This is the proper first light using my new StarlightXpress TriusPro-814 Blue edition camera, the smaller pixels yielding a finer image scale, dropping from 0.84"/pix to 0.68"/pix... and I have to say, it is a bloody fantastic camera and well worth considering if you are looking for a small pixel camera
NGC 1300 is a classic barred spiral galaxy located about 65 Million light years away in the constellation Eridanus. The galaxy is about 110,000 light-years across.
So, why "The Sprinkler Galaxy?"...it reminds me of the overhead view of a two armed lawn sprinkler, spraying out two rotating streams of water
The conditions were really excellent across two of the three nights with clear calm transparent skies and excellent seeing, crossing the meridian some subs were hitting a FWHM of 1.3" but most sat consistently around 1.5"-1.6" the other night saw FWHM at 2.0" which is a little below the Eagleview average, so I utilised this period to collect some of the RGB.
Wow - nice picture Mike
and certainly a large improvement compared to Wallaroo.
You've also picked up detail in the nucleus
which is hard to do without Hubble: https://cseligman.com/text/atlas/ngc13.htm
That’s extraordinary Mike. Some stunning detail and yes the final result is a substantial improvement. Congratulations!!
I look forward to a revision of ALL your previous images
Wow - nice picture Mike
and certainly a large improvement compared to Wallaroo.
You've also picked up detail in the nucleus
which is hard to do without Hubble: https://cseligman.com/text/atlas/ngc13.htm
cheers
Allan
Cheers Allan, yeah I have of course, for fun, compared to images shot with larger scopes, from places like Mt Lemmon and the Andes/Atacama etc with more traditional longer FL RC's/CDK's and it holds up surprisingly well, even exceeding in some ways, very satisfying, the finer/greater image scale is definitely working favourably
Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave882
That’s extraordinary Mike. Some stunning detail and yes the final result is a substantial improvement. Congratulations!!
I look forward to a revision of ALL your previous images
Ha ha yeah, I will probably reshoot a couple but I have more incentive to go for the smaller blighters now
That's a beautiful image Mike!
Better than I'll ever be able to get with my Player one Neptune (IMX178) colour camera (no, I'm not silly enough to expect the quality you have captured with my little toy) and, my Nikon D810 is dead in the water till it gets to Nikon service centre (and I'm very upset by that, I've never had a camera fail in over 50 years and still have the thing I was given 53 years ago which was already old then, still in working condition).
I'd upgrade if I could afford a faster get away car, I don't think the old Falcon is up to it, those new BMW's accelerate like crazy, lol.....
That's a beautiful image Mike!
Better than I'll ever be able to get with my Player one Neptune (IMX178) colour camera (no, I'm not silly enough to expect the quality you have captured with my little toy) and, my Nikon D810 is dead in the water till it gets to Nikon service centre (and I'm very upset by that, I've never had a camera fail in over 50 years and still have the thing I was given 53 years ago which was already old then, still in working condition).
I'd upgrade if I could afford a faster get away car, I don't think the old Falcon is up to it, those new BMW's accelerate like crazy, lol.....
Cheers Leo, I have found while the thought is daunting, the ensuring ranting after the fact, dies away and is eventually forgotten (scary though... )
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolhandJo
Another spaceship adventure brought to you by Strongmanmike! lovely field reminds me of the hubble deep field.
Thanks Paul, space ship adventure, yeah, galaxies images can create that feeling, huh?
Good on you Mike presenting us with a fine galaxy image from the new camera. Your results definitely show the benefit of moving to the smaller pixel camera. We are excited as to what awaits us
Good on you Mike presenting us with a fine galaxy image from the new camera. Your results definitely show the benefit of moving to the smaller pixel camera. We are excited as to what awaits us
Nice to hear, thanks Roddles
Can only imagine the improvement, were my scope to have no astigmatism...? I suspect the true FWHM is probably hitting nearer 1.2"-1.3" on many nights up here, so an aberration free, good size aperture operating at say, around 0.4"/pix (?), would be quite an amazing performer on those nights.
I think a fairer comparison might be to take one hour of luminance data on the same night/same target with both cameras. It certainly wouldn't be that difficult to swap back to the old camera for a conclusive test.
I think a fairer comparison might be to take one hour of luminance data on the same night/same target with both cameras. It certainly wouldn't be that difficult to swap back to the old camera for a conclusive test.
Peter
Yes, I agree, for a quantitative comparison, that would be a good way to get a clear comparison but I do hate fiddling in the dark, loath it in fact ...but maybe, if I can be bothered
For now, the noticeable improvement is confidently determined by finely honed instincts based on expertise, experience and good judgement
The Starlight cameras certainly put out good results, along with your processing expertise Mike.
I believe they've always had a good reputation but I could never get my old express to focus, probably more me than the camera. That was with the suggested camera lens fitted before moving to a telescope. It could have been something with the serial (DB9/RS232) to USB adapter but I don't believe that would affect my visual focus through the computer.
I have thought about putting a much later sensor and USB-3 connection in with the cooled body though but I hate the thought of destroying anything photography.
The Starlight cameras certainly put out good results, along with your processing expertise Mike.
I believe they've always had a good reputation but I could never get my old express to focus, probably more me than the camera. That was with the suggested camera lens fitted before moving to a telescope. It could have been something with the serial (DB9/RS232) to USB adapter but I don't believe that would affect my visual focus through the computer.
I have thought about putting a much later sensor and USB-3 connection in with the cooled body though but I hate the thought of destroying anything photography.
I have used five SX cameras, three SX autoguiders, two SX FW's and two SX OAG units now, since June 2003 and they have all given me nothing but please and no negative issues, none. They show no fixed patern noise, are linear, with no amp glow and no gain adjustments are required, heck they dont even need dark frames. I have had much success with them too, so I love'em and can only say good things about them
Mike
Last edited by strongmanmike; 10-11-2024 at 10:15 PM.
......
I suspect the true FWHM is probably hitting nearer 1.2"-1.3" on many nights up here, so an aberration free, good size aperture operating at say, around 0.4"/pix (?), would be quite an amazing performer on those nights.
and can only say good things about them 
