it’s not brilliant but it shows the best I can do with it.

Your Horsehead looks great.

 

F0C5870A-154B-4DA4-9C97-6D522D0D47C2.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

What size tele-extender do you have, as this is native FL using your 1100d in yellow and with a 6.3

My tele-extender is f6 with its 50mm lens with a focal length of 300mm. This gives a total magnification with the Celestron of x6.8 which is why I consider the size of the Horsehead will be very small in the image and not be able to withstand much enlargement. I have no idea how much contrast it will have with the red background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, newbie alert said:

Not really getting what you're doing, or how you're doing it..have you a picture?

 

“I have an 8” Celestron SCT (all as per my signature 🙂). I fix the tele-extender directly onto the visual back and my un-modded Canon EOS 1100D straight onto that. That’s it!” 
That’s how I explained it before and I fail to see how I can make it any clearer.  

I don’t have a picture and to be honest can’t be bothered to set up all my gear in the day time just so I can take a picture of it.

I think I will leave it there.

Thanks for trying to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rickwayne said:

I don't know what clip filters cost, but NA was referring to one that clips into your Canon's body, not a 2" one that screws onto the lens.

The trouble is that your camera already has an infrared-cut filter that also strips much of the hydrogen-alpha emission at 656nm, this is by far the largest component of the emission that surrounds the dark Horsehead and gives it contrast. So adding an Ha filter would just eliminate everything else, such as the star color and any other emission or reflection light.

IC 434, the emission nebula, has tons of really interesting detail and tones, so a wider view should be quite nice to look at. This is hydrogen-alpha light only (hence the B&W), and I've always meant to go back and add more integration time to obviate some of the objectionable noise in the areas that I stretched too hard.

Thanks for all the info. I knew that as my Canon had not been modified the built in filter reduces the infrared but was unaware that it also reduces much of the hydrogen-alpha emissions that surrounds the Horsehead and gives it contrast.

What 2” filter (to fit my tele-extender) would you recommend for the Horsehead?  I can’t fit any directly to my Canon without a lens on it, I think you can do that when they have been modded?
Thanks again, I didn’t realise this was going to get complicated when I started the thread. Live and learn !
Soon as weather permits I will try it with my existing gear.

I was unable for some reason to open your astrobin images or your Ha B&W image of the Horsehead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Moonshed said:

“I have an 8” Celestron SCT (all as per my signature 🙂). I fix the tele-extender directly onto the visual back and my un-modded Canon EOS 1100D straight onto that. That’s it!” 
That’s how I explained it before and I fail to see how I can make it any clearer.  

I've already said I can't see your signature as I'm viewing on a phone( you can't see this on a phone)

What I don't get is why you're using a tele- extender and making your image small.. you want a reducer if anything...

Only trying to help , won't take the trouble anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, newbie alert said:

Only trying to help , won't take the trouble anymore

You had posted 7 times and each time I have responded and answered your questions but you do not appear to understand what I am explaining to you. Even on your last post you repeat that you cannot see my signature as you are using a phone. I know, you already told me! I posted a QUOTE from a PREVIOUS reply as it explained very clearly the setup I was using. I even said that’s how I explained it before. You do not seem to be able to grasp what I am saying.

I really do not see the point in your deleting so much material from most of your previous posts after I said I would leave it there, I’m sure you must have your reasons but it does look a little childish.

This exchange has got me nowhere which is why on my last post I said “I think I will leave it there. Thanks for trying to help.”

I will say again, for the final time, thanks for trying to help, but I think we must be on different wavelengths.

Sorry for having wasted so much of your time, I know you were trying to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would help if posters clearly listed their equipment, location and light pollution when submitting queries. 

A few pointers.

Unmodded DSLRs don't pick up much Ha signal because of the sensor filter.

Ha filters are a waste of time on a DSLR because of the Bayer matrix RGGB, which means only one in four pixels will get a red signal

Some DSLRs pick up better Ha than others. Fuji are apparently ok, my Nikons are so so, so takes a bit of work and exposure to get Ha signal. Look up on Google to see if there is a transmission curve for your camera

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 900SL said:

It would help if posters clearly listed their equipment, location and light pollution when submitting queries. 

Yes, I agree, I thought that was the point of listing your gear in your signature, but apparently this is not visible on phones for some reason. The posters location is shown under their Username. That leaves light pollution which is of course a very valid point. I live in a Bortle 4 area and have added that to my signature.  Those that use phones only need to say so and any relevant details can be given.

Thanks for the info on my camera and explaining about the filters. My Canon doesn’t seem too bad on picking up red but that is based on one example of M42,  I posted that image a few posts back.

As soon as weather permits I will have a go and see what I get and take it from there.

Thanks for the info.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Swillis said:

Yes just give it a go and see what you can get. 

Post your results and work out where to go from there...

Good luck

Thank you. If I do manage to get an image I will post it here no matter how bad it may be. I only have a short window of opportunity to capture the Horsehead, I get about an hour as it passes though a gap in next door’s trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/02/2023 at 18:36, AstroMuni said:

Thats a great shot. Interesting to see the reds around horsehead but not in M42 itself. 🤔

From memory I may have selectively stretched the colour around the horsehead. It's a while back...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.