Around M30 interesting DSOs images

[Kristoff]

Couple days ago had a go with my scope. Just below M30, a bit to right from it found this ..... see image.
Conditions: Typical Sydney light polluted sky ( if lucky can see 4-6 stars). No UHC filter used.
Telescope N250 F4.8 + CANON EOS M ( unmodified i.e. IR filter in) at prime focus. FOV estimated 40 arc.min
Spectral capability: Sensor is CANON specifically developed for astrophotography ( same as on 6D camera). Photo-diodes are sensitive to any frequency from MHz to 300 GHz. Metallized mirror in the scope reflects any frequency, naturally this includes Xray and ?????
Picture is snipped (around 5 arc.min) from full frame. Any astrophysicists there with an idea ..... what the hell is it ?????
Regards Kris

[Placidus]

No idea what it is, but it looks like two copies of the same thing, side by side.

Stray light almost in-focus, reflecting off a shiny but not quite rigid surface, such as a dew heater cable?

[Atmos]

I really have no idea what that is. They actually both look like they're the same thing. The right side being an inverted and with higher contract.

What does pop into mind is something along the lines of an aerial drone attempting to hover in your FOV. About all I got at the moment.

[Slawomir]

Hi Kristoff,

Would probably have been easier to analyse a higher resolution image. My guess would be that the one on the right is a result of an internal reflection of the sharper image on the left, and that it was probably a point source of light that left that pattern on the sensor as it was moving relative the the camera (that could also mean telescope shaking too). How long was the exposure and are other objects in the image sharp?

As for CMOS sensitivity to EM spectrum, I would not think it was possible to pick much of anything outside of the visible spectrum, in particular that IR filter cuts frequencies below red light. Not sure about X-Rays though, I believe that sensitivity of CMOS used in DSLRs approaches zero below 300nm?

[Kristoff]

Thanks guys for ideas. Reflection ???? wonder how this is possible. Scope is one of SYNTA things, inside tube if unreflective coated. Who will fly drones after midnight ???
No cables ..... only guiding motors which are well below scope.
There was several shots ... all of them more/less same thing.
Exposure 6 sec. ISO 800. I guess full res photo will help to solve the mystery.

[Slawomir]

Hi Kristoff,

Thanks for the larger image. Coatings limit reflections, but do not eliminate them entirely.

One reason for this pattern could be marks/stains/water somewhere in the optical train. Try shooting again, with camera and everything aligned in the same way as before, and see if you get a similar pattern in the same part of the image.

[Peter.M]

My guess, they are stars oscillating with bad tracking. There are no other stars present in your images to indicate good tracking, and the shapes of each are identical, again indicating that they are still and your scope movement is the cause of the motion. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a wind gust.

[Slawomir]

That would explain the differences in colour in both patterns - nicely done. And once disturbed, the scope would take time (a few seconds?) to settle making stars oscillate in the image.

[jase]

Good detective work Peter. I'd say you nailed the cause. bright and dim stars following the same tracking error or similar.

[Kristoff]

First ..... Tracking error - theoretical 0.0625 arc/sec
See image and zoom, how many galaxies are there??? and this is in Sydney "sky" and you have an idea about tracking stability. Area shown is somewhere around M30.
https://goo.gl/photos/zVdLH11BB8rJjLwJ7

More images of strange thing:
https://goo.gl/photos/zZ9SXsgUfMC4hfWE6
https://goo.gl/photos/ws5iGbAsYdC2XB3n8
https://goo.gl/photos/7JnMQQ6yRKEj8cs86
https://goo.gl/photos/p4A7949aCMggEdUr6

Telescope N250 F4.8 Canon EOS M, exposure times 5-8 sec, ISO 800
Pointing to target: RA 21:42:54 DE -23:11:31 FOV ~40"x1.1 deg ..... at least this is what was told the scope to go to.

When Moon is out of the way later tonight I may try video ... it will be like 150-250 images so some kind of stacker can be used.

Thanks guys ..... Kris

[Slawomir]

Hi Kristoff,

To be honest, your first image has strongly elongated stars in only a 5-8 second exposure, indicating poor guiding. Definitely not 0.0625 arcseconds per...?

It might also be something in the sensor itself, since this object is sharp in relation to the background.

More images could potentially help in identifying the cause.

Lets keep the investigation going :)

[Atmos]

At 5-8 seconds there should be some or even a considerably number of stars present in the images. I don't think it is a tracking error for some of those just because nothing but those things is showing. This makes me really think it is an internal reflection, possibly on the glass plate or silicon surface?

[cometcatcher]

+1. They are stars with wobbles.

[Kristoff]

There are links to more images taken few days later.
I am talking about long term tracking, positional update is 1 per 1 time second and this is with accuracy +/- 0.065 arcsec.per update. Mechanical "back lash" becomes stable after a couple of seconds.

Regards K.

[Peter.M]

If you don't want to listen to the answer that people give you, then don't post asking. I am telling you, they are stars. Quoting some tracking figure like 0.065 arc seconds means absolutely nothing. I will tell you right now that if you think your tracking is that good, you are wrong. If they are indeed some form of nebulous discovery, then kindly explain why these two images appear to be the same objects, but spread out slightly differently.

The answer is, they are stars, and your tracking is variable.

https://goo.gl/photos/ws5iGbAsYdC2XB3n8
https://goo.gl/photos/7JnMQQ6yRKEj8cs86

[Kristoff]

OK ..... so any sellers of equipment make nonsense in their advertising .... thanks for warning.

[rustigsmed]

hi kristoff,

feel free to add a drop box link of the actual original raw and unaltered file ... till then nothing can be added to what has generously been said.
i suspect there is nothing wrong with the equipment but its application and that is something we may be able to help you with - more details to that effect would aid in achieving this.

regards

[Kristoff]

Ha .... so far no one was talking about seeing. I thing this is most likely suspect.
Should you have Pix-Insight software and willing to analyze images you may find more likable answers. I used only uraf .... may be buying one day Pix_Insight but with sky quality in Sydeny it is rather pointless.

Ok there are links to RAW imaging.
https://goo.gl/photos/dHZsi836MrWTC7Ux5
https://goo.gl/photos/GssK3dK5HHjW6CoY7
https://goo.gl/photos/bjGwuJRHPHWc3dQf8

And one image giving an idea about my optical instruments .... pretty good.
https://goo.gl/photos/dsQneEbTEKKbYqX5A
naturally one needs to consider seeing at time of observation. Sydney is almost constantly in "earth quake" see geophysical survey for area .... amplitue much higher than photons vibration amplitude and 0,4 arc.sec optics resolution, largely ignored by amateur astronomers.

Thanks for trying to have professional look at my query.

Kris

[LewisM]

I'll say a FEW things.

1. each image shown is grossly out of focus
2. the "good" image showing stars has very poor tracking - there is elongation across the entire field. Stars should look like round points of light.
3. there IS internal reflection to some degree evident in some of the images
4. the "odd object" not only duplicates itself once, but in another shot, it is shown 4 times, in varying degrees of fade.
5. Possibly it would seem the scope is also out of collimation to some extent

I shoot my images from extreme light pollution and have no appreciable problems. Also, MANY MANY imagers in Sydney do not seem to suffer from any geological instability!!!

Next we will be seeing insects on the moon again... aye carumba!

I would seriously suggest LISTENING to what is being suggested and generously offered and not quoting erroneous figures and pseudo-science factoids.

[Octane]

Guys, stop trolling.

Clearly, they're UFOs or some other stellar discovery.

Don't listen to them, Kristoff. They're trying to throw you off the scent.

H

[Kristoff]

Finally I managed to upload RAW (CR2) files. Chrome browser works on Apple OSX, Firefox on Linux ..... asking for credentials.

Try:
ftp://astro.kristoffc.me/public_ftp/astro
ftp://astro.kristoffc.me/public_ftp/incoming
also
ftp://kristoffc.me/public_ftp/

Oh boy ..... sky in your location ..... it is a dream for Sydney siders. Your scopes are pretty much as mine, just slightly smaller 250mm, same camera (EOS M has same sensor as 6D).
Excellent imaging, wonder what software you are you using?? I was thinking to get Pix_insight but I guess it may be pointless while residing in Sydney.
I have UHC (from Astronomik) .... suppose to do good job on larger apertures but still light pollution cut out is .... well, not as dramatic as can be expected.

Wonder .... on cam software, how many "features" can influence astro imaging. So far I managed to discover that Canon uses high frequency sampling, like 100 ??? imges/sec which are stacked in real time to produce the RAW image (tiff). This method can be used for image stabilization. Naturally the math used by Canon never will be disclosed, and it is closely guarded.

I still blame "seeing". Any back yard astronomer in Sydney is a masochists :mad2:
Use itelescope.net for best results.

Regards Kris ... Thanks for your time.

[Kristoff]

Ha .... Ha .... at least 90% guys on forums have no science qualifications to make reasonable judgement. In big science astronomers are working in tightly controlled and structured research projects ... no one waists incredible resources for just looking at the sky ..... This creates some opportunity for "amateurs" to discover things ... there is a guy in QLD, champion in dicovering supernovas daily .... he must have super photographic memory or use HPC for his daily sky surveys.

Thanks ... Kris

[LewisM]

http://www.weebls-stuff.com/other-toons/video/scampi.html

[Peter.M]

Just finished my honours in chemistry, usually in my field people adjust their views to suit the evidence. Apparently that is lost on some people

[Paul Haese]

What a really funny thread.:lol::lol::lol::lol: Kristoff you have one interesting sense of humour. Love the image of how good your system is. Yep pretty good.;) I cannot get over how tight those stars are in your image.

Seriously though I reckon you ought to take this to Today tonight or A Current Affair. They would be really interested in your discovery. It could make you really famous. You know and we all know that the truth is out there and the authorities are hiding things from the general populous. Get your name in lights.

[Atmos]

More recently graduated astrophysicist here if that helps :)

[Peter.M]

This guys probably a troll. I'm going to stop feeding him.

[Kristoff]

Congratulation ..... you are brave .... How many science graduates we have in OZ every year ????

[Atmos]

I know that I was one of six that finished up at Swinburne last year in astrophysics. Other than that, no idea!

[Kristoff]

I just snoop around the sky and now and than bump on something.

Hope this time get picture posted ....
Few years ago bump on this one. In this part of Sagittarius there is nothing. Few people tried to come up with answer .... so finaly we got answer from "Milky Way Central Comity" .... it is Rocket Buster still smoking hot.
Hm .... I never managed to catch this thing again .... so presume "THEY" are right.

Have fun ..... Kris

[LewisM]

Kristoff, your images are so grossly out of focus it could be as simple as dust or pollen being illuminated by ambient light.

[Kristoff]

They are not ...... this is collimation and can be easily fixed in post.

[Kristoff]

Main factor is collimation - scope is moved in/out the house so really should be re-collimated every time, but this slight problem can be fixed in the post.

[Atmos]

If collimation was the only issue it would just look like a "normal" image that is out of focus or with elongated stars like coma across the entire image. It is true, if you are moving a newt around the collimation should be checked on every use just to make sure that nothing has moved. Realistically though, it appears that there is far more than just potentially poor collimation at play.

[Kristoff]

I recollimated the bist (scope) and tried to shoot this area again before Moon comes up. Scope is open area so this time wind was giving me s...s. Light pollution is crazy.

Wonder .... I am ~400m of the ocean, ~50m above sea level it is like small peninsula. Looking at M30 this time of the year and early evening latituude 40deg. and bit. Scope is looking almost at the East - through air moving like in chimney because land temp ~10deg and Ocean surface (top 1m) temperature ~20. Never seen any shots with air movement like this so simply no experience there.

Regards Kris.