26-Jan-2024, Macclefield

[Richard N]

The Wolf Full Moon  is nearly here so I have to capture a Wolf Rayet star. WR1 in Cas. was my target. WR stars are an unusual class worth investigating. A good target for a Moonlit night. I then imaged a few double stars for good measure. With ,y system I can resolve down to a splits of about 6 seconds. AG9 is at about that split and is a physical double. Deep sky was a bit rubbish but I did image M97. Then the clouds rolled in. It seems like lots of folks at Macc Astro are investing in S50s for EAA. Can't blame them - amazing value for money.

[PeterC65]

I've also had a go at Wolf-Rayet stars. Here's my attempt at WR134 from last November ...

I can understand people buying the S50. I found myself recommending it at the last Forest of Dean Astronomy Group meeting. When you compare it with the cost and complexity of building up EAA kit from the components, it is a very compelling alternative.

 

[Richard N]

2 hours ago, PeterC65 said:

I've also had a go at Wolf-Rayet stars. Here's my attempt at WR134 from last November ...

I can understand people buying the S50. I found myself recommending it at the last Forest of Dean Astronomy Group meeting. When you compare it with the cost and complexity of building up EAA kit from the components, it is a very compelling alternative.

 

I agree about the S50. It’s excellent value for money. I was looking at a camera with the same sensor. £285. I will stick with mono. 

[Beardy30]

I’m seriously considering the S50 for ease of use , it really appeals to me in terms of its portability to take to a dark site or camping somewhere 

[Richard N]

16 hours ago, Beardy30 said:

I’m seriously considering the S50 for ease of use , it really appeals to me in terms of its portability to take to a dark site or camping somewhere 

Looking at various YT videos, I'm not sure that very dark skies make such a huge difference for EAA-imaging. The difference seem to be reduced exposure times and a marginal improvement in signal to noise ratio. I would have expected the difference to be greater but is doesn't look like it. Of course if you are imaging at the very limits with long exposures, that's worth the effort. The rather modest different was one of the reasons that EAA appealed to me in my Bortle 5/6 location. Ease of use and size/portablility look like the main advantages of the S50 to me. Personally, I'm going to stick to visual at dark sites.

Edited January 28 by Richard N