Heart Nebula with a square sensor!

[LaurenceT]

I discovered the disadvantage of a square sensor, no matter how I rotated the camera I couldn't get it to fit and then I had to crop it a small amount. I really should have used my Askar FMA 180 and got the Soul nebula as well.

It was a first for me as I took some flats as well, don't know of they made any difference. Also I failed yet again in setting up guiding, seems to be a blank spot for me so all subs unguided. Also I never quite know how set the red colour, sometimes too light other times too intense!

WO ZS61ii, SA GTi mount, Asiair Plus, L-Enhance filter, 150x60 second subs. Astropixelprocessor, Photoshop, Gimp.

[ollypenrice]

A square sensor is only a disadvantage if you consider it as having one short side: if you consider it as having its short side extended to the same length as its long side, it becomes an advantage!  In truth, it's the best possible shape for any straight sided sensor. You just need a bigger square sensor...$$$$$$$$ 

Olly

[AstroMuni]

5 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

You just need a bigger square sensor...$$$$$$$$ 

Or a focal reducer $$$ 🙂

[Stickey]

Isn't this the Field of View (FoV), or should I say Angle of View (AoV), trap for the unwary, like me😳?

Each telescope/lens and camera combination will have a fixed AoV. That parameter can only be altered by using a focal reducer or by changing either or both of the telescope/lens or camera components.

I've fallen over this trap a few times until I learned to check the angular size of my targets when planning my observing session. 

Now I chose my setup for the targets I'm after, or I change the target list to suit the setup.

[AstroMuni]

46 minutes ago, Stickey said:

Each telescope/lens and camera combination will have a fixed AoV.

My understanding is that the telescope/lens will dictate the FoV. The camera sensor can only limit this view (assuming the sensor is not large enough). So in the examples below, for the same scope you could get larger sensor cameras and get more of the object into the view.

Edited February 26 by AstroMuni

[DaveS]

The big advantage of square sensors is, once you've set them orthogonal to RA and Dec you can leave them.

Unfortunately there's nothing between the small 533 and the professional 4040 sensors at professional prices, unless you're willing to find a S/H 4022 camera, but it's noisy and insensitive.

[Ratlet]

The beauty of the 533 sensor is because it is quite small you avoid edge artifacts from lenses/scopes.

I can use mine with my 130pds and get minimal issues with coma.  I try to pick up vintage telephotos too which are cheap and reasonably well corrected.  200mm super takumar SMC stopped down to f5.6 on a 533 sensor frames the heart nebula beautifully.

[tomato]

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

A square sensor is only a disadvantage if you consider it as having one short side: if you consider it as having its short side extended to the same length as its long side, it becomes an advantage!  In truth, it's the best possible shape for any straight sided sensor. You just need a bigger square sensor...$$$$$$$$ 

Olly

Or get into mosaics, not $$$$$$ but tttttttttt.😉

[AstroMuni]

29 minutes ago, tomato said:

Or get into mosaics, not $$$$$$ but tttttttttt.😉

ttttt = Lots of tomatoes working together? 😉

Edited February 26 by AstroMuni

[900SL]

Same problem lol 

This was 90mm f6 with 0.8 reducer. It frames nicely on GT71 with 0.8 reducer

[Elp]

It depends on the target. I find I tend to use the 533 more with camera lenses rather than telescopes.

[Tomatobro]

1 hour ago, AstroMuni said:

ttttt = Lots of tomatoes working together?

From experience ttttttttttttttt = lots of time. Right Bro?

[tomato]

11 minutes ago, Tomatobro said:

From experience ttttttttttttttt = lots of time. Right Bro?

Got it in one👍🏼

[LaurenceT]

Thanks for the replies everyone and apologies for not responding sooner but I've been in Devon for a friends funeral.

I'll spend tomorrow reading and digesting all that's been written here.