NGC 2442 with a 10" LX200

[Gama]

Heres a picture of NGC 2442 which i took about a year ago with my 10" LX200 classic at f/6.3 .
I took 40 images at 1 minute each then stacked them in Maxim DL 1 dark frame was taken only, and just a little enhancing, but basically not really touched too much.

NGC 2442 is an 11th Mag Galaxy only 6 arc min diameter, so the little 10" really did a good job, as well as the camera.
To focus i used a simple Hartman (Kwik Focus) screen, then snapped away.
Scope was in Polar mount setup, and in a suburban sky.
I would like to take this same shot with my new 14" RCX and compare the 2..
Sometime very soon i think.

[asimov]

That's great Gama! :thumbsup:

[Striker]

Very nice Gama.

What camera did you use.

[astroboy]

Great shot
What camera are you using
It will be interesting to see how well you RCX auto guides I've been thinking of buying one but it seems most people have to use the AO7 ( except for the S&T artical but that scope was chosen by Meade:confuse3: ) , I assume because of drive problems like the LX200
Have you done much imaging with the RCX yet

Zane

[atalas]

Great detail Gama !

[Rodstar]

Thanks for sharing that great image, Gama. I too would like to hear your comments about your new RCX400, comparing with the LX200, which is my particular stellar workhorse at the moment.

[rumples riot]

Nice image, the detail is very good. Well done.

[Gama]

I used a SXV-H9, unguided.

I did take a few of shots last night of NGC2442 with the 14", but its not fair cause it was a full moon, and mount must have moved, as i got heaps of drift across the sensor, thus the image wasnt so sharp when i stacked them.
I'll align the mount again and see how i go.

[h0ughy]

i am impressed beyond words, awesome!

[astroboy]

Hi Gama

On the subject of unguided shots how long an exposure can you take with the 14 before the stars start trailing.

Thanks
Zane

[Gama]

Currently i can go about 3 minutes now, but before i lost alignment, i could have gone for 8 minutes easy.
Just have to do a better PEC calibration.

This is the only limit thats not allowing more than 3 minutes now. I lost the original PEC, boy was i peed off when i lost it...

Not good to expose so long in suburbs with light pollution as it overexposes the ccd sensor, and stars are bloated, so better with a max of 2 minutes and then just stack them.

[Gama]

Well, i have processed the image, and i dont like it.
Its pretty unfair to compare the image with the previous image from the 10", as RCX took the image during the Full Moon and as i explained the mount was out of alignment to such a degree that every minute the image moved across the sensor. Too boot i didnt set the dewheater on, so i started to get dew mid way before i turned it on.
So i will attempt it again when the moon wont interfere so much, and now with the mount ligned up again.
But in anycase here is the image :..

You can see a couple of fainter galaxies in the image too.

[astroboy]

Looks quite good dispite all your troubles , be great to see what you can do once you have the system fine tuned.

Unguided shots from 3 to 8 min' sounds great to me particularly at that focal length.
Love to hear more about your RCX's pros & cons compared to the LX200 .
The main thing that concerned me was the mount and how well it could autoguide but unguided exposuses may be the best way to go.
Are you using a meade wedge is that how you lost polar alignment?

Sorry for all the questions but I think a lot af us would like to know more about your scope .

Zane

[atalas]

Still great detail Gama !

[Gama]

The mount was out by a little, re aligned it and was ready for business again.
Firstly the wedge is the new Meade Ultra, were Ultra means Ultra wobbly !.
the scope is just too heavy for this wedge. They should have made a much more solid unit, rather than fancy grooves and shapes on the surface. They really should have made it out of solid Aluminum. But better than nothing..
I tried my canon to see how much field could be taken in, so i set up and started taking 40 images at 1 minute ASA 400 each unguided, just as i was about to start taking flat fields and dark frames, but it started to rain, so i just closed up and processed without.
More laziness than anything, but at 3.00am and work the next day made me close up really fast.
One question people ask me, is would i buy this scope again , well it does have its pro's and con's. The scope is magnificent, but so was the LX200. I still have not been able to see a clear and distinct differences between the 2 types.
I still have to do some proper imaging with both scopes rather than lazy ones.
So im undecided, but quality of finish is such a big big big let down.
But i have to say the image is sharper in the RCX across the entire field, were as the LX200 starts to show a little distortion closer to the edge of the field.
For now, heres the image, i had bad vignetting and dust spots, without a flat i had to use 'Automatic Flat" to fix it up a little, but its got an uneven contrast now, but much better than before. I used a f6.3 reducer which changed my RCX to an f5 from its original f8, i did do some extra bits on the image to bring out some detail. You can actually see about 5 more galaxies in the background (Faint smudges), but images are sharp to the edge (No croping was done, so you can see some stacking lines).

[astroboy]

Thanks for the info on the RCX

Sounds like the RCX like most Meades needs quite a lot of debugging before you get it to work up to spec.
I'm planing on getting the LX200 back into EQ mode and use it for narrow field imaging with the ST2000 and just auto guide on the RA axis if I can get 2 or 3 min exposures and stack them , should get some good results at F5
If things go well I may buy an AO7 or the new starlight express version although seems an expensive way to go but cheaper than a large good mount by Tak or AP
Seems the best reason to buy the RCX is the larger flat field particularly if Meade ever make the field flatener they have promised .

Thanks again
Zane

[Lester]

G'day Gama,

Great photos and enjoyed reading your comments. Spent some time comparing the LX and RCX photos seems the third brightest galaxy in the RCX shot is not visible in the LX, I guess the faster f ratio of the RCX would be the reason. :astron:

[Robby]

Great shot Gama! Yet another one to add to my list. If the clouds stay away tonight I'll give it ago! Looks alot like NGC1365 in Fornax.
Cheers

[Gama]

I wouldnt say the f ratio, but more the extra 4 inches of glass and mirror that clinched it..

The little 10" is actually a great imaging scope, i have taken so many great clear shots with this scope over the 8 years ive been doing imaging now.

If the reliability of the RCX would have been better i would be doing more imaging now with this scope. But the RCX has got some issues that need to be worked out by Meade very very soon, or its "back it goes"...

[Glenn Dawes]

Hi Gama,

It is a great shot and it is wonderful to see a lesser known, far southern galaxy photographed. It is an interesting object visually too (if it was in the Northern Hemisphere I think we would have heard a lot more about this gem!). When I first saw it through an 8" f/6 Newtonian I thought I had discovered a comet sitting next to the galaxy. It was in fact that bright 'shoulder' section at the start of one of the arms. When it was first catalogued it must have been distinctive enough for it was called NGC 2443.

Gama keep up the good work.

Regards

Glenn

[Gama]

I stumbled across it actually, when i was looking for something to image from a star catalogue.

It is an unknown, and i think its a better galaxy than the more known and boring NGC253 (Sculptor) galaxy. Theres a few more unknown but still great galaxies in that area, and when my scope and sky conditions improve i'll image somemore.

[Glenn Dawes]

Gama,

I like your reference to stumbling across. I think self discovery is wonderful! If you would like to discover NGC 1566 in Dorado some time I don't think you will be disappointed. I'd like to see how you image it.

Regards

Glenn D

[Gama]

Well, its raining now, and when she clears up i'll image it.

I'll try both the SXV-H9 and the 20D and see how she goes.


I did get the Tarantula Neb a few weeks ago, all be it a short exposure, it still pretty good.
Camera was the 20D thru the 14" RCX at f5, but the f6.3 reducer adds some distortion at the very edges though. But until Meade bring out a proper flatner for these scopes, its better than nothing.