|
Post by Dragon Man on Dec 29, 2021 14:48:27 GMT
The sky was clear but the seeing wasn't the greatest. The heat haze from today 32c was rising into the atmosphere and later the moisture spoiled it too, so I did what I could with Horsehead Canon 450d, CLS filter, 200mm f5 Newtonian. 3 x 10 minutes, stacked in Sequator, played with in PhotoShop to try get rid of the graininess and noise without much success. Guiding wasn't behaving either Oh well, here it is:
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jan 3, 2022 3:37:55 GMT
You are getting some nice shots with the 450d ,Ken. Just a question about the length of exposure. If you did say 10 x 3 minutes. Would your results be very different.Why 10 minutes?
I have just started guiding using the ASIair. Just doing 3 minutes and stacking.Lots of problems . Images are ok on the ipad,I suppose, but post processing Fits files has been a bit of a disaster.
and Happy New Year everyone cheers Paul
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Jan 3, 2022 14:46:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jan 4, 2022 3:48:46 GMT
Thanks Ken A 10 minute exposure seems like a long time. Do DSLR's need longer exposures than say your IMX 178? Would you do 10 minute exposures with the 178?
It is early days for me with guiding. I am trying to get it going the simplest way possible. The ASIair pro simplifies guiding and plate solving, but the post processing is still a problem. I have been giving Star Tools a go, but havent produced anything that is worth looking at so far. Looks like cloudy nights for a while down the Victorian coast. cheers Paul
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Jan 4, 2022 16:14:43 GMT
No Paul, I probably wouldn't suggest 10 minute frames with the 178. The times I mentioned are with a DSLR which is less sensitive than the 178. DSLR's require longer exposures. We also have to look at pixel size and well depth. You will find that the larger the pixel the faster the camera, but at a loss of resolution. Have you ever noticed how the top shelf Astro camera require 20 or 30 minute exposures but have magnificent resolution? That's because of their tiny pixels with deep well depth. They NEED very long exposures. Each camera is different. Remember how fast the Mallincam Xtreme and Xterminator were? It only took seconds to see what takes much longer with the 224, 178, etc. But at a massive loss of resolution. The Mallincam's gave crappy results with blocky stars but damn they were fast! If you want nice detail, you need small pixels with longer exposures.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jan 9, 2022 2:40:30 GMT
Thanks Ken. good explanation. cheers Paul
|
|