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 the Heart and Soul nebula much fainter than the Rosette? Or was my failure due to not using my CLS filter?

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Rocklobster

Rocklobster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Biggin Hill, Greater London, Bortle 6

Posted 25 January 2021 - 12:03 AM

Hi all,

So, I had great success imaging the Rosette Nebula last week with my stock DSLR, 70-300mm f5.6 lens, CLS filter and Star Adventurer 2i. Got fantastic detail, much more than I was expecting.

I tried to replicate that success yesterday with the heart and soul nebula, taking about 3 hours of exposure time at 200mm, f.5.6 and ISO1600, but this time chose not to use the filter.

Almost no nebulosity was recorded. Even after testing with overly extreme manipulation in Photoshop.

I absolutely realise that a modded camera would solve this, but I was still expecting to record SOME nebulosity after seeing other images taken with similar setup to mine.

My question is did I fail because I didn't use my CLS filter or was it just that this Nebula is much fainter than the Rosette?

More details:

-Bortle 6 location

-90s exposures

Cheers

Sent from my NOTE 10 using Tapatalk

#2 james7ca

james7ca

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,227
  • Joined: 21 May 2011
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 25 January 2021 - 12:16 AM

The Rosette is pretty bright and the Heart and Soul are certainly dimmer. I've imaged the Rosette with an unmodified APS-C camera but I've never recorded much on the Heart and Soul unless I use narrow band filters on a mono camera. I'm in a Red/Orange zone in terms of light pollution.


  • Jon Isaacs and bobzeq25 like this

#3 chanrobi

chanrobi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 602
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2019

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:12 AM

Hi all,

So, I had great success imaging the Rosette Nebula last week with my stock DSLR, 70-300mm f5.6 lens, CLS filter and Star Adventurer 2i. Got fantastic detail, much more than I was expecting.

I tried to replicate that success yesterday with the heart and soul nebula, taking about 3 hours of exposure time at 200mm, f.5.6 and ISO1600, but this time chose not to use the filter.

Almost no nebulosity was recorded. Even after testing with overly extreme manipulation in Photoshop.

I absolutely realise that a modded camera would solve this, but I was still expecting to record SOME nebulosity after seeing other images taken with similar setup to mine.

My question is did I fail because I didn't use my CLS filter or was it just that this Nebula is much fainter than the Rosette?

More details:

-Bortle 6 location

-90s exposures

Cheers

Sent from my NOTE 10 using Tapatalk

I took over an hour of exposure at f/2 135mm at a bortle 2/3 site with a APS-C Eos M, iso 1600. Unmodded no filter.

That's equivalent to like what 9 hours at your f5.6?

 

Didn't see **** all (and by **** all, I do mean *SOMETHING* was seen, but honestly i'm not doing it again).

 

I got much better results on like the veil nebula in 1/2 the time and NGC 7000 was useable for comparison.


Edited by chanrobi, 25 January 2021 - 01:14 AM.


#4 asanmax

asanmax

    Vendor - DSLR Modifications

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2018
  • Loc: Vancouver BC

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:13 AM

Yes, you are right. Rosette is brighter than the Heart and Soul. 

You would need to spend a lot of time with a stock camera to register that faint Ha light in the two nebulae.


  • Jon Isaacs likes this

#5 pejorde

pejorde

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2010
  • Loc: Norway

Posted 25 January 2021 - 11:58 AM

Well, the Rosette is clearly brighter, but the Heart nebula (IC 1805) should certainly be doable. This was taken with an unmodified Nikon D5300 on a Takahashi FS60-CB with the 1.04x multi-flattener (@ f/6.2), 13 x 5 min:

 

IC1805.jpg

 

My guess is that your sky brightness may be the problem.

 

Per Erik

 



#6 erictheastrojunkie

erictheastrojunkie

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 962
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2016
  • Loc: Salt Lake City

Posted 25 January 2021 - 12:04 PM

The H&S is substantially less bright than the Rosette, it is a very difficult target for unmodified cameras.



#7 Hesiod

Hesiod

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,691
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2013

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:26 PM

The Soul and Heart are overall fainter than the Rosetta (but the Heart has a much brighter "knot", which I believe is entitled its own NGC entry and which can be detected even in single subs with unmodded cameras from decent sites); however are doable with unmodded cameras.
A major issue if are shooting from polluted sites is handling gradients: for this purpose the cls filter could be rather helpful.
To bring out more red may also apply a stronger stretch to the R channel: mind that doing so will underline also the CA from the lens, so may have to be more creative with PP (star masks are very helpful, as putting stars to diet).
Last, your lens is not especially fast so getting more integration would help a lot (I remember 3 hours being good from a decent site with a f/2.8 lens. Since you have most likely a much better camera than my eos1100d I suggest to keep the subs and add a couple more sessions)

#8 Rocklobster

Rocklobster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Biggin Hill, Greater London, Bortle 6

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:46 PM

Well, the Rosette is clearly brighter, but the Heart nebula (IC 1805) should certainly be doable. This was taken with an unmodified Nikon D5300 on a Takahashi FS60-CB with the 1.04x multi-flattener (@ f/6.2), 13 x 5 min:

attachicon.gifIC1805.jpg

My guess is that your sky brightness may be the problem.

Per Erik

That's what I thought. I'd seen many other APers taking great images with a stock DSLR. I think you are right, the sky brightness didn't help and neither does my slow lens.

Cheers

Sent from my NOTE 10 using Tapatalk

#9 Rocklobster

Rocklobster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Biggin Hill, Greater London, Bortle 6

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:48 PM

I took over an hour of exposure at f/2 135mm at a bortle 2/3 site with a APS-C Eos M, iso 1600. Unmodded no filter.
That's equivalent to like what 9 hours at your f5.6?

Didn't see **** all (and by **** all, I do mean *SOMETHING* was seen, but honestly i'm not doing it again).

I got much better results on like the veil nebula in 1/2 the time and NGC 7000 was useable for comparison.

Oh man...that's not good to here.
I'm going to give up on the H&S till I get my camera modded.

I'll give the veil a go later in the year when Cygnus is high up.

Cheers

Sent from my NOTE 10 using Tapatalk

#10 Rocklobster

Rocklobster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2019
  • Loc: Biggin Hill, Greater London, Bortle 6

Posted 25 January 2021 - 01:51 PM

The Soul and Heart are overall fainter than the Rosetta (but the Heart has a much brighter "knot", which I believe is entitled its own NGC entry and which can be detected even in single subs with unmodded cameras from decent sites); however are doable with unmodded cameras.
A major issue if are shooting from polluted sites is handling gradients: for this purpose the cls filter could be rather helpful.
To bring out more red may also apply a stronger stretch to the R channel: mind that doing so will underline also the CA from the lens, so may have to be more creative with PP (star masks are very helpful, as putting stars to diet).
Last, your lens is not especially fast so getting more integration would help a lot (I remember 3 hours being good from a decent site with a f/2.8 lens. Since you have most likely a much better camera than my eos1100d I suggest to keep the subs and add a couple more sessions)

Thanks for the detailed reply. yes, I think you are right with every point. It's clearly doable with an unmodded camera, but with my lens and location, I'm in for an uphill struggle.

Coupled with the fact that my battery only lasts 2 hours and I haven't mastered centering the target exactly as before after I remove the camera to swap batteries. (My 4000d doesn't have a slot for the cable of a dummy battery for mains power.

I'll focus on better targets for my kit..going after my second attempt at M33 tonight.

Cheers guys. Thanks very much to everyone for replying.

Sent from my NOTE 10 using Tapatalk

#11 DJL

DJL

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 454
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2020

Posted 25 January 2021 - 05:59 PM

Before getting my OSC I had several sessions with my DSLR and captured the Heartless Nebula, the Soulless Nebula, the No America Nebula and the Sadder Region.


  • Alen K, 17.5Dob and asanmax like this

#12 asanmax

asanmax

    Vendor - DSLR Modifications

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2018
  • Loc: Vancouver BC

Posted 25 January 2021 - 06:09 PM

Before getting my OSC I had several sessions with my DSLR and captured the Heartless Nebula, the Soulless Nebula, the No America Nebula and the Sadder Region.

This is so hilarious but true lol.gif


  • DJL likes this

#13 chanrobi

chanrobi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 602
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2019

Posted 25 January 2021 - 10:49 PM

Before getting my OSC I had several sessions with my DSLR and captured the Heartless Nebula, the Soulless Nebula, the No America Nebula and the Sadder Region.

This is what I got with unmodded, 1 hr exposure at f/2

 

Jwt6Qkm.jpg

 

NGC 7000 came out like this

 

jgS02N5.jpg



#14 asanmax

asanmax

    Vendor - DSLR Modifications

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 706
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2018
  • Loc: Vancouver BC

Posted 25 January 2021 - 11:40 PM

Here is a quick comparison between two images.

Both images stretched the same way in Photoshop.

The center of the Heart nebula shot with a 6" RC scope at F/6. 

Nikon D5300 full spectrum mod.

Single 150sec sub at ISO 800 with L-eNhance filter.

 

Heart.JPG

 

And the Rosette nebula shot with an 80mm refractor at F/7.

Same camera.

Single 120sec sub at ISO 800 with L-eNhance filter.

 

Rosette.JPG

 

It's evident that even with a modded camera the Heart and Soul nebulae need more acquisition time.




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