What is the best broadband filter in 2023 for OSC cameras ?

[TiffsAndAstro]

1 hour ago, Elp said:

Use astronomy.tools

Trying it now seems perfect ty

Lol the 585 isn't square as I thought but the smaller field of view I like

Dunno if the numbers make it a suitable match or not.

That is a much smaller fov then my current lens and camera, not sure I'm good enough for that bigger leap. also intending to get a guidescope and cam and will need to work out if the flo £200 bundle one will do.

Edited April 1 by TiffsAndAstro

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

Currently my best lens for ap is a 200mm and with my 1.6 canon crop is effectively 320.

I'm struggling to compute a roughly equivalent crop factor for the zwo859mc. Will plug info into stellarium hopefully for a comparison 

Don't try to calculate crop factors at all. They are entirely meaningless in astrophotography. 'Crop factors' imply that you can improve resolution by reducing chip size, which is pure nonsense.

There are two dimensions which matter:

1) The size of the pixels. These, along with focal length, determine the resolution in arcseconds per pixel. (The pixel count of the chip on its own says nothing at all about the resolution.)

2) The dimensions of the chip in mm.  These determine the field of view.

If you muddy the waters by using the kinds of shorthand used in daytime photography you go right up a gum tree. 

Olly

Edited April 1 by ollypenrice
Clarification

[TiffsAndAstro]

Yeah I initially tried to guestimate a CF from relative sensor size, but astronomy tools correctly showed a much smaller field of view than I'm used too.

Zwo 585mc is a planetary camera and the only option in my budget, so I'll have a rethink.

Ty for this

Edited April 1 by TiffsAndAstro

[Elp]

You can always mosaic if you find the FOV small. Whatever you choose, if you're in for the long haul, you WILL end up upgrading.

You can continue to use your 600D as people do use DSLRs well, the lack of HA sensitivity however will hinder capture of emission targets.

Ultimately I think you have to spend a few hours per target than you're currently doing at the moment, it makes all the difference.

[ONIKKINEN]

The 585 is a very capable deep sky camera, its just sold under the "planetary camera" flag (in most places) because it is uncooled and the sensor is not as big as some other models. I'd say dont get hung up on that at all, within this kind of budget it is easily the best camera you could buy.

You still have hundreds of potential targets that fit on the chip with your 72ED, so its not really limiting your imaging much.

[Elp]

Or get a 485, that's what I used. You just have to ensure you take darks (as well as flats and dark flats) and calibrate (you'll have to do that (darks) with an uncooled 585 anyway).

[TiffsAndAstro]

Ty all for this. It seems the sensor it uses is suitable and should be ok with the 72ed and a noticeable upgrade from what I have.

Assuming I can get it all connected up and working

Should I be unduly worried about plate solving at such smaller fov? It looks pretty extreme to me, but I'm guessing there's people here who would still think of it as wide field?

the main reason I'm still considering it is m51 looked big and m31 might just fit in. 

 

If I did get the 72ed and 585mc I can get a guide scope and guide cam or a tripod. I'm assuming at this fov, guiding would be a necessity? 

Edited April 1 by TiffsAndAstro

[ONIKKINEN]

Astap will plateolve an image within a second or two at this field of view, as long as you are within a few degrees of mount to sky error =always, unless you bump the mount or something.

[TiffsAndAstro]

Also I've never taken dark flats, but do take flats, bias and darks.

Mostly.

Not keen on flats as it is though. On an actual telescope I'm even less keen. 

[TiffsAndAstro]

15 minutes ago, ONIKKINEN said:

Astap will plateolve an image within a second or two at this field of view, as long as you are within a few degrees of mount to sky error =always, unless you bump the mount or something.

I have recently struggled with plate solving, before eventually solving it by removing the lens cap.

Also spent twenty minutes trying to focus a star before realising it was a reflection of a street lamp in kitchen window.

I'm at that sort of ability level. But I'd rather fail at something a bit difficult than a bit easy.

[ONIKKINEN]

3 minutes ago, TiffsAndAstro said:

I have recently struggled with plate solving, before eventually solving it by removing the lens cap.

Also spent twenty minutes trying to focus a star before realising it was a reflection of a street lamp in kitchen window.

I'm at that sort of ability level. But I'd rather fail at something a bit difficult than a bit easy.

Funny, reminds me of one of the first times i used Astap, when i forgot to remove my bahtinov mask but it still actually was still able to platesolve the image somehow. I only realized as i saw the first sub come in through NINA and wondered where those horrible spikes came from.

Astap+NINA is actually quite trouble free to use once you get the ball rolling. Also regarding flats, you should consider taking them as a part of your standard workflow as soon as possible, they are extremely important for allowing you to fully stretch the image before it breaks down and dust spots come visible. If you used NINA you would have access to the flat wizard, which will just auto expose for an optimal length and take the flats for you. You only need to place a flat panel on the scope for that to work (cheap LED tracing panel for example, or a tablet showing a white screen). But then with flats you also need to take bias/darkflat and dark frames. Keep them in mind for when you get the urge to try something new.

Going from a DSLR to a dedicated computer controlled camera is a bit of a leap in terms of complexity, so probably best to focus on a couple of things at a time.

[TiffsAndAstro]

I've been taking all calibration frames, except dark flats with my dslr they clearly are great at improving end result when done well and I love how Nina organises them.

First time I tried using dark, bias and flat in a Nina  sequence I couldn't work out why Nina would only show 0.0 in the exposure length field for bias and flats, so I gave up and used my intervalometer.

 

I think If I made a poll called "what's the longest time you've kept your gear together without making a single upgrade/change" ..,....I wouldn't want to see the results

Edited April 1 by TiffsAndAstro