NGC 3293 3324 and IC 2944

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Have been dying to get out for ages now and whilst waiting for accessories for my RC10 i deceided to get the ED80 out and match it up to the QHY10 (first time i've used it with this scope!).

I'm pleased with the results

Explore Scientific ED80 triplet APO, QHY10, AstroTec FF, Maxim DL5, Guided SSAG, processed CCDStack2, PS4, topaz adjust,detail

NGC 3293 3324 7 X 600s Darks, Flats and Bias applied

IC 2944 12 X 600s Darks, Flats and Bias applied

Thanks for looking

All the best

Paul

[cybereye (Mario)]

Paul,

Both images are very good indeed!

Cheers,
Mario

[TrevorW]

Nicely done Paul you've picked up the nebula around NGC3293 nicely, the QHY10 OSC appears more sensitve than the 8

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Originally Posted by cybereye

Paul,

Both images are very good indeed!

Cheers,
Mario

Thank you Mario, Still learning.

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Nicely done Paul you've picked up the nebula around NGC3293 nicely, the QHY10 OSC appears more sensitve than the 8

I love this little camera. It does everything i want at this stage and being OSC allows me to shoot more than one target in a short night. I see myself using it for some time to come yet while I learn the dark arts of processing.

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Just a crop to bring out more detail in the nebs.

Paul

[gregbradley]

Very good images. That Sony chip is a beauty. I notice there is a 14mp Sony chip now available in QHY cameras.

Sony are catching up with Kodak.

Greg.

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Very good images. That Sony chip is a beauty. I notice there is a 14mp Sony chip now available in QHY cameras.

Sony are catching up with Kodak.

Greg.

Thanks for your comment Greg,
Yes the Sony chip is very good and I would like to see what the QHY12 can do. An increase to 14.2 MP in the same sized package at the cost of pixel size to 5.12 um as opposed to the QHY10 at 6.08 um. Its also noticable that the well depth of the QHY12 is less than the QHY10 (32 ke to the 10's 45 ke). Also there are other companies starting to use these chips as well (Starlight). With the debacle at Kodak we shall see who fills the void for our future chips.

Paul

[gregbradley]

Oh I see, same size smaller pixels. Sounds like you got the better one then. I doubt you'd see a difference between 10 and 14 mp.

Greg.

Originally Posted by ReaPerMan

Thanks for your comment Greg,
Yes the Sony chip is very good and I would like to see what the QHY12 can do. An increase to 14.2 MP in the same sized package at the cost of pixel size to 5.12 um as opposed to the QHY10 at 6.08 um. Its also noticable that the well depth of the QHY12 is less than the QHY10 (32 ke to the 10's 45 ke). Also there are other companies starting to use these chips as well (Starlight). With the debacle at Kodak we shall see who fills the void for our future chips.

Paul

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Oh I see, same size smaller pixels. Sounds like you got the better one then. I doubt you'd see a difference between 10 and 14 mp.

Greg.

I really like the QHY10, It's large well depth allows you to draw in a lot of image and if adjusted properly (The gain and offset on the QHY must be set by the user) you can really develop the picture into something special. It also has very low noise properties but I still feel more comfortable using Darks and Bias from my library! What I have to get used to is using the longer sub times to bring out the best and some of my previous images were 300 - 400 secs where these ones were 600 secs. My guiding was working really well so I could possibly have pushed as far as 900 secs without too much trouble! The more I'm using this camera the more I seem to be getting out of it. I have also used the technique in CCDStack where I debayer into seperate RG&B images and do individual processing for each colour. They are then joined and a Luminance is derived from the final RGB image, deconvolution and other processing steps are applied to this lum and then the colour is added back in in photosop. Its a longer process but the result is worth it in the end. Having said that you still have the option to debayer in one step.

All round in the bang for buck department the QHY is right up there.

All the best

Paul

[midnight (Darrin)]

Some nice images there Paul. I like how you have retained the star colours. Probably a fair bit to do with the decent well depth of the chip I guess.

Doesn't take long for my 40D to create a white out in my images.

Darrin...

[ReaPerMan (Paul)]

Originally Posted by midnight

Some nice images there Paul. I like how you have retained the star colours. Probably a fair bit to do with the decent well depth of the chip I guess.

Doesn't take long for my 40D to create a white out in my images.

Darrin...

Thanks Darrin, I took my first guided and DSLR pictures in March 2011 and after the first few times that I got decent pictures I was hooked and knew that I had to move on to a cooled CCD of some description. The QHY10 was the best alternative that i could see that would allow me to replicate the ease of using the DSLR. I lucked out that it was also a very good camera i it's own right. To get the best out of it it is necessary to set the gain and offset correctly and there is a method to graph out the settings which then gives you a great result. It's worth taking the time to do it properly and then you get the full advantage of the chip. If you consider changing the 40D i really reccomend the QHY.

this is a link to the higher res versions

http://www.pbase.com/paulstorey/astrophotography&page=3

all the best

Paul