17 replies to this topic

[syxbach]

Continue my galaxy journey. I start to use BlurXTerminator. Now Russell's three plugs are really powerful post-process tools. BXT takes care of deconvolution and sharpening. Actually, I do not use too much strength on BXL and I do not want to exceed the resolution of my system. I want the result to be nature-looking. After BXT, looks like another round of sharpening either in PI or PS is not necessary. NXT takes care of noise reduction. I use minimum NXT as long as my subs provide sufficient signal-to-noise ratio. SXT takes care of making a perfect start mask (for galaxy post-process). After that, I can reduce my stars and halos a little bit. Overall, these three tools are very convenient. Still, I need very high quality data.  Looks like my RC8 can continue to service for a while before retirement.

 

Image details:
Mount: Astro-Physics 1100GTO
Telescope: Astro-Tech RC8 carbon
Camera: SBIG STF-8300 with OAG+FW8-8300 filter wheel
Guide camera: SBIG OAG-8300+Lodestar X2 with Kiss focuser
Filter: Astrodon LRGB Gen2 E-Series
Exposure time:
L: 65*10 min, bin1
R: 24*10 min, bin2
G: 22*10 min, bin2
B: 26*10 min, bin2

Post processing: Pixinsight+Photoshop+RC plug-in
C&C are welcomes

Yuexiao

 

Link to full size image: https://live.staticf...4d7959059_o.jpg

 

Edited by syxbach, 22 December 2022 - 10:04 AM.

[jsmithsd]

Very nice image. Tight stars, great detail in the Galaxy. Well done!

[crpainter]

That's astonishingly great.  Shows what a lot of integration time can achieve.

[hornjs]

Terrific image!  Love the detail and the color really pops.  

[syxbach]

Thank you all for your comments!

 

Best

 

Yuexiao

Very nice image. Tight stars, great detail in the Galaxy. Well done!

 

Terrific image!  Love the detail and the color really pops.  

 

That's astonishingly great.  Shows what a lot of integration time can achieve.

[Mert]

That's beautiful Yuexiao, great detail in the galaxy down to

the core.

Looks like the RC8 has been promoted a couple of inches more

[bernhardhubl]

Very nice details in the spiral arms of this galaxy!

 

best,

Bernhard

[syxbach]

yeah, close to 10-12 inch? haha

 

I think this AI-based deconvolution is better because I cannot perform deconvolution well by myself. Sometimes the parameters I used were not optimized. Always the stars had halos and the details I produced looked not real. This plug really helps this process.

 

Yuexiao 

That's beautiful Yuexiao, great detail in the galaxy down to

the core.

Looks like the RC8 has been promoted a couple of inches more

[mikeyL]

Excellent result - really lovely colors and lots of subtle detail!

 

ML

[Lead_Weight]

Very nice image! What system do you think you might move to after the RC8? 

[marvyyk]

Nicely captured and processed! 

[syxbach]

Thank you guys, happy holidays

 

Yuexiao 

Excellent result - really lovely colors and lots of subtle detail!

 

ML

 

 

Nicely captured and processed! 

[syxbach]

Andrew

 

I thought for a while, a couple of options in front of me

 

1. ONTC 10 F4 with para 2+QHY268. I have see this combination provide a lot of details with much faster speed compared to my F8 system. This system is affordable to me.

 

2. If I want to chase aperture, I am thinking about a 12-14 inch CDK or premium RC. Originally I am looking for an RCOS. However, F9 is too slow and the electronic system may break down any time. Therefore a PW CDK14 or AG idk14.5 is a better option. The new 461 sensor looks like a good match with these 14 inch scopes. QHY just announced 461 photographic version, which is the cheapest among QHY, ZWO, and Moravian. I am also looking at the test results. 14 inch scopes are the largest scopes my mount and observatory can accommodate. However, these systems are too expensive for me, especially those 50 mm square filters. I may look for a partner to join this project if I want to go for a 14 inch cdk or idk. The resolution should be much better than the 10 inch Newtonian.

 

Yuexiao   

 

 

Very nice image! What system do you think you might move to after the RC8? 

[Lead_Weight]

Andrew

 

I thought for a while, a couple of options in front of me

 

1. ONTC 10 F4 with para 2+QHY268. I have see this combination provide a lot of details with much faster speed compared to my F8 system. This system is affordable to me.

 

2. If I want to chase aperture, I am thinking about a 12-14 inch CDK or premium RC. Originally I am looking for an RCOS. However, F9 is too slow and the electronic system may break down any time. Therefore a PW CDK14 or AG idk14.5 is a better option. The new 461 sensor looks like a good match with these 14 inch scopes. QHY just announced 461 photographic version, which is the cheapest among QHY, ZWO, and Moravian. I am also looking at the test results. 14 inch scopes are the largest scopes my mount and observatory can accommodate. However, these systems are too expensive for me, especially those 50 mm square filters. I may look for a partner to join this project if I want to go for a 14 inch cdk or idk. The resolution should be much better than the 10 inch Newtonian.

 

Yuexiao   

I had very similar thoughts. Right now I'm nursing a Takahashi Epsilon 200 back to imaging. I have 8" and 11" Edge telescopes, but find that they are very slow, and the reducer available for them has lots of CA and broadband reflection issues. I feel the Takahashi is a bit too short of focal length, and the Edge scopes has the mentioned issues. This leaves me with a large diameter higher quality Newtonian or CDK. I have had two inexpensive RC telescopes, and only one of them was well made. The largest CDK I can use is also the 14", but I have to consider the 12" to reduce costs some. The seeing in my skies might also not support the 14" CDK very well so a large newtonian, maybe even a 12" would be ideal for a better pixel scale.

[syxbach]

12 inch Newtonian is huge. 12.5 cdk or idk is more compacted and mount friendly. 

 

When you go beyond 2000 mm,  you need to use bin2 or resampling anyway 

 

 

I had very similar thoughts. Right now I'm nursing a Takahashi Epsilon 200 back to imaging. I have 8" and 11" Edge telescopes, but find that they are very slow, and the reducer available for them has lots of CA and broadband reflection issues. I feel the Takahashi is a bit too short of focal length, and the Edge scopes has the mentioned issues. This leaves me with a large diameter higher quality Newtonian or CDK. I have had two inexpensive RC telescopes, and only one of them was well made. The largest CDK I can use is also the 14", but I have to consider the 12" to reduce costs some. The seeing in my skies might also not support the 14" CDK very well so a large newtonian, maybe even a 12" would be ideal for a better pixel scale.

[Rouzbeh]

Andrew

 

I thought for a while, a couple of options in front of me

 

1. ONTC 10 F4 with para 2+QHY268. I have see this combination provide a lot of details with much faster speed compared to my F8 system. This system is affordable to me.

 

2. If I want to chase aperture, I am thinking about a 12-14 inch CDK or premium RC. Originally I am looking for an RCOS. However, F9 is too slow and the electronic system may break down any time. Therefore a PW CDK14 or AG idk14.5 is a better option. The new 461 sensor looks like a good match with these 14 inch scopes. QHY just announced 461 photographic version, which is the cheapest among QHY, ZWO, and Moravian. I am also looking at the test results. 14 inch scopes are the largest scopes my mount and observatory can accommodate. However, these systems are too expensive for me, especially those 50 mm square filters. I may look for a partner to join this project if I want to go for a 14 inch cdk or idk. The resolution should be much better than the 10 inch Newtonian.

 

Yuexiao   

 

I was looking for larger aperture at relatively fast speeds. 14 to 16" newts were too long. Been working on both the CDk12 and 14 with the QHY268 and 600.

 

The CDK14 is now running at f/4.7 with the reducer and the QHY600. The FOV is equal to the that of the IMX411 (150MP) at native focal length.

 

The image scale is 0.455"/pixel vs the native 0.31.

 

Details:

https://astrogeartod...-imaging-train/

 

 

Images in 2022 were with that setup:

https://www.astrobin.../users/Rouzbeh/

 

 

I'm using 50mm round unmounted filters.

 

 

CS

Rouz

[syxbach]

Rouz

 

I have been watching your review for a while. Your cdk14 project definitely paved the way for us, especially you figured out the reducer which needs very short backfocus.

 

My concern about the reducer is the spot size may not be as good as that of native focal length. Would you be willing to share with me one L sub of each combination? I will PM you later. 

 

Thanks!

 

Yuexiao 

 

 

 

 

I was looking for larger aperture at relatively fast speeds. 14 to 16" newts were too long. Been working on both the CDk12 and 14 with the QHY268 and 600.

 

The CDK14 is now running at f/4.7 with the reducer and the QHY600. The FOV is equal to the that of the IMX411 (150MP) at native focal length.

 

The image scale is 0.455"/pixel vs the native 0.31.

 

Details:

https://astrogeartod...-imaging-train/

 

 

Images in 2022 were with that setup:

https://www.astrobin.../users/Rouzbeh/

 

 

I'm using 50mm round unmounted filters.

 

 

CS

Rouz

[Rouzbeh]

Rouz

 

I have been watching your review for a while. Your cdk14 project definitely paved the way for us, especially you figured out the reducer which needs very short backfocus.

 

My concern about the reducer is the spot size may not be as good as that of native focal length. Would you be willing to share with me one L sub of each combination? I will PM you later. 

 

Thanks!

 

Yuexiao 

Glad you found it useful.

 

Sent you some subs.

 

The main concern is seeing, when its good FWHM gets nice and low with the reducer. Being winter now, conditions are quite unfavorable.

With poor seeing, I find the native sampling rate even worse.

 

CS

Rouz

Attached Thumbnails

•