#1  
Old 16-11-2016, 03:08 PM
rustigsmed's Avatar
rustigsmed (Russell)
Registered User

rustigsmed is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mornington Peninsula, Australia
Posts: 3,142
Question Anyone mono imaging with an achro?

Not that I've spent more than one night imaging this year due to weather and other issues. I've been pondering getting a large achro for imaging. of course we all know they are no good for OSC imaging as all colours don't come to focus - or if you are capturing Luminance with a mono cam. I am fairly certain there is no issue with NB imaging. so in short I suspect if most of the imaging is done in NB it should be fine for that purpose.

I'm not so sure on RGB imaging (mostly because I haven't done it properly yet - just dslr and NB). of course with RGB obtaining L is very important but how well does a synthetic L work from RGB data is it comparable? does it yield a result 90%75%50% as good?
Is an R or G or B filter narrow enough for the achro colour/focus issues?

Most of the time will be NB but curious as to know the situation with RGB. Of course the plan would be to go large ~152mm f6.5(or do we go in inches now its bigger aperture territory? )
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 16-11-2016, 03:39 PM
LightningNZ's Avatar
LightningNZ (Cam)
Registered User

LightningNZ is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Canberra
Posts: 952
You'll still have to refocus for each colour, so that could be a PITA without a repeatable electronic focuser?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 16-11-2016, 04:49 PM
rustigsmed's Avatar
rustigsmed (Russell)
Registered User

rustigsmed is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mornington Peninsula, Australia
Posts: 3,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by LightningNZ View Post
You'll still have to refocus for each colour, so that could be a PITA without a repeatable electronic focuser?
Hi Cam,

I find I have to refocus every hour anyway currently. and it can be automated with SGpro etc. but yep a moonlite or similar would be needed. perhaps getting a reputable focuser to fit the OTA may be an issue
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 16-11-2016, 04:58 PM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5,186
Yes i am doing it. I use a Bresser 152mm f5 (Flatfield achromat with modified Petzval design). Importantly it has a very strong Hexfocuser that can support an imaging train. Purchased from Teleskop-Express at a rediculously low price, unavailable from suppliers outside europe. BTW Teleskop-Express remove the 19% Euro VAT when they sell out side the EU, this offset pays for the shipping.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...0-mm--OTA.html

No CA issues obviously as i am narrowband only with this scope. Surprisingly there turned out to be little focus difference, especially with Ha and Sii filters which are very close in the spectrum. Yes Oiii requires a focus check. I use a bahtinov mask to check focus when i switch filters. Importantly my Baader NB filters are parafocal and that helps. I tend to shoot Ha and Sii back to back on the same night and do Oiii another night, this cuts the need to refocus. You don't need a motor focuser if your prepared to do it manually, and the Bresser focuser easily supports my ASI1600MM-C and the QHY filter wheel - no sag, no tilt.
IMHO you would need to invest in proper narrowband filters. You can build a synthetic luminance layer with NB filters, particularly Ha and Oiii, but i find using Ha as luminance works pretty well.
I would not recommend trying LRGB imaging through any achro, but others might.

Last edited by glend; 16-11-2016 at 06:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16-11-2016, 05:17 PM
RickS's Avatar
RickS (Rick)
PI cult recruiter

RickS is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustigsmed View Post
I'm not so sure on RGB imaging (mostly because I haven't done it properly yet - just dslr and NB). of course with RGB obtaining L is very important but how well does a synthetic L work from RGB data is it comparable? does it yield a result 90%75%50% as good?
I've done a few RGB only images with data from our automated/shared scope at SRO. In terms of detail there's a benefit as we get better FHWM in the colour subs that we do in Lum. For bright objects it works well. I did a very decent M31 with about 6 hours on each colour. The downside is that it does take substantially longer to get good SNR with dim targets.

Cheers,
Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16-11-2016, 06:16 PM
RickS's Avatar
RickS (Rick)
PI cult recruiter

RickS is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS View Post
The downside is that it does take substantially longer to get good SNR with dim targets.
Just happened to have some data that I'm working on right now. The target is NGC7497, a small galaxy visible through lots of dust. I extracted luminance from just over 31 hours of RGB data and compared it to just over 9 hours of real Lum. The SNR estimated by PI/SubframeSelector is about the same and eyeballing them they look very similar.

Of course, the luminance I'm actually working with is a combination of both

Cheers,
Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17-11-2016, 01:59 AM
mountainjoo (Jerome)
Registered User

mountainjoo is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS View Post
Just happened to have some data that I'm working on right now. The target is NGC7497, a small galaxy visible through lots of dust. I extracted luminance from just over 31 hours of RGB data and compared it to just over 9 hours of real Lum. The SNR estimated by PI/SubframeSelector is about the same and eyeballing them they look very similar.

Of course, the luminance I'm actually working with is a combination of both

Cheers,
Rick.

Hi Rick. What weighting scheme do you use when generating a luminance channel from multiple filters?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 17-11-2016, 08:02 AM
RickS's Avatar
RickS (Rick)
PI cult recruiter

RickS is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainjoo View Post
Hi Rick. What weighting scheme do you use when generating a luminance channel from multiple filters?
Hi Jerome. My default is to do a noise-weighted integration (no rejection, of course.) That gives the best result in terms of SNR. If the weights end up skewed so much that an important channel isn't contributing then I might switch to equal weights instead.

Cheers,
Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17-11-2016, 09:03 AM
rustigsmed's Avatar
rustigsmed (Russell)
Registered User

rustigsmed is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mornington Peninsula, Australia
Posts: 3,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by glend View Post
Yes i am doing it. I use a Bresser 152mm f5 (Flatfield achromat with modified Petzval design). Importantly it has a very strong Hexfocuser that can support an imaging train. Purchased from Teleskop-Express at a rediculously low price, unavailable from suppliers outside europe. BTW Teleskop-Express remove the 19% Euro VAT when they sell out side the EU, this offset pays for the shipping.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...0-mm--OTA.html

No CA issues obviously as i am narrowband only with this scope. Surprisingly there turned out to be little focus difference, especially with Ha and Sii filters which are very close in the spectrum. Yes Oiii requires a focus check. I use a bahtinov mask to check focus when i switch filters. Importantly my Baader NB filters are parafocal and that helps. I tend to shoot Ha and Sii back to back on the same night and do Oiii another night, this cuts the need to refocus. You don't need a motor focuser if your prepared to do it manually, and the Bresser focuser easily supports my ASI1600MM-C and the QHY filter wheel - no sag, no tilt.
IMHO you would need to invest in proper narrowband filters. You can build a synthetic luminance layer with NB filters, particularly Ha and Oiii, but i find using Ha as luminance works pretty well.
I would not recommend trying LRGB imaging through any achro, but others might.
thanks glen looks like an interesting scope quite fast for a refractor as well. from what I read the focuser and options for upgrading can be limiting so good to hear your experience with that model.

I think L-RGB imaging is definitely out, really interested to hear about any RGB experiences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS View Post
I've done a few RGB only images with data from our automated/shared scope at SRO. In terms of detail there's a benefit as we get better FHWM in the colour subs that we do in Lum. For bright objects it works well. I did a very decent M31 with about 6 hours on each colour. The downside is that it does take substantially longer to get good SNR with dim targets.

Cheers,
Rick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS View Post
Just happened to have some data that I'm working on right now. The target is NGC7497, a small galaxy visible through lots of dust. I extracted luminance from just over 31 hours of RGB data and compared it to just over 9 hours of real Lum. The SNR estimated by PI/SubframeSelector is about the same and eyeballing them they look very similar.

Of course, the luminance I'm actually working with is a combination of both

Cheers,
Rick.
awesome timing - thanks for the info Rick - it sounds a bit like OSC capturing as far as total integration times go
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17-11-2016, 09:28 AM
mountainjoo (Jerome)
Registered User

mountainjoo is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickS View Post
Hi Jerome. My default is to do a noise-weighted integration (no rejection, of course.) That gives the best result in terms of SNR. If the weights end up skewed so much that an important channel isn't contributing then I might switch to equal weights instead.

Cheers,
Rick.
Great, thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 17-11-2016, 09:43 AM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustigsmed View Post
thanks glen looks like an interesting scope quite fast for a refractor as well. from what I read the focuser and options for upgrading can be limiting so good to hear your experience with that model.
Russell, Moonlight have a focuser adaptor for the Bresser 152mm f5, which is the same one they sell for the ES AR152S. The Bresser 152mm and the ES AR152S have the same tube diametre, and focuser mounting arrangement, and are both made by JOC in China. So you would be able to replace the focuser if you wished, and motorise it for remote control. However, I have found no need for a focuser replacement with my imaging gear.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Nitecore
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement