Quote:
Originally Posted by Garyh
Beaut image Fred!
Loads of fine detail in the dust lanes for sure!
That is no easy feat all on as poor old G-11 too!
 |
Thanks Gary, actually the G11 can be pretty stable overloaded and gude well, particulary near the pole (its easier there).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuts
Hi Fred,
Great image, the amount of detail is incredible. A 3m FL is challenging to say the least, but I can see why you say narrowfield rules.
I am thinking of getting a 6 or 7 inch mak/cass OTA, a cheap option to get to a 2 meter plus FL. I would use this only for galaxies. Do you think this would work as long as i went for longer subs, or would it be a total waste of money for a 'galaxy imaging scope'. I would be using it with my EQ6 and SBIG 2K.
Paul
|
Paul. Optical quality really shows up at long FLs, the stars were fairly big on the Meade (compared to an RC say), but I found the secret there is mega data, as in many hours of exposures allows far more deconvolution and sharpening before noise shows up. Its not a substitute for a classy scope, but if you are patient, and spent time carefully processing, youd be supprised the results you get with a relatively cheap OTA. IMO, this form of imaging then requires a good camera. hi QE reduces the need for very long sub exposure times, which brings out mount deficiencies at long FLs. The SBIG 2K certainly fits there, even though its not as hi as a NABG cam, the ABG is a big bonus because the kind of longish sub exposure times needed can make forground stars bloom very quickly on a NABG cam.
In short, with an SBIG2k, yes you can do long FL on a cheap OTA, but mega data is required to be able to process to a reasonable quality image. I dont know how long a FL OTA the EQ6 will take though, that will be the limiting factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric
Very sharp and spectacular Fred, very enjoyable to view.
Cheers
|
Thanks Ric, glad you liked it.