ICEINSPACE
Most Read Articles
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON Waxing Gibbous
60.4%
The Sun Now
Time Zones
Sydney*
5:11 pm
Perth
2:11 pm
Auckland*
7:11 pm
New York
1:11 am
Paris
7:11 am
GMT
6:11 am




Go Back   IceInSpace > Beginners Start Here > Beginners Astrophotography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #41  
Old 20-02-2018, 10:05 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 9,030
That is a fantastic result given everything you have had to contend with.
Reading your diy thread entry you say colmination goes off if you move it...do you mean to a new sky region? I mean will it stay ok for a certain object...it looks like it was ok for your capture above.

I would keep at it and work within its limits...I think I said you may have to colminate for specific regions...and balance.
Could you add a guutar string type brace system.
When I was using the 12 inch on eq6 I would balance for a specific region generally directly above or as close as possible.
Anyways great effort.
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 20-02-2018, 11:44 AM
PKay's Avatar
PKay (Peter)
Registered User

PKay is offline
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: DEPOT BEACH
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave View Post
That is a fantastic result given everything you have had to contend with.....
Alex
Thanks Alex

Quote:
Originally Posted by doppler View Post
Great to see you got a result, and it's not too shabby at that....
Thanks Rick

I am in a complete quandary as in what to do.
It will work if set up for each individual target, maybe I should just allow for the extra 30mins. set up.
I will need to spend ~$500 for lens re-coating.

And Alex may have been joking about getting a hernia, but I do have a sore back.

Last edited by PKay; 20-02-2018 at 11:44 AM. Reason: yes
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 20-02-2018, 12:35 PM
doppler's Avatar
doppler (Rick)
Registered User

doppler is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Mackay
Posts: 1,231
Mirror re silvering is always painful especially with an older scope, you can start pondering the economics. There is a cheap DIY method that works but the coating doesn't last as long as an over coated al mirror. http://angelgilding.com/kits-chemicals/pouring-silver.html and then my dodgy home recipe.
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ight=silvering

If it's a good mirror it's worth getting a professional job. Your mirror looks pretty good though from your images, not a lot of coma showing.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 21-02-2018, 08:20 AM
PKay's Avatar
PKay (Peter)
Registered User

PKay is offline
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: DEPOT BEACH
Posts: 240
Now this is interesting.
Since this is a comparison thread, attached are 3 images.
(Hover over each image to get the right one)

The first (Seagull_4inch) is using the 4" EON refractor.
FOV = 110' X 83'
56 of 240sec subs = 4 hrs integration time. Cropped

The second (Seagull_12inch) is using the 12" reflector.
FOV = 40' X 30'
14 of 240sec. subs = ~1 hour integration time.
(this scope has a badly corroded mirror)

The third is all of the above images integrated together.
This meant the FOV became the smaller of the two.

The most obvious outcome is the bigger scope gets more detail in a fraction of the time, however both scopes can arrive at pretty much the same result.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Seagull_12inch.jpg)
207.5 KB8 views
Click for full-size image (seagull_2nights_12inch_4inch.jpg)
201.8 KB7 views
Click for full-size image (Seagull_4inch.jpg)
209.0 KB9 views

Last edited by PKay; 21-02-2018 at 10:38 AM. Reason: yes
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 21-02-2018, 02:51 PM
doppler's Avatar
doppler (Rick)
Registered User

doppler is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Mackay
Posts: 1,231
I think that's the whole point of the bigger scope, the same result but "in a fraction of the time". I have a 150mm RC that does a good job but at f9 takes 4 times as long to get the same result as my 10" f4'8. Resolution is also a factor to consider, a larger aperture will resolve finer detail (assuming that the scope is well collimated and the camera sensor is a good match for the ota). And I guess the longer focal length of the larger aperture scopes is also better for smaller DSO's.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 21-02-2018, 03:13 PM
raymo
Registered User

raymo is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: margaret river, western australia
Posts: 4,016
With objects that display a wealth of fine detail, no matter how long you expose with a 4" scope, you will never produce the same result as an
identical but 10" scope, simply because of your already mentioned superior resolution.
raymo
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 21-02-2018, 03:39 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 9,030
All we need is a 12 inch f3 five element refractor on a, yet to be invented, eq 15 on a bed rock anchored pier English equatorial mount with a 100 meg cam...
alex
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 21-02-2018, 04:36 PM
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV (Chris)
Registered User

ChrisV is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 480
Nice comparison!

Ah come one, the difference is just the larger f-ratio on the refractor. Unless aperture is king?
That 12" F3 sounds good though.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 21-02-2018, 06:44 PM
doppler's Avatar
doppler (Rick)
Registered User

doppler is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Mackay
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV View Post
Nice comparison!

Ah come one, the difference is just the larger f-ratio on the refractor. Unless aperture is king?
That 12" F3 sounds good though.
Aperture is king.

"Another important function of the telescope is resolving power. This measures how well you can separate two objects, and of course this is related to how sharp the image looks. Both of these functions, light gathering power and resolving power, depend only on the size of the telescope (called the aperture)."

Of course bad seeing stuffs all that up.

Last edited by doppler; 21-02-2018 at 07:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 22-02-2018, 10:27 AM
Icearcher (Chris)
Registered User

Icearcher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide - Inner West
Posts: 37
How about with a Sony RX100?

I think I got the faintest bit of nebular, its not much but I think I see something.

Sony RX100m4
70mm
9x120sec
ISO1600
Stocked in DSC and poorly edited in PS.

Regards
Chris
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (seagull2.jpg)
185.7 KB10 views
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 22-02-2018, 11:24 AM
PKay's Avatar
PKay (Peter)
Registered User

PKay is offline
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: DEPOT BEACH
Posts: 240
Good one Chris

Definitely there, diving down into the ocean.
The Seagull actually measures about 2 degrees by 40 minutes.

So it is very big!

You may have captured Sirius going supanova
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 04:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Atik 16200
Advertisement
SkyWatcher WiFi Adaptor
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Esprit
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
SkyWatcher 2018 Catalogue
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
FLI Cameras and Imaging Accessories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement