Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Is this the best I can expect with a unmodded DSLR?

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 bldeagle1

bldeagle1

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Just outside Chicago, IL

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:02 PM

Hi, so being new I am asking for an experienced opinion. There are 2 images attached, both were taken with my 10" F4 Schmidt Newtonian with dual speed Moonlite focuser on a new EQ6-R Pro mount with a Polemaster and 60mm guide scope / ASI-120MMS  guide camera and using PHD2 with Stellarium and APT, taken with my unmodified Nikon D5600 from Bortle class 8 skies but using an Optolong L-Enhance filter.The details of both images are below, my question is if it is my image processing skills or the camera that needs improving. Clearly my processing skills are very challenged as Photoshop is a new medium for me, but wondering if it is all that or something else as well? I have seen images of M101 with smaller apertures and similar sub times and the image was far superior to mine. I get there are seeing factors and such, but just looking for opinions on where to focus my time. Thanks!

 

M101

40 lights at 240 seconds @ ISO 800

20 Darks at 240 seconds @ISO 800

15 Flats

15 Bias

Stacked in 64 bit Deep Sky Stacker

 

M51

20 Lights @ 240 Seconds @ISO 1600

10 Darks @ 240 Seconds @ ISO 1600

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • m101.jpg
  • m51.jpg


#2 Alex McConahay

Alex McConahay

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,109
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:30 PM

You are doing fine.... Frustrating, isn't it. Many of us have gone through that stage. Most of us got beyond it.

 

You will do okay. You recognize that there is a lot to learn out of processing. 

Note, however that your stars are mostly round. (Yeah, there is trailing, but it is not as bad as it could be.) And you get structure. That trailing has nothing to do with the limitations of a DSLR versus other cameras. And it certainly has nothing to do with modification. 

 

You also have detail in the structure of the galaxies.  

 

Some attention to stretching, and color adjustment and saturation will help.

 

Furthermore, if the issue is MODIFICATION of the DSLR versus the standard, it is not an issue much with galaxies. You may be missing some Ha spots in those galaxies, but not much. that is not the main concern in these shots.  

 

If you want to see what the limitations of a DSLR are, go to the DSLR forum here on CN, and see what people are doing with their DSLR's.

 

If you want to see the limitations of MODIFICATION versus non mod, then you need to compare the images of big pink and red nebulae, not galaxies.

 

YOu will be producing good stuff in short order when you learn the intricacies of your processing program. 

 

 

Alex



#3 Tapio

Tapio

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,799
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Tampere, Finland

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:36 PM

I think a big problem here is that you are using duo narrowband filter for galaxies which are broadband targets.
  • Stelios and Deesk06 like this

#4 bldeagle1

bldeagle1

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Just outside Chicago, IL

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:40 PM

I think a big problem here is that you are using duo narrowband filter for galaxies which are broadband targets.

Ah, so I should forgo the filter for galaxies, but better for Nebulas? 



#5 bldeagle1

bldeagle1

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Just outside Chicago, IL

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:43 PM

You are doing fine.... Frustrating, isn't it. Many of us have gone through that stage. Most of us got beyond it.

 

You will do okay. You recognize that there is a lot to learn out of processing. 

Note, however that your stars are mostly round. (Yeah, there is trailing, but it is not as bad as it could be.) And you get structure. That trailing has nothing to do with the limitations of a DSLR versus other cameras. And it certainly has nothing to do with modification. 

 

You also have detail in the structure of the galaxies.  

 

Some attention to stretching, and color adjustment and saturation will help.

 

Furthermore, if the issue is MODIFICATION of the DSLR versus the standard, it is not an issue much with galaxies. You may be missing some Ha spots in those galaxies, but not much. that is not the main concern in these shots.  

 

If you want to see what the limitations of a DSLR are, go to the DSLR forum here on CN, and see what people are doing with their DSLR's.

 

If you want to see the limitations of MODIFICATION versus non mod, then you need to compare the images of big pink and red nebulae, not galaxies.

 

YOu will be producing good stuff in short order when you learn the intricacies of your processing program. 

 

 

Alex

Thanks Alex, yes, it is a bit frustrating! There are SO many things to learn! Could the small trailing be collimation error? I use a laser collimator before an imaging session to ensure it's close, but I am assuming the collimator is collimated!



#6 randcpoll

randcpoll

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2013
  • Loc: New York

Posted 01 June 2020 - 01:46 PM

Modifying your DSLR will not help much with galaxies. The modification is to allow more Ha light to hit the sensor and most of that comes from nebulae. Try just a regular broadband light pollution filter, or just many shorter exposures at lower (ISO 800) gain with no filter.



#7 Stelios

Stelios

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9,268
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2003
  • Loc: West Hills, CA

Posted 01 June 2020 - 02:19 PM

Ah, so I should forgo the filter for galaxies, but better for Nebulas? 

Yes! You should entirely forego this filter for Galaxies, globulars and star clusters, also for reflection nebulae. It's best used for emission nebulae (most of the summer showpieces in our own Galaxy), also some planetary nebulae. 

 

You also should consider dropping the exposure length. Your heavy scope apparently can't track well for that long even on the EQ6R-Pro. "Mostly round" is not a goal for stars. Go down to 180" and even 120" or 90". Round stars (at the center anyway) should be the goal. 



#8 Deesk06

Deesk06

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 01 June 2020 - 02:23 PM

I would drop the L-enhance filter. if anything the L-pro, but I honestly do not think you need it. Give it another try without the filter, shorten your exposure length a little bit. You will get there, it takes many frustrating nights, but there is always something small and positive that keeps us going every single time. I have so much to learn just as you do. We are in this together! Rinse and repeat!




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics