A faint nebula in Carina

[strongmanmike]

Simple quick 90 Min H-Alpha...man...love this scope!..perfection scoponified :)

Eta Carina Nebula (http://www.pbase.com/strongmanmike2002/image/166984211/original) Full frame, full resolution....

This was just a quick fill in image to check out the FOV, so may or may not complete a narrow band or RGB version...maybeee...

Mike

[skysurfer]

It is indeed very faint: the image is all black.....
Probably you uploaded a wrong (empty) image.

[strongmanmike]

No,... no...there is something there...yep, I can see something....very faint but definitely something...

[atalas]

Wow...what a humongous field :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: FSQ's are very addictive....maybe you won't get over It.

[Andy01]

Now you're just showing off! Lol:lol:

Took me 6 panels and 5 months to cover that much territory and create a mosaic of that region with my gear. (sigh) :screwy:

Very nice Mike, go on - make a nice colour pic, you know you want to! :D

[Placidus]

That's huge, bigger than the Gladiator! We could zoom in well beyond 1:1 on tiny areas, like Gabriela Mistral, and it was still showing sharp detail. That's so impressive, tells such a big story about gas and stars and turmoil, no emoticon can do it justice.

[gregbradley]

A lovely vista Mile.
FSQ is an ultimate imaging scope. I wonder if the
FSQ130 maintains that quality? I don’t see much about it.
Greg

[bratislav]

Your scope is too small and camera is too big :P Where's fun in that?
Ah, I remember, it rides on top of a proper telescope :D

Man, those FSQs are really nice scopes ... they just work.

[h0ughy]

All I can see is Amp glow :)

[Atmos]

Mike, you can’t just throw out a teaser and NOT do a HaRGB ;)

[SimmoW]

Tak sharp Mike!

WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB,
WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB, WE WANT HARGB,

[strongmanmike]

Ha ha thanks for the comments guys :thumbsup: was just a quicky, done around watching a movie and a series on Netflix and several cold IPA's... while the wife was out with the girls for a Friday evening :lol:...looking at it again I clearly pushed a little hard looking for the faint outer stuff, 90min with 4" isn't quite enough there.

Are you suggesting I should gather some colour data Simmon :question:...we'll see, it's early in the season for Eta Carina so plenty of time to find some more fill in time windows between imaging less boring objects I guess :P :)

Mike

[RickS]

Gotta love that FOV, Mike :thumbsup: Give it a few more hours. You know you want to :lol:

[alpal]

Looks great Mike,
are you saying that it's one 90 minute frame?

cheers
Allan

[skysurfer]

I bet even a tiny cellphone camera captures more in 90 minutes .....

[multiweb]

MOAF (mother of all fields). :P Bit flat as you mentioned but can't wait to see the repro with all dynamic range and possibly some other channels. :thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Yeah, yeah, probably will, since I have started..... :rolleyes:



Ah no...who does 90min subs :eyepop: :shrug:...not even Mike and Trish! :lol: T'was 9 X 10min subs :thumbsup:



The size, shape and even colour of the FLI ProLine-CFW-5-7 ensemble are indeed quite similar to a Nokia Mobira Talkman (http://www.zdnet.com/pictures/nokia-evolution-from-beast-to-beauty-photos/2/) cell phone circa 1984 :P



Weeell, I was referring to the sharpness of the field across the frame, not the dynamic range :rolleyes: :lol:...but you are quite right, with a little more data (should I decide to get any) and a repro, I will endeavour to display the dynamic range in a more pleasing way ;)

Mike

[multiweb]

The fov is not that sharp. I was only referring to the contrast and dynamic range.

[strongmanmike]

Ok you have lost me now...not sharp? what do you mean..? I think the field looks pretty flat (ie no coma or field curvature or tilt) :question:

Mike

[Atmos]

Marc might be referring to resolution.

[topheart]

So many photons in so little time....It shouldn't be allowed!


:)

Tim

[multiweb]

I checked your image (~3.5asp @ 9um) against half your FOV that I did in Ha (2.1asp @ 5.4um) (https://zbt1yg-dm2305.files.1drv.com/y4mdklsI9q-KwNJcQ3LkaqhG2XRM3XgeimZEdTCYFjWlwv 68NKd7DoaGmbPBLtoX1dRmZUeaHRKQLbrqZ cQDe_SB2MzobfqO8ipJHD5v9gDYJDe7qBXd YkPwLSfHHveRfWRhgwzvnc8SWcdfFVB9jj6 cubXAuJZjBNgDyhSOHeVz-DrJcOl6WmFkeCVBLDrkjSR2VRhGgppNYHLS b93Tb2xFA/ngc3372_FSQ_fff.jpg?psid=1)? Maybe the sampling difference is why I thought it was a bit soft.

[strongmanmike]

Ah yep...thaaat cooould have something to do with it :) I swamp your field size though :P... but I do like your processing :thumbsup:(and I will try and improve for the future repro, I really rushed it what with all the beer and whisky consumed throughout the processing :lol:)...I should get one of these (http://www.flicamera.com/51.html) for the FSQ, but it would require bigger (expensive) filters :doh:

Mike

[Prickly]

Wow amazing how far the nebulosity extends. Great telescope and lovely shot Mike!

[strongmanmike]

Thanks Prickly, yes it is a pretty big and bright bugger but the faint outer stuff still requires some exposure and care with processing :thumbsup:

Mike

[Ross G]

Another amazing widefield in the making Mike.

So sharp and detailed.

I love the new path you are powering along.

Ross.

[alpal]

OK - for a minute there I thought you had gone for a world record sub frame.

cheers
Allan

[strongmanmike]

M&T have routinely done 60min subs with their big fork mounted beauty...wonder if they have tried 90min :question:

Mike