Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
Peter we are going to have to shoot you very soon,  how can one compete,  that is just awesome, well done just doesn't cover it. 
Leon |
Well, not sure about the shooting part, but thanks very much Leon. I take it
the image is a keeper
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Very nice Peter. Uh oh a focal reducer. They can be fun given how much quicker you get the data. Sometimes there can be a cost though.
With a Planewave the cost is no backfocus for any guiding. In your case fatter stars than the original data?
A bit of an issue with star registration or perhaps CA from the reducer?
I never know what to expect on the colour of this one as examples vary wildly. I wonder what the new colour calibration tool in PI would show.
What is impressive still is the detail and what appears to be almost differentiated stars in the outer belts. They almost seem to be resolving into single stars.
Greg.
|
Thanks Greg.
The reducer if anything makes the stars a tad tighter, there is absolutely no CA.... but I hear you when to comes to back-focus!
I had to get second cover-plate for the CFW adapted solely for the reducer.
Yes there is some fringing around the stars, but purely due the seeing varying during the exposure sequence.
I guess I could have "fuzzed" it out, but didn't want to lose the snap...or as Andy aptly said "Bam!" in the data
I rather like the structure in faint fuzzies at 2 o'clock. Faint.... but beautifully resolved by this instrument.