m42 from the doghouse with a Williams Optic reducer

[h0ughy]

OK i was trying for a flat field evenly focused - i didn't get that. Instead what i got was even more severe curvature in the corners that i had to crop off. So basically it was a test shot - it provides me an insight into what not to do - again LOL. it was a Williams Optics 0.8 Series 3 reducer corrector.

for the record, it was 47 minutes, ISO 400 with cloud about taken with the 127ED canon cooled 350D and the WO reducer. Processed in Pixinsight, shrunk for the web in Photoshop.

Might get out the 8" R200SS tomorrow and mount that up:shrug: again after getting the mirror pinching of the primary fixed up provided its good weather:P

[strongmanmike]

You got the first image there from the second..?? :eyepop: top effort
Very nice image of the great nebula Dave.

Must be nice to be able to toddle out when ever (almost) you want and even take advantage of breaks in the clouds or short periods of cleared up skies :thumbsup:

Mike

[h0ughy]

;) i am fiding that concept hard to handle Mike. Yes in developing the image from the stack thats what i get. had to crop as you can see. BTW i love your test shot you took

[duncan]

Hi Houghy,
Just wondering what the third photo is of. Was this just a focus test?
Looks like a Double star split.
Cheers,
Duncan

[h0ughy]

Yes mate - i focussed on ACRUX.

Basically what i showed is the finished processed shot, the raw image it came from and then the focus i used for the run. That way i can show the whole ugly truth:lol:, that i have heaps to learn:thumbsup:

[duncan]

Hey mate at least you can get out and try!!!!!!! I need to move, find work elsewhere or retire just to get some clear skies,LOL.
All the best
Duncan

[spearo]

Well done,
The nebula seems well represented and balanced with the core which reveals details.
I realize its a test shot but with a nice outcome. The focus seems razor sharp!

f

[h0ughy]

thanks Frank - i didnt do a few things i should have - might even do a repro yet, but it simply isnt long enough exposure

[Martin Pugh]

Shows great promise Houghy.

You did well to tease the detail out. I look forward to more.

cheers
Martin

[h0ughy]

thanks Martin, yes it does show some promise but i hope that next year when it is at its prime i can do some justice for myself and get my best ever shot.

for now i am trying to work out my gear and the stupid user interface (me);)

[strongmanmike]

Hey, I have the same control panel, we should compare notes :question:

[multiweb]

Wow! Nice details. Your best to date I reckon. Top shot. :thumbsup:

[alan meehan]

Shame the corrector didnt work your not having much luck on the optics side at the moment .putting the vixon back into play hopefully will be the answer,other than that not a bad test shot.
AL

[h0ughy]

yes you will have to see the control room one day

not quite but it has some merit

yes will look at putting it back on today

[gregbradley]

Very nice shot apart from that coma problem.

Reducers/correctors have a defined meetal back distance which is the distance from the last metal edge to the CCD plane.

It usually has a tolerance depending on the reducer of say 5mm.

Did you find you what your WO metal back distance is? It may work but is too close/too far from the chip.

Greg.

[h0ughy]

No i didnt know that Greg, maybe someone might know:shrug: Do you measure from where the camera connects to the scope?