Hi,
Thought it time to try the rosette neblua with the ED80. So many ways to process this, I decided to go for quite a bit of colour saturation and I'm happy with the depth of the image and pleased with the star colour This is a total of 96 minutes of data, could do with another 96 epecially in this warm weather with an unmodded DSLR.
I've also done an 80mm wide field for a bit of context.
Equipment.
Skywatcher ED80, orion mini guider, orion field flattener, HEQ pro 5 mount.
Unmodded canon 1100D, 8 minute subs at iso 800, total 96 minutes.
Same for 80mm wide field.
Darks, flats and bias frames applied.
Stacked in DSS and processed in PS7.
Cheers,
Justin.
Last edited by tilbrook@rbe.ne; 22-12-2012 at 01:27 PM.
Have you any images of the rosette?
I would like to see the difference in invidual subs.
It's probably not a good comparison since to get anything at all from it I have to use a Deep Sky filter. These were taken back in September before it got really hot. I found that adding subs after September actually made the final image worse.
The single frame is roughly 3 minutes at ISO 1600 and deep sky filter, the stack is about two hours worth through an ED80 at F5.5. As you can see, I need a better camera for Ha. It does alright for comets which are mostly greenish, but Ha is terrible.
It's probably not a good comparison since to get anything at all from it I have to use a Deep Sky filter. These were taken back in September before it got really hot. I found that adding subs after September actually made the final image worse.
The single frame is roughly 3 minutes at ISO 1600 and deep sky filter, the stack is about two hours worth through an ED80 at F5.5. As you can see, I need a better camera for Ha. It does alright for comets which are mostly greenish, but Ha is terrible.
Thanks Kevin!
Here's a single 8 minute sub iso 800, yours actually looks like it has more response in the red.
Another superb effort with an unmodded DSLR, Justin!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher
The single frame is roughly 3 minutes at ISO 1600 and deep sky filter, the stack is about two hours worth through an ED80 at F5.5. As you can see, I need a better camera for Ha. It does alright for comets which are mostly greenish, but Ha is terrible.
Kevin, just looking at your single sub vs Justin's, I can see that you have a much brighter sky background - hence lower nebulosity contrast. If you have a go imaging it from dark skies (where no filters are needed), I bet you'll find that your camera will work quite well
The star colours are superb, it's certainly an element I struggle with when using light pollution filters on the DSLR. Out of interest, to the left side of the wide angle field is the christmas tree cluster, and you can just see hints of the nebulosity that the cone and fox-fur are embedded in.
I accidently swung the scope onto this and took two 5 min subs before I realised I was on the wrong object last month. It's certainly interesting to compare the subs from the Nikon. this is 10 minutes worth - but calibrated and stretched via a basic pixinisght workflow.
cheers,
Andrew.
Last edited by alocky; 22-12-2012 at 05:33 PM.
Reason: added a 10 minute stack image.
Kevin, just looking at your single sub vs Justin's, I can see that you have a much brighter sky background - hence lower nebulosity contrast. If you have a go imaging it from dark skies (where no filters are needed), I bet you'll find that your camera will work quite well
Yes that would help. A bit more elevation would help also. It's pretty low in September.
The star colours are superb, it's certainly an element I struggle with when using light pollution filters on the DSLR. Out of interest, to the left side of the wide angle field is the christmas tree cluster, and you can just see hints of the nebulosity that the cone and fox-fur are embedded in.
I accidently swung the scope onto this and took two 5 min subs before I realised I was on the wrong object last month. It's certainly interesting to compare the subs from the Nikon. this is 10 minutes worth - but calibrated and stretched via a basic pixinisght workflow.
cheers,
Andrew.
Thanks Andrew!
Yes, light pollution and filters add another level of difficulty to imaging and processing. Even the baader fringe killer gives me odd backgrounds which I have to balance out.
I'm lucky I don't have to use LP filters .
[QUOTE=naskies;927567]Another superb effort with an unmodded DSLR, Justin!
Thanks Dave!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometcatcher
That's probably the Deep Sky filter at work. I'll have to shoot it unfiltered some time.
Thanks Kevin!
Look forward to seeing more comparisons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike
I can see you have had to deal with plenty of noise but hey, I like this Justin, great colours and I like the way it is kinda see-through, great job
Thanks Mike!
Early next year I will be sending off a second canon 1100D for cooling mods, I'll be looking forward to that.
