I set out last night (early this morning actually) to capture M78 which I have always noticed in my widefield shots of Orion. I wanted to get a bit closer to the subject and used my Esprit 100 to achieve that. The aim was to get M78 and some of Barnard's Loop in the one shot, which I was successful in doing. Unfortunately, that was where the success ended.
A warmish night with below average seeing didn't help my focussing error on this one. I had perfect focus using the Batinov mask initially, then when I rotated the camera to reframe the shot I forgot to refocus. Just that few turns of the camera mount on the draw tube was enough to put the focus out and cause my stars to bloat slightly. One hour of exposure wasted!
If it wasn't for the ClsCcd filtered shots that I took where I had to refocus after removing the camera to insert the filter, none of my subs would have been in focus. Something else to remember to check next time!
So here is the result, modded Canon 550d, 40 x 90 secs (out of focus) unguided subs 1600iso. 6 x 300 secs (focussed) guided subs 800iso with ClsCcd filter. The ClsCcd filter basically did nothing to enhance the image other than help sharpen it!
Nice effort Mickoid, the loop and neb are well framed too. I was out too that night and agree the seeing was all over the place so you’ve managed to get a result well enough. Yeh and I can understand the annoyance of missing a step or two during a session- it’s all part of the course isn’t it?
Anth
Am I right in reading you did some 5 minute subs??? If so great work!
I probably only produce something every 3 or 4 imaging runs due to problems so just look at my failures as 'practice runs' for when I'm good enough to never have an issue hahahahaha
Nice effort Mickoid, the loop and neb are well framed too. I was out too that night and agree the seeing was all over the place so you’ve managed to get a result well enough. Yeh and I can understand the annoyance of missing a step or two during a session- it’s all part of the course isn’t it?
Anth
Yes Anthony, I agree, part of the course. Just as long as it's not my main course !
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imme
Really well framed Mike.
Am I right in reading you did some 5 minute subs??? If so great work!
I probably only produce something every 3 or 4 imaging runs due to problems so just look at my failures as 'practice runs' for when I'm good enough to never have an issue hahahahaha
Learn something from every session
Thanks Jon, I am learning something from every session. Each one is different, even when shooting something you've shot before. You never know what's going to happen, that's what makes it a challenge.Yes, some 5 min subs using PhD2 only because 90 secs would hardly produce any signal through the Cls Ccd filter. I don't like these filters, they don't do much as far as I'm concerned and put weird red halos around some stars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
Looks good to me.
I am making a check list as it is always surprising things you miss...
Well done.
Alex
Thanks Alex, great idea to jot things down, I'm relying on my memory at this stage but as I get older I may not be able to so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by casstony
A night in the backyard along with mistakes is still a lot better than a cloudy night
I get where you're coming from Tony. Last night was a window of opportunity in a long weekend with mostly cloudy nights. I just wished I didn't have to waste a new moon as well!
Bojan, my scope was a 550mm f 5.6 (SW Esprit 100). So your field of view is a bit wider than than mine and your lens is a bit faster. What iso did you use? My UVIR cut filter shots were done at 1600iso and the Cls Ccd at 800iso. I also drove out to the nearby hills to take mine. We're yours from Mt Waverly?
No, it was taken from Mt Pleasant, Ballarat... LP was pretty bad (getting worse as Ballarat is growing and adopting LED illumination), but Mt Waverley is much, much worse.
ISO was 1600.
I will try again from Snake Valley next time.. Or Daylesford (friend's farm).
BTW, the trace of moving object (starting at upper left) on my photo doesn't look like satelite.. because fragments of it it are present on ~10 frames, meaning it took 10 min to move for ~1.5°...
Nice effort Mick considering the mishaps. We all know the feeling. Live and learn.
Thanks LostInSp_ce, appreciate the encouragement. Just looking at your avatar, shouldn't it be "aLostInSp_ce"
Quote:
Originally Posted by bojan
BTW, the trace of moving object (starting at upper left) on my photo doesn't look like satelite.. because fragments of it it are present on ~10 frames, meaning it took 10 min to move for ~1.5°...
Any ideas?
Tricky one Bojan, not sure. Was the straight line the same length in each of the 10 subs but just in different positions, or did it's length stay the same from sub to sub? Might give someone else a clue if we know that. I had some strange lines going through one of my widefield shots once and it turned out to be the camera slipping at a point in the exposure but they were squiggles rather than straight lines.
.... Was the straight line the same length in each of the 10 subs but just in different positions ...
Exactly that.
It was a very slow moving object....
If it was a satelite, it is in very high orbit.
The whole looks like NEO i managed to image couple of years ago, only that one was moving even faster (I wil try to find the video I made on forum.. it is somewhere)
