NGC300 11 hours

[gregbradley]

One of my favourite southern galaxies. This is quite a large and bright galaxy and dare I say nicer than M33!

CDK17, Proline 16803, PME 11 hours total.

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/153427890/large regular size

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/153427890/original large size

Greg.

[Larryp]

Great image, Greg. Lots of little background galaxies too.

[strongmanmike]

Ah good'ol NGC 300...sigh...gotta love this galaxy, big and lots going on :love:

Great job Greg :thumbsup:

Mike

[RickS]

A very nice NGC 300, Greg!

[jase]

Looks great Greg. NGC300 is always impressive. It is interesting to blink my recent rendition given both our images 11hrs exposure time. Was expect more from a 17" given you've got the edge on speed and aperture. Perhaps I'm expect too much. Regardless its a fine image. Well done.

[Spookyer]

nice shot, you have inspired me to have a go at this one next opportunity I get.

[alpal]

Excellent result given the low elevation.

[gregbradley]

Thanks Larry.



Cheers Mike.



Thanks Rick.



Yes I noticed they are very similar.
The difference would be the location. Mine is from rural skies an hour and a half from Sydney. Not fully dark skies. I'll probably relocate my scope soon and that will give a better indication of the differences if any.



That's great. Have fun with it.



Thanks for that.

Greg.

[Stevec35]

That's a good NGC300 Greg. Better than my recent technicolour version.

Cheers

Steve

[gregbradley]

Thanks Steve. I am quite happy with this one.

Greg.

[Shiraz]

Beaut image Greg - excellent detail and colour. Regards Ray

[John K]

Great shot and a beautiful galaxy akin to a distant M33!

[gregbradley]

Cheers Ray.

Greg.

[RobF]

Very tasty! Great work Greg. Love the Ha regions and galaxy cluster bottom left.

[gregbradley]

Thanks Rob. I noticed there are quite a few background galaxies in this image. Its a rich area.

Greg.

[Paul Haese]

I reckon you could squeeze a bit more out of that Greg. The image appears to be black point clipped and is indicated as such in PS. I stretched it a little further and brought out a bit more of the arms. Better image than using the other camera. Not a fan of that camera with the 17CDK myself. Anyway each to their own.

[gregbradley]

Possibly Paul. But then you lose colour richness. The image isn't black clipped but the background areas are quite dark to suppress light gradients. The galaxy was masked and is not black clipped.

The Trius is an excellent camera and I've really only started using it. I quite like it. Whats not to like - its low read noise, 77% QE, more QE than 6303 chip in HA and double in O111. The downside is the small wells but they are not that much smaller than the KAF8300 and the binning works well and so does the antiblooming. With the CDK its oversampling a lot but then that helps with deconvolution a lot. I also plan to use it with my TEC180 and it should be a nice fit there. I also plan to use it with a reducer of some sort (the CDK one or an AP one) once I trial out adapters etc - you know the drill. The other sensor I am looking at trying out with the CDK is a 6303 at some point. Its got good QE, deep wells and is a good size for the CDK. 9 micron pixels as well which are a good match. Blooms though would be the downside. They all seem to have a downside and an upside.

Greg.