M97 & M95 with EdgeHD14

[sergeC14]

dear all,

I am sharing with you last night's work. sky transparency here in the french alps has been bad all winter, and yesterday was no exeption to the rule... I started with M97 and did 10 x 10 min exposures:

The original is packed full of tiny magnitude 18 galaxies. the original can be viewed here: Astrophotography with Atik 11000 camera | Amateur Astronomy

then, once Leo was high enough, 15 exposures on M95:

tell me what you think.

thanks

Serge

[Hypernova]

Those are both wonderful images, thanks for sharing

Loads of fine detail in both pics and quite deep with a few scattered fuzzies about, in particular those PGC galaxies around M97. It is true that everywhere you look, there are galaxies, even if you can't see them

[davew]

The M97 is truly ethereal and the distant galaxies are sharper than most can produce. You have that C14 working very well.

What focal ratio / length are you working at ?

Dave.

[MartinB]

Good stuff Serge, I like the barred M95

[sergeC14]

hi dave,

the EdgeHD14, like it's C14 father, operates at F/D 11. There are no focal reducers at the moment for the EdgeHD series so it stays at that!

These scope are good deep sky instrument, do not believe what some people say. That might appear strange, but the 31'X21' field I get with the Atik, allow me to cover most of NGC objects.

Thank you all for your comments.

Serge

[Shibby]

Lovely pair of images Serge. Stunning resolution!

[Dave Smith]

Wonderful images. I do like that M95 - it's now on my target list!

Dave

[davew]

Thanks Serge. You and your setup do a good job.

Dave.

[Whippy]

Both images are great but that M95 is the one I'd choose, if I had to!

Tony...

[sergeC14]

thanks guys.

The upside of those low transparency nights is a fairly good seing, hence a better tracking and resolution...

serge

[TakMan]

Great resolution and colours.... love that Owl!

And all at 'only' 10x10 min exposures @ f11 !!!

Some processing.... (I've no excuses then running at f5... !)

Clear skies,

Damian

[RobH]

Great results Serge.

These are the first images I've seen from the Edge 14, and they are very impressive. Perfect stars right to the edge of the FOV.

What mount are you using? Tracking like that at F11 isn't easy!

Do you use a guidescope or OAG?

Cheers

Rob

[ollypenrice]

Hi Serge,

I too was thinking your mount was doing a brilliant job. (It is a Titan if I remember?) Incredibly good stars for any focal length but at the focal length of a C14 it is quite amazing.

You are getting wonderful resolution but more time would bring down the noise.

I don't think you have applied flats here? I just bought one of these, which makes it really quick and easy, especially in a colour camera where you only need to do one set.

Gerd Neumann jr.-Aurora Flatfield Panels- You wouold be amazed by the effect on your images.

We have had a wonderful month of February here. Same for you I guess?

Cordialement,

Olly

[sergeC14]

hi Rob,

I am using a Titan Gemini level 4 mount. You have to use an OAG for guiding, because, at such long focal lengths, there is no way you can exceed 3 min exposures guiding in //with guidescope (even one like the orion 120EQ).

It is true that the EdgeHD are astrographs (as Celestron call them).

Hey Olly,

I did apply flats, which I took on the early morning sky, but I may have moved the camera in between! What makes the background noisy, is light pollution magnified tenfold by really bad transparency. The upside of bad transparency being good seeing where I live.

Regarding guiding, I think I am starting to get it tuned down to a fine art, but, low turbulence sure helps. Some nights, guide star dances so much at F11 it's hard to track effectively.

Cheers

Serge

[ollypenrice]

hi Rob,

I am using a Titan Gemini level 4 mount. You have to use an OAG for guiding, because, at such long focal lengths, there is no way you can exceed 3 min exposures guiding in //with guidescope (even one like the orion 120EQ).

It is true that the EdgeHD are astrographs (as Celestron call them).

Hey Olly,

I did apply flats, which I took on the early morning sky, but I may have moved the camera in between! What makes the background noisy, is light pollution magnified tenfold by really bad transparency. The upside of bad transparency being good seeing where I live.

Regarding guiding, I think I am starting to get it tuned down to a fine art, but, low turbulence sure helps. Some nights, guide star dances so much at F11 it's hard to track effectively.

Cheers

Serge

Yes. I guess you have already tried this but using a long exposure on the guide star (three seconds or more) lets the seeing average out. I can do this on my Tak mount but not on my EQ sixes which have too much periodic error in three seconds.

Olly