A rough-cut unpolished zirconia in Musca...

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

I noticed that the image scale of Mike's new SX/AG12 setup is similar to mine, so just for fun i thought i'd have a quick peak at what NGC5189 looked like with my DSLR setup (VC200L at f6.4 with a 1000D)

This is a 100% resolution crop of 25 x 6min subs at ISO1600 (taken last night while I was waiting for M27 to rise) together with Mike's remarkable image for comparison.

Quick processed using Pixinsight 1.8

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

Nobody has jumped in to comment, so i'll offer some of my own thoughts.

1. NGC5189 is very small and dim - as you can see from the full (unprocessed) frame - making it a tricky subject for OSC imaging with modest gear like mine. This is possibly why there are so few examples of this object here on IIS
2. Imaging at 0.9 arcsec per pixel clearly requires good seeing, especially for such a small target
3. The detail in Mike's image (giving the seeing and tracking limitations of working at this image scale) is simply incredible

[LewisM]

Gawd, that's good Richard!

Shows what benefits a dark sky has. I am sure if I tried, all I'd get would be yellow light pollution cast.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Ahh an image stalker

I'm being fooollloowwweedd

Mike

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by rmuhlack

Nobody has jumped in to comment, so i'll offer some of my own thoughts.

1. NGC5189 is very small and dim - as you can see from the full (unprocessed) frame - making it a tricky subject for OSC imaging with modest gear like mine. This is possibly why there are so few examples of this object here on IIS
2. Imaging at 0.9 arcsec per pixel clearly requires good seeing, especially for such a small target
3. The detail in Mike's image (giving the seeing and tracking limitations of working at this image scale) is simply incredible

I am surprised at your description of NGC5189 as faint
I find it is one of the brighter PNe's
Maybe it's my dark sky and large scope which has me confused
Cheers

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

Originally Posted by astroron

I am surprised at your description of NGC5189 as faint
I find it is one of the brighter PNe's
Maybe it's my dark sky and large scope which has me confused
Cheers

Thanks for picking me up on that.

My skies are pretty dark too. I guess it's just faint relative to brighter PN's like the Helix and M27 which I have imaged previously. The emphasis really should have been on small, as that is the main issue I found during imaging and processing of NGC5189.

[tilbrook@rbe.ne (Justin Tilbrook)]

Interesting challenge Richard.

Got me fired up!!

Thanks for posting.

Cheers,

Justin.

[Ross G]

Great capture Richard.

A lot of detail for such a small object.


Ross.

[Lee]

Nice one....

I went to have a try last night, went to find it, plate solved to within several pixels, couldn't find it, did a 60s scout image, nothing showed even on a hard histogram stretch? gave up and imaged the bug instead....

Did some more research tonight, figuring I should have seen it.... I had the RA entered as 13.1hr instead of 13.556hr.... Funny, I had the right thing written on a scrap of paper on the obs desk too....

[Logieberra (Logan)]

Richard, nicely done. Your humble dslr + 8" vixen shapes up nicely against the comparison image and Mike's pro gear