From: Mark Gaffney <markgaffney@me.com>
Date: February 6, 2010 11:01:55 AM MST
To: Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Astro_IIDC] Re: Damian Peach
Tim,
The Benoit Schilling page shows nice detail in the final image M 57. Can`t say I understand the technicalities involved in the other images. My Flea 2 is a colour 648 x 488 pixel 7.4 micron type but I guess it dosen`t have as great detail as as mono one would have. It`s off to PGR at present for them to fix the blotch on the glass it has, which I haven`t been able to clean myself. (under warranty). As to collimation my attitude has been well enough is good enough. I always get carried away with imaging when I get a good night at the expense of these fine adjustments. I mean I can see the moon clearly (it`s in focus OK) & stars are pinpoint enough to my eye. But Jupiter through the barlow was disappointing so maybe I`ll have to make some time to check it. As usual otherwise I`m finding things to buy at a great rate, far in excess of my budget..!
Mark.
On 07/02/2010, at 4:21 AM, doobisary wrote:
Mark:
I've found my 9.25" to be extremely sensitive to accurate alignment. It's also hard to do, since I'm up on a ladder to reach the scope in my roof mount. Compared to the f/2.5 or so f/ratio of the 9.25", collimating my 6" f/10.3 Newtonian is amazingly easy!
Planetary images will improve dramatically if you spend some time to accurately collimate an SCT.
I've used my Televue 5x powermate for planetary imaging. It does quite well on the 9.25" with the flea 640x480 with the 7.4 micron pixels. It's way too much magnification for the flea2 with the smaller pixels, though. For that, I get my best results with a 2x "shorty barlow" I picked up at RTMC from Stellarvue for $20. In fact, it was such a good price I bought two!
I'd like to try a 4x powermate, but they're 2", and my "classic" Newts have 1 1/4" focusers. The Televues are pretty expensive, too.
Somewhere in a box I have an old Meade 3x, one of those that's about 10" long! Picked it up from the Meade booth for $10 New about 20 years ago when they were selling off unused stock at RTMC. I used to use it a lot on my Jaegers 6" f/10 for planetary. But it's comparable in magnification to an old Televue 2.5x I have, too. I sometimes use that one, but it doesn't seem quite as good as the Shortys.
-Tim.
--- In Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com, Mark Gaffney <markgaffney@...> wrote:
>
> I still haven`t attempted to perfect my collimation either using any
> of the methods at my disposal. Things seem relatively alright so far
> anyway but maybe barlowed Jupiters would show imperfections to a
> greater extent than normal..
> On 06/02/2010, at 1:42 PM, Mark Gaffney wrote:
>
> > My attempts to barlow (2.4x & 2x) Jupiter a while ago were very
> > noisy & dark..I`m wondering if the seeing was working against me or
> > whether a Televue type would work better than my cheapo Vixen etc.
> > ones..Have you or anybody else ever used a Televue 5x barlow for
> > instance..?
> >
> >
> > Mark.
> > On 06/02/2010, at 12:24 PM, doobisary wrote:
> >
> >> Antonio Cidadao of Portugal used to use an AO2 for keeping planets
> >> on chip with his ST5 camera That device has been out of production
> >> for many years, though, unfortunately.
> >>
> >> I have an AO-7 with my SBIG ST2000XM. It's great for "guiding" DSO
> >> images, but it (and devices by Orion and Starlight Xpress) can't be
> >> used for planetary for a couple reasons. First, they work at very
> >> slow rates (the AO2 did corrections many times/second). Second,
> >> they get their pointing information from an off-axis chip in the
> >> camera (SBIG) or a guide camera (Starlight Xpress, via an OAG).
> >>
> >> I've been curious whether anyone has tried planetary imaging (of
> >> faint planets like Uranus and Neptune, in particular) using an
> >> image intensifier and really short exposures/high frame rates, to
> >> freeze the seeing that would otherwise be crippling with the long
> >> exposures required (shortest exposure I was able to use on Uranus
> >> with my 12.5" Cass was half a second).
> >>
> >> -Tim.
> >>
> >> --- In Astro_IIDC@yahoogroups.com, Mark Gaffney <markgaffney@>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hey Ray,
> >> > Yes it`s my aspiration to become one of these "Deep Sky fiends"!
> >> I`d
> >> > like to have my finger in several pies eventually..
> >> >
> >> > Mark.
> >> > On 04/02/2010, at 3:19 AM, Ray Byrne wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > G'day Mark,
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > To my way of thinking - well for Solar System imaging the
> >> cameras we
> >> > > use and good old AstroIIDC is in effect adaptive optics. We are
> >> > > taking video at an incredible frame rate and then letting our
> >> > > favourite software ditch all the crap and stack the good stuff
> >> ready
> >> > > for us to tweak it. I don't think that an AO gadget could work
> >> this
> >> > > fast and is aimed at the Deepsky fiends who are taking long
> >> exposures.
> >> > >
> >> > > Just my two penn'th
> >> > >
> >> > > Ray
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 2 Feb 2010, at 21:27, Mark Gaffney wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> By the way Ray,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I assume you`re talking about amateur scopes?! The REALLY big
> >> earth
> >> > >> based scopes (one called the European Extremely Large
> >> Telescope at
> >> > >> 42 metres is the next largest on the books!) have adaptive
> >> optics
> >> > >> now which compensate for atmospheric turbulence. Apparently
> >> earth
> >> > >> based telescopes will now rival (or exceed) the Hubble &
> >> > >> it`successors for clear pictures & although astronomically
> >> > >> expensive they`re a fraction of the price of sending these
> >> scopes
> >> > >> into space & maintaining them! They shoot lasers at the sky to
> >> > >> create artificial guide stars which enable these adjustments. I
> >> > >> think for a great price you can get some sort of adaptive optics
> >> > >> for your backyard scope now as well..
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Mark.
> >> > >> On 02/02/2010, at 1:07 PM, Ray Byrne wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> Hi Mark,
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> He now uses a C14 mounted on a G11 and transports that to
> >> Barbados
> >> > >>> with another guy who uses a C11 on an EQ6. Damian personally
> >> told
> >> > >>> me that he thought the C9.25 all round was better than a C11
> >> when
> >> > >>> I was considering them both, he probably meant in the UK
> >> generally
> >> > >>> - but on Barbados the C14 would be king because if seeing
> >> allows -
> >> > >>> aperture rules.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> The aperture rules bit has its limits though for planetary
> >> imaging
> >> > >>> as even the largest scopes in the world can only resolve to the
> >> > >>> limit set by us looking through the atmosphere. In the book
> >> "High
> >> > >>> Resolution Astrophotography by Jean Dregesco he felt that 16"
> >> was
> >> > >>> the upper limit and any more aperture than that was
> >> pointless. I
> >> > >>> must point out that this book was published pre webcam
> >> imaging and
> >> > >>> his comments may not be relevant, I'd be interested to hear any
> >> > >>> comments on this 16" rule.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> BTW Damian still uses the C9.25 as the C14 will not always
> >> perform
> >> > >>> that well as often as the C9.25 in the English seeing. There
> >> are
> >> > >>> some contemporary Saturns that are C9.25 on his site and the
> >> C11
> >> > >>> he sold may the one his mate uses in Barbados but I'm not
> >> sure (he
> >> > >>> said the C11 was a great scope).
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> From my experience tonight my C9.25 is a great scope - out in
> >> up
> >> > >>> to -17c at one point. And my EQ6 just did the business after
> >> > >>> several months in the same situation flawlessly tracking at
> >> nearly
> >> > >>> 400x mag. - wonderful gear
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> ATB
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Ray
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> On 1 Feb 2010, at 18:52, Mark Gaffney wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>> > Hi Ray,
> >> > >>>> > Last I heard Damian had given up his C11 for a C9.25 for his
> >> > >>>> > excellent imaging of the planets. Is this still the case
> >> do you
> >> > >>>> > know, that he uses a C9.25? I know he travels by plane
> >> > >>>> regularly to
> >> > >>>> > the Bahamas or Canary islands (with the scope in the
> >> cargo) to
> >> > >>>> get
> >> > >>>> > the best results with turbulence & jet streams..!
> >> > >>>> >
> >> > >>>> > Mark.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>