Deep inside the Sombrero Galaxy

[h0ughy (David)]

Originally Posted by jase

Good to see you're up to your usual self Mike. Great comparison. Good stuff.

LOL Jase i had to re-read your response several times - i kept missing a few key words like "to" and "your" and thought you meant something else LOL

i must be tired

[astroron (Ron)]

Nice Mike could you combine the two images I wonder what it would look like

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by astroron

Nice Mike could you combine the two images I wonder what it would look like

Mine would look better and Hubbles would look worse

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Mine would look better and Hubbles would look worse

[marc4darkskies (Marcus)]

Very impressive Mike!

Cheers, Marcus

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by RB

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by marc4darkskies

Very impressive Mike!

Cheers, Marcus

On ya Marcus, glad you like it, you are the get-detail-out-of-a 6" guru

Seems it was impressive enough to suck P.Ward out of the woodwork too

[Ken Crawford (KenC)]

Nicely Done,

I just had Zolt and Lisa (lead processors from the Hubble Heritage division) as presenters at AIC2010. They are pretty amazed at what we are all doing and how far we have all come. The resoution Zolt and Lisa work with is very amazing but we can use the information to verify what we are seeing in our own images.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Ken Crawford

Nicely Done,

I just had Zolt and Lisa (lead processors from the Hubble Heritage division) as presenters at AIC2010. They are pretty amazed at what we are all doing and how far we have all come. The resoution Zolt and Lisa work with is very amazing but we can use the information to verify what we are seeing in our own images.

Yes, the original Hubble shots are amazingily detailed so there is certainly no delusional belief here of approaching Hubbles resolution but as you say comparing to even small low res Hubble shots does prove useful at better visualising the blurier detail in our own images.

Hey maybe we can get Zolt and/or Lisa down here in July next year

Mike

[bert (Brett)]

Cool shot Mike.
Interestingly your shot looks more bowl shaped thatn the hubble shot. I never have really noiticed that before. This is one galaxy I just find really difficult to get a decent image.

I like it.

Brett

[gregbradley]

Maybe NASA should put a 152 Starfire/FLI Proline in space and see what they can get!

Greg.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

maybe nasa should put a 152 starfire/fli proline in space and see what they can get!

Greg.

:p

[Hagar (Doug)]

Nice comparison Mike. Like your others you are well on the way to catching Hubble. Maybe your new scope will hand you the edge you yearn for.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Hagar

Nice comparison Mike. Like your others you are well on the way to catching Hubble. Maybe your new scope will hand you the edge you yearn for.

Hey if it were fine detail alone I was after I would go with a CDK on a fork mount = image all night without meridian flips . The new 12" astrograph is unlikely to seriously outperform the Starfire in raw resolution (it has slightly less FL 1140mm v 1300mm and central obstruction) but man, it should kick its arr's in aquisition speed and ultimate image depth ...well, that's the hope anyway

Mike

[danielsun]

Wow mike! Love the comparison. Nice work from the 6"

Cheers Daniel.