Severe vignetting meant I had to crop nearly half the frame but it was half expected due to the crappy adaptor.
M42, from Orpington
59 x 60s
ISO 2500
Baader L-Booster filter
GSO 10" RC at f/8
Basic processing in PI to gauge the attempt.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7381/16527691905_1477ac431b_b.jpg)
That has come out very nicely indeed. An excellent first light for the camera and very nicely processed. The camera really looks like it will be a great full-frame performer with its excellent sensor. I'm very tempted by it's smaller sibling, the A6000 (which is much cheaper!).
When did you get a clear night for this?
Mark
The image looks fantastic Robert.
Quote from: MarkS on Feb 14, 2015, 15:13:09
When did you get a clear night for this?
Mark
Sunday 8th.
Edit. It's a long way from being processed correctly but at least it shows promise.
Did you process it as a single HDR image - i.e. none of the Photoshop overlaying mullarky?
I used PI for the whole process but wished I'd done it properly with calibration frames and processed it carefully after having seen how it turned out. For the HDR I think I just increased to layers to 8 or 9, everything else was default. The output from the stack was surprisingly clean so only a little NR was applied to counter the deconvolution.
Robert
What language are you speaking because it's not one I recognise. ;) :D
For a test run I think this is a really nice result .
There must be a high dynamic range available even at ISO 2500 as you've nearly been able to reveal the Trapezium without recourse to shorter subs.
Quote from: Kenny on Feb 14, 2015, 23:04:51
What language are you speaking because it's not one I recognise. ;) :D
PI = PixInsight astro processing software
HDR = high dynamic range
NR = Noise reduction.
You'll be speaking da lingo soon enough ;)
Duncan,
Thanks, the trapezium was visible in the 30s subs so perhaps that was a better length. The histogram was well up as you can imagine so I could certainly try that next time.
Robert
Very nice test image Robert.
Carole
Very nice Robert, how is the Sony with computer software etc? did you use BYE or APT or capture just using the camera?
Well that looks pretty amazing to me for 60 sec subs - I'd be really interested to see a single 60sec sub (warts & all) full size without the crop...
John
Fay, I used one of those cheap timer things that plug into the accessory port so capture was to SD card. There won't be much software support for automated capture till APT version 3 is out and even then it's not guaranteed.
John, will do but it will be a JPEG, I can make a Sony 'RAW' available if needed.
Robert
The full size JPEG can be found here: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8598/16375138830_4ea85850ca_o_d.jpg (https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8598/16375138830_4ea85850ca_o_d.jpg)
A 2.5" field flattener came with the scope; I'll use that as soon as the focuser adaptor arrives from Telescop Service.
Robert
I thought BYE supported the camera?
Quote from: Fay on Feb 17, 2015, 18:56:25
I thought BYE supported the camera?
I don't think so, that's for Canon EOS cameras.
Robert why did you choose a Sony camera?
Hi Mike,
It was the particular camera that interested me.
1) Full frame
2) mirrorless so no mirror box shadows
3) exceptional ISO performance (I can see the trapezium and surrounding nebulosity in live view).
4) in camera apps that mean less reliance on a computer.
5) no back focus issues with almost any lens.
6) no stupidly small pixels.
And more importantly, it came in at a good price converted.
Robert
Quote from: Fay on Feb 17, 2015, 18:56:25
I thought BYE supported the camera?
I think all software is about to start supporting the Sonys, but BYE has a Nikon version at present but not Sony.
This is a link to the full size (after cropping), the one originally posted is a flickr resized version.
<link>https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7381/16527691905_ac64ce0365_o.jpg</link>
Absolutely stunning.
That is amazing Robert - are all the little light coloured bits (all over the image) jpeg compression artifacts...?
John, that's me being careless with deconvolution and noise reduction - I got both a bit wrong ! Some may be faint stars but not that many.
Robert
I've just compared it with an old one of mine: http://www.markshelley.co.uk/Astronomy/2008/m42_2008.html
Yours has got far more detail in it - better colouring as well. I suspect my guiding wasn't much good though - guiding with a Philips Toucam back then!
Mark