Environs of the heart

[Rodd]

I am frequently amazed at the details revealed with a 4” scope, which seem beyond the resolution of 2.46”/pix. I hypothesized that this is in part due to the general lack of very fine details in many nebula compared to galaxies, where big aperture and long focal length    almost always reveals more and more as resolution increases.  But, whole true in general, in this case, that is bunk reasoning….for there is allot of details in this nebula. A good example is a portion of the Soul Nebula I shot with the FSQ and the same area with the C11Edge.  Not much difference.   Maybe if seeing had been good the C11 image would have trounced the FSQ, if more details are to be found.  That’s was 2.46”/pix vs .4”/pix (binned to .8”/pix). Hard to say.   If seeing is limiting my C11, it makes it a poor choice for me as the FOV is most unsatisfying.  
 

This image was taken with FSQ 106 with .6x reducer and asi 1600. About 20 hours of 300sec subs.

[ollypenrice]

That's exquisite, Rodd, on all counts. How could a NB rendition of this region be better? I have no idea.

Olly

[Rodd]

10 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

That's exquisite, Rodd, on all counts. How could a NB rendition of this region be better? I have no idea.

Olly

Thanks Olly. I wonder how different the image would look if the same data was taken from Bortle 1 with seeing < 1”, a guide rms of .25”, and live focus (like innovative foresight) with pe TV fee Ed ct focus at all times 

[ollypenrice]

7 minutes ago, Rodd said:

Thanks Olly. I wonder how different the image would look if the same data was taken from Bortle 1 with seeing < 1”, a guide rms of .25”, and live focus (like innovative foresight) with pe TV fee Ed ct focus at all times 

I think it would depend on the resolution at which it was presented. At normal screen resolution only pixel peepers would find any difference.

Olly