M44 Cluster

[WolfieGlos]

On my last session collecting the last of the data for the Leo Triplet, I had an hour before it was visible so I aimed up at the Beehive Cluster.

I have just decided to get the trial version of Pixinsight and have been trying to learn it this weekend with a few videos when I've had some opportunities. Knowing Siril makes life a bit easier for some of the terminology, it's just the navigation and finding said commands so far but following a few introductory videos, I thought an easy start would be this cluster image.

Although stacked in Siril, this is the first image I have fully processed with PI (aside from the border using GIMP) - but as always I'm open to comments and criticism 🙂 Also I really like the annotation script in PI, it's much clearer than Siril's. I just need to find out how to get the quasar catalogue into it now .......

60 x 60s subs with Canon 800D at ISO-400, Starfield 102.

[juno16]

That is a beautiful image!

Very nicely processed. Your first delve into PI is definitely a success!

No criticism here!

Actually, your image looks very similar to my recent image of M44. Also short integration at 62 minutes. I was testing my new oag.

Well done!

Jim

[Vroobel]

That's funny, I also took the M44 as the time gap filler. Even if I spent twice more time on that (total LRGB) your 4" OTA gives a better picture than my 2" Askar FMA230, stacked and post processed with PixInsight. There are two orange stars looking like double, you have them separated while my ones look like a partial eclipse. 🙂 I know, it's about the resolution. 

https://www.astrobin.com/z0xw0f/(

(A mouse hover zooms it twice)

 

Edited April 7 by Vroobel

[WolfieGlos]

34 minutes ago, juno16 said:

That is a beautiful image!

Very nicely processed. Your first delve into PI is definitely a success!

No criticism here!

Actually, your image looks very similar to my recent image of M44. Also short integration at 62 minutes. I was testing my new oag.

Well done!

Jim

Thanks Jim, appreciate it! I'm not sure how I'll fare with galaxies and nebulae yet, but it's a learning curve. At least with all this cloud I have a lot of previous data that I can reprocess and test out PI on.

Next up will be the XT tools, which I also see can be tested out on trials ......

[WolfieGlos]

3 minutes ago, Vroobel said:

That's funny, I also took the M44 as the time gap filler. Even if I spent twice more time on that (total LRGB) your 4" OTA gives a better picture than my 2" Askar FMA230, stacked and post processed with PixInsight. There are two orange stars looking like double, you have them separated while my ones look like a partial eclipse. 🙂 I know, it's about the resolution. 

https://www.astrobin.com/z0xw0f/(

(A mouse hover zooms it twice)

 

That's a nice one too Vroobel, nice job! Especially with the FMA230, looks like it's working well. I did consider buying that for widefield, but went with a SY135.

I take it you are talking about the star at the centre of the hive? Using a 2600MM, nice, that's a serious piece of kit 👍

[Vroobel]

2 minutes ago, WolfieGlos said:

That's a nice one too Vroobel, nice job! Especially with the FMA230, looks like it's working well. I did consider buying that for widefield, but went with a SY135.

I take it you are talking about the star at the centre of the hive? Using a 2600MM, nice, that's a serious piece of kit 👍

Thanks.

Yes, I forgot to mention that they are in middle. 

I'm surprised that the Canon 800D beat the 2600MM cam. 😳 That means the twice bigger aperture is more important than the twice smaller pixel. We both have 3.7um pixel, but the mono is in fact twice smaller that the RGGB. Good job! 👍

 

[WolfieGlos]

1 hour ago, Vroobel said:

Thanks.

Yes, I forgot to mention that they are in middle. 

I'm surprised that the Canon 800D beat the 2600MM cam. 😳 That means the twice bigger aperture is more important than the twice smaller pixel. We both have 3.7um pixel, but the mono is in fact twice smaller that the RGGB. Good job! 👍

It can only really be down to the focal length, of course it'll be able to resolve smaller detail.

I don't think for one second a 2600MM is worse than an 800D. Although I'd be willing to trade to find out, complete with filters and wheel of course for a fair test 😀

Edited April 7 by WolfieGlos
typo