Chris Sulyma - SeaWolf Astrophotography:
Jon Rista:
Chris Sulyma - SeaWolf Astrophotography:
Vinny Vent:
My gosh that must stink going from a B4 to a B8, I guess at least in my situation better to never have had then to have had and lost! Good for you though on continuing to push through! When you all say substanial more integration time; I know its contigent on what type target but generally what could I expect?
I was hoping to use my Evolution mount on the CPC 1100 Heavy Duty Tripod that I have and just mount a refractor to it. Thought process was it would be like making a king size version of a SeeStar and then I could just hit the same target for about 20-30 minutes per night for multiplel nights. This would save me money on getting a new mount but the more I read the more it seems like a bad idea.
Depends on the quality of the image you want. I've been chipping away slowly at M81/M82 with over a dozen hours of integration, and I'm still not 100% happy.
I saw a chart on Instagram that shows the rough equivalency from different Bortle zones. On it, it suggests that, to achieve the same quality data of 90 minutes integration in a Bortle 4 zone, we require roughly 27.5 hours in Bortle 8.
Sounds about right by my calculation. That would be about an 18x difference, which is definitely in the ballpark for the differences between my back yard (bortle 8/9) and my dark sites (which are around bortle 4, randing from 21-21.6mag/sq".)
Only, I rarely ever just acquired 90 minutes at the dark site. That is a start, but usually I had 4-5 hours, and more like 10 if I was really able to get started lower in the horizon and keep on an object before it hit the Denver LP bubble on the other side. With some objects, even 10, from a dark site, wasn't enough. So then, extrapolate 4 hours and 10 hours into bortle 8 time, and you have 72-180 hours! (And in my experience, even with tens of hours of light polluted broadband data, its still polluted data, even after gradient extraction (an imperfect process, even still today), and never ever actually normalizes with the contrast and color quality you get with pure dark site data.)
I'm moving to Bortle 6 in August, and even that change from 8 to 6 has me excited beyond measure for this very reason...
Lucky you!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
I would my price point on just the telescope itself is up to $1,200 dollar mark. Not sure if that is good enough for a good 4inch APO?
*That should be good enough for the Askar, see:
https://agenaastro.com/askar-103apo-triplet-apo-refractor-telescope.html |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
andrea tasselli:
Vinny Vent:
I would my price point on just the telescope itself is up to $1,200 dollar mark. Not sure if that is good enough for a good 4inch APO?
*That should be good enough for the Askar, see:
https://agenaastro.com/askar-103apo-triplet-apo-refractor-telescope.html
Thanks I’m going to check it out now!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
My advice?
Follow the suggestions that folks have made here and decide how much you like AP. If you really like it then get better gear and rent space at a remote hosting site where it is dark and (maybe) has better seeing.
For what it is worth, seeing is something too few people look at as carefully as they should, although it is not critical until you get to longer focal lengths.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Bill McLaughlin:
My advice?
Follow the suggestions that folks have made here and decide how much you like AP. If you really like it then get better gear and rent space at a remote hosting site where it is dark and (maybe) has better seeing.
For what it is worth, seeing is something too few people look at as carefully as they should, although it is not critical until you get to longer focal lengths.
Thanks Bill - definitely great advice above. One of the reasons I looked at the ZWO cameras (aside from my satisfaction with a planetary one I have from them) along with the AM mount and Redcat was due to the resale value. If for whatever reason things didn’t work out those items can move fairly quickly and at a reasonable resale value as well.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Mono cameras do not produce black and white images.... You need to do some basic astrophotography research.
I live in Bortle 8 in the middle of a city with lights everywhere and shoot both OSC and Mono. You can look at my images, it is not that hard.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Aside from stacking the data... mono only requires a single step that OSC does not. That's combining the R G B channels into a single image. That's it! Mono is far cleaner, and with the proper filters will have far less light pollution.
Mono will be more expensive. In astrophotography you have to pay to play. There's no cheap routes to success.
oh, Please don't use a C8 for DSO.
On a side note, the beautiful thing about Astrobin, you can search images by equipment used. You can also look at any of our galleries on here and see the results of images we've produced with various equipment.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Dan Kearl:
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Mono cameras do not produce black and white images.... You need to do some basic astrophotography research.
I live in Bortle 8 in the middle of a city with lights everywhere and shoot both OSC and Mono. You can look at my images, it is not that hard.
Apologize for the ignorance - I just looked up what you said. So it seems main con is price?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Brian Puhl:
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Aside from stacking the data... mono only requires a single step that OSC does not. That's combining the R G B channels into a single image. That's it! Mono is far cleaner, and with the proper filters will have far less light pollution.
Mono will be more expensive. In astrophotography you have to pay to play. There's no cheap routes to success.
oh, Please don't use a C8 for DSO.
On a side note, the beautiful thing about Astrobin, you can search images by equipment used. You can also look at any of our galleries on here and see the results of images we've produced with various equipment.
Thanks Brian I’m going to do just that! So quick observation / question. I’m trying to read as I respond and what I’m gathering is mono is A. MUCH more expensive (filters + camera cost) and B. More time consuming, in the sense of processing like you mentioned. Calibration frames for each filter, refocusing after switching filters, weather dependent (clouds roll in before you finish getting all you filter colors in requiring another day of imaging to complete, as an example) ?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
hi
I shoot in Bortle 9 ( SQM 16.84) with a barrowband filter 3nm and my neighbors have more lights than a soccer stadium
what can i say, some nights i can read a book next to my telescope
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Aside from stacking the data... mono only requires a single step that OSC does not. That's combining the R G B channels into a single image. That's it! Mono is far cleaner, and with the proper filters will have far less light pollution.
Mono will be more expensive. In astrophotography you have to pay to play. There's no cheap routes to success.
oh, Please don't use a C8 for DSO.
On a side note, the beautiful thing about Astrobin, you can search images by equipment used. You can also look at any of our galleries on here and see the results of images we've produced with various equipment.
Thanks Brian I’m going to do just that! So quick observation / question. I’m trying to read as I respond and what I’m gathering is mono is A. MUCH more expensive (filters + camera cost) and B. More time consuming, in the sense of processing like you mentioned. Calibration frames for each filter, refocusing after switching filters, weather dependent (clouds roll in before you finish getting all you filter colors in requiring another day of imaging to complete, as an example) ?
That's honestly the biggest drawback I've had with contemplating going mono. In my mind, I could shoot 3x the integration using OSC, clean up the noise as best I can, and just brute-force through sheer number of frames. That being said, I know that mono cameras also capture far more light per pixel than OSC, so... tradeoffs, I suppose.
Near Montreal, I have had maybe a half-dozen clear nights all year, so I've remained staunchly OSC since I can never guarantee when my next imaging session will be... or when clouds will roll in and ruin the night.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
|
I have the same problem and it is getting worse with the new LED streetlights. My answer to you is fine away (wedge) to use your Evoluation in equatorial mode and buy an Optolong L=eNhance eXtreme filter and see if you think you can image from home or need to find a dark site. Also shoot nebulas, not galaxies to start. Talk to established imagers before buying a new mount. Chris Strang.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Brian Puhl:
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
Aside from stacking the data... mono only requires a single step that OSC does not. That's combining the R G B channels into a single image. That's it! Mono is far cleaner, and with the proper filters will have far less light pollution.
Mono will be more expensive. In astrophotography you have to pay to play. There's no cheap routes to success.
oh, Please don't use a C8 for DSO.
On a side note, the beautiful thing about Astrobin, you can search images by equipment used. You can also look at any of our galleries on here and see the results of images we've produced with various equipment.
May I ask a stupid question? Does the telescope you use have any impact on Mono vs OSC? In other words if I got the ASKAR does that mean it performs just as well in mono vs OSC and it is only dependent on the camera and additional equipment or are certain scopes geared toward one vs the other?
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
ay I ask a stupid question? Does the telescope you use have any impact on Mono vs OSC? In other words if I got the ASKAR does that mean it performs just as well in mono vs OSC and it is only dependent on the camera and additional equipment or are certain scopes geared toward one vs the other?
Of course, you can image with whatever you wish, even full frame, mono or OSC, but OSC is better.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
May I ask a stupid question? Does the telescope you use have any impact on Mono vs OSC? In other words if I got the ASKAR does that mean it performs just as well in mono vs OSC and it is only dependent on the camera and additional equipment or are certain scopes geared toward one vs the other?
The telescope does not matter.. I shoot mono with an Askar 600, I shoot OSC with an Askar 103 and a Williams Z81.
I am probably going to get another Mono camera for the Askar 103.
OSC is simpler and a lot of people are happy with it and never move on. On some targets like M42, OSC is preferable.
Mono is fun to shoot if you enjoy processing and it does give better results most of the time.
I have trouble shooting Mono in my Bortle 8 backyard in Full moon phases, My OSC filters work better in Moonlight.
There are all kinds of tradeoffs.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
.
I have trouble shooting Mono in my Bortle 8 backyard in Full moon phases, My OSC filters work better in Moonlight.
There are all kinds of tradeoffs.
This doesn't make alot of sense really unless you're having some internal reflection issues.
To answer OP, the scope does not matter at all in regards to OSC or Mono. I can also echo some good things about that Askar 103. While it's not perfect, the raw data that I've seen from that scope is really nice. A damn good bang for the buck for sure.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
If for whatever reason things didn’t work out those items can move fairly quickly and at a reasonable resale value as well.
Indeed, Resale is something that should be considered. I have been doing AP for over 30 years and have gone thru so much stuff I have long ago lost track. There seem to be three categories of equipment as far as resale value:
1) Commonly used moderately high quality items that are popular (think ZWO, etc.)
2) High end stuff with limited production (think Takahashi and especially Astro-Physics)
3) Cheaper and/or less well known brands or items
The first one you can get usually back most of your money
The second you can sometimes get back all of your money or maybe even a small profit in the right situation
The last one is a bit of a gamble
Something I am thinking more about recently since I have an AP1600 GTO due and will be selling my old but solid Paramount ME as well as my AGO iDK (replaced by a Planewave).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
I’m supposedly in a bortle 7/8 zone, but everything has gone LED and I can only see maybe 6 or 7 stars from my backyard now. Definitely not bortle 7.
i can’t shoot south at all as my house and a streetlight block the view. East is my neighbours unshielded porchlight that’s on all night. North is industrial, that’s supplemented with a nice baseball/soccer skyglow in the summer. West is a grove of mature trees. A few years ago, flightpaths were changed and we’re now under the approach to the airport, so we have planes going overhead non-stop in the late evening (with lots of wake turbulence).
I still manage to image, in narrowband with cheap zwo filters, so I would imagine you could too ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
 Sean Mc (smcx)I’m supposedly in a bortle 7/8 zone, but everything has gone LED and I can only see maybe 6 or 7 stars from my backyard now. Definitely not bortle 7.
i can’t shoot south at all as my house and a streetlight block the view. East is my neighbours unshielded porchlight that’s on all night. North is industrial, that’s supplemented with a nice baseball/soccer skyglow in the summer. West is a grove of mature trees. A few years ago, flightpaths were changed and we’re now under the approach to the airport, so we have planes going overhead non-stop in the late evening (with lots of wake turbulence).
I still manage to image, in narrowband with cheap zwo filters, so I would imagine you could too ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Your situation sounds on par with mine. My home blocks the N / NE side of the house (raises questions in my head on polar alignment if I get an EQ). Plus being in Brooklyn all the homes are pretty closely packed together. Attached you will see the tiny slice of sky I have access to image. The SE side is also dicey as that’s the streetlight / power lines.
I too am now in a flight path zone. I would say it’s not excessive to guess a plane passes over my FOV about once every 10-12 minutes some days; particularly in the evening / night (because of course!).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
|
Yeah i’m pretty similar to that except pointing north.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
A mono camera can make color images. I'm thinking you may not be aware of that? Most of the time, with mono cameras, we use a filter wheel. We can have red, green, blue, L (called luminance, although its not entirely a correct term), and then of course other channels like narrow band Ha, OIII and SII. We then combine those separate channels to create a full color image.
OSC is a "One Shot" Color camera, in that it has red, green and blue pixels on the same sensor. An OSC camera basically trades spatial resolution for the ability to capture color in "one shot", or in every single frame, and has no need for external filters. Keep in mind though, you are generally trading spatial resolution for the one-shot capability. OSC does potentially have some advantages in terms of efficiency, depending on the kind of filter bandpasses in the CFA. Sometimes they overlap to an appreciable degree, which actually makes them more efficient than mono.
However, under light polluted skies...that efficiency will usually mean significantly better efficiency capturing LP (notably the orange colored kind that's been around for decades, but also the broader band LED LP.) That LP is sometimes "double collected" across channels (for the orange high pressure sodium vapor emissions, both the green and red filters on the CFA will pass that light). Then the data is demosaiced, and depending on what other processing you do, that LP signal may be distributed across the color channels even more (especially if you apply a CCM). So it can be a win/lose. My experience with broadband OSC data under light polluted skies has never been good. I finally ditched it entirely for narrow band. The only place I get broadband OSC data (or really, broadband data at all) is my dark sites.
But, a mono camera can create color images. In fact, more often than not, the color images you see shared here are from monochrome cameras.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Jon Rista:
Vinny Vent:
Brian Puhl:
You say you're 'not a huge fan of mono', but might I ask why? If your answer is 'because I don't have enough time' or 'osc is more efficient', then I strongly suggest you reconsider.
Living in a bortle 8, you can certainly produce respectable images, but astrophotography is all about signal to noise ratio. Light pollution is noise, since you have alot of it, you'll need more signal to increase that SNR. Using OSC is far less efficient for narrowband imaging. It can be done sure. And there are a ton of die hard OSC imagers these day that will encourage you, but I'm here to tell you that mono is the ONLY way I'd consider imaging in a situation such as yours. Just as Jon said above, you'll be dumping significantly more time in bortle 8 compared to a bortle 4 or less. OSC reduces that efficiency even more.
A redcat and an AM3 is not a horrible idea at all, provided you put a mono sensor behind it with good filters, like an IMX571. And yes, Astrophotography is a money pit. I think we can all agree on that. My goal by helping you would be to see you spend money on the right things, and not regret your purchases later.
Also, broadband imaging such as galaxies or reflection nebula will always be your weaknesss in a bortle 8. If you stick with the Redcat/AM3, which is fairly compact, you could actually take that out to a darker site and make better use of your time for broadband stuff.
Thanks Brian! So to answer question; at the risk of sounding silly or childish; I just prefer the color images rather than black and white. Simply just a preference, that in combination with I believe I have read that going the mono route is even more expensive then OSC?
Your point is well taken though about efficiency. Speaking of which, some on cloudy nights have suggested just getting a 533mc and a hyper star mounted on my C8 and calling it a day. It would eliminate the immediate need for a EQ mount and cost much less. But I’m pretty unsure about that. It’s still not a refractor and I’ve read way too many horror stories on collimation and focus.
A mono camera can make color images. I'm thinking you may not be aware of that? Most of the time, with mono cameras, we use a filter wheel. We can have red, green, blue, L (called luminance, although its not entirely a correct term), and then of course other channels like narrow band Ha, OIII and SII. We then combine those separate channels to create a full color image.
OSC is a "One Shot" Color camera, in that it has red, green and blue pixels on the same sensor. An OSC camera basically trades spatial resolution for the ability to capture color in "one shot", or in every single frame, and has no need for external filters.
But, a mono camera can create color images. In fact, more often than not, the color images you see shared here are from monochrome cameras.
I was in fact completely ignorant of this until just an hour or two ago! This is really helpful to know!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Nothing beats a good dark sky site if you can find one that is accessible and seems right for you. I go to the mountain sites around here but sometimes they can be very windy even if at lower elevation there is no wind and trying to level out a scope mountainous terrain can be a pain.
I do use a school parking lot close to here to get a little less light pollution and shot a couple of deep sky objects m51 and m81 last night for 20 minutes and they turned out pretty well considering over half a moon up and not the darkest skies but the big dipper was in the upper part of the sky and that helps a lot. I am getting about 50 percent of my frames stacked with my see star right until I get to 20 minutes and then it falls off. I haven't tried putting the see star on a equatorial mount yet and doing it in equatorial mode. I don't know if it will help with more frames stacked or not? It will help with field. rotation, however. I have thought about getting a unistellar 2 telescope but I haven't seen very many long exposures with the unistellar scopes yet to see how they would do with several hours of stack time. They do look like they would be better than a see star, though. The Celestron origin is coming out but it is four grand for it. It would be very good but probably would compete with top pics on here
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
0.00
8.78
7.76
5.21
4.67
2.11
0.90
0.00
8.59
