Yet another IC1396

[MarkS]

Last night from Riberac, Dordogne.  Moon was not too imposing.

21 x 5min,  modified EOS 350D on C11 at F6.3, ISO 800.  IR filter only.

Don't have time to process this in depth (hot sunshine beckons)  but here is a preview of the full frame.  It's certainly a worthwhile target for a colour image.

[Ian]

gobsmacked.

[JohnP]

That does look excellent. Looks like you had spacing issues with your FR as stars look like they have rotated.. top left & bottom left????? or is this due to soemthing else?

That is unbelievable though for a DSLR    I can't wait to see the finished image.

Enjoy the sun - totally cloud covered here (but at least it's not raining)

John

[Mike]

Yes there is distortion at the edges, but nevertheless it is a fantastic image Mark.

[Tony G]

And no cows or bullocks to be seen. 

Tony G

[RobertM]

That's brilliant Mark ! Totally amazing colour, detail and depth, can't wait to see the finished image.

There is an odd optical effect, mostly on the left, almost as if the image has been rotated a tad but everything in the center 2/3rds look spot on ?

[Fay]

That is really good Mark, I can't wait to see it finished either!

[MarkS]

The centre 2/3 corresponds to the "official" FOV of the scope.  When used at F6.3 the ccd is larger than this FOV.  That's where the wierd optical effects (coma maybe?) take place.

For comparison see this earlier image done with no flats:
http://forum.orpington-astronomy.org.uk/index.php?topic=3721.0

[Daniel]

Wow, that really is fantastic, i've always come up empty handed when imaging IC1396, I put it down to the fact I was using a DSLR, now I know that's not the case, how dark was it where this was taken, and what was the transparency like at the time?

Awesome stuff!

Daniel
:O)

[MarkS]

Daniel,

Skies here (Riberac) are definitely darker then Tuesnoad but there is still visible light pollution.

Transparency was good that night but I had the dewheater on because of slight dew.

For interest, here is the Crescent I took 2 days earlier - it was a great disappointment.  It was a very damp night - maybe that explains why I can't resolve any internal structure.

20 x 5min modified EOS350D on C11 at F6.3 ISO800.  This is a crop of the 2x2 binned image.

[Daniel]

Hi Mark. yes, I was suprised with how little of it I got, always thought of crescent as a bright object, but the skies were very misty that night, here's a full frame and a blowup of the image, this was 2 hours at ISO 400, 480s subs on the Modded EOS 40D through the 120ED.

[MarkS]

Here is the re-processed version.  I'm not too happy with it but it's the best I could achieve with the noisy raw data.

21 x 5min modified Canon EOS 350D on Celestron C11 with F6.3 focal reducer

[Fay]

That is fantastic Mark. I must have a go with the Canon!

[RobertM]

Mark, that's one of the most detailed images I've seen of this object, especially at the end of the trunk.  I think it's the only time I've seen the three other faint stars in the 'nostril', excellent detail in the dark lane nearby and reflection nebula around the nearby bright star (didn't know there was any).  Poor guiding would have ruined the detail but you've got that spot on too.  It's got to be a great candidate for image of the month.  To be picky, I do think you may have pushed some of the stars to saturation a little too much but it's difficult not to and doesn't detract from the final image.

Robert

[Mike]

Fantastic image mark and you say you're not too happy with it !!!