New WF imaging Setup For Anyone

Another forum I'm on has members producing images that are just awesome with their equipment . These members have knowledge and trying new ways all the time which is also amazing their results . One particular member has a setup I wanted to share so that maybe others can get an idea that there are other ways to take great WF images of DSOs' with great results . Check out the link below for a member name Matt : http://ukastroimaging.​co.uk …s/index.php?top​ic=64789.0

Very cool,

It's similar to what I've seen a few people do using Canon 200 F2.8L primes with adapters to seat up to ZWO CCD's too. They get F2.8 speed and the 200mm focal length on the smaller sensors give a nice wide field. Super small and light setup too. Makes tracking a breeze and instant long subs without having to be ultra precise.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #18092683
Very cool,

It's similar to what I've seen a few people do using Canon 200 F2.8L primes with adapters to seat up to ZWO CCD's too. They get F2.8 speed and the 200mm focal length on the smaller sensors give a nice wide field. Super small and light setup too. Makes tracking a breeze and instant long subs without having to be ultra precise.

Very best,

That use to be very popular about back around 2005 . Haven't seen much of that setup used lately .

With a lens you really dont need tracking honestly. I rarely shoot longer than 120s subs at my darksite, mag 21.4 With an F2 lens and my 550d.

calypsob wrote in post #18141900
, mag 21.4 With an F2 lens and my 550d.

What ? You meaning your sensor is sensitive enough to pick up 21.4 mag stars ? How do you know they are 21.4mag ?

Celestron wrote in post #18141906
What ? You meaning your sensor is sensitive enough to pick up 21.4 mag stars ? How do you know they are 21.4mag ?

I wonder if he's talking about the sky quality. One way of measuring sky quality is to rate in in magnitudes per arc-second squared.

The "idea" of this is that it represents how much "glow" would be in the sky if there was a star at that brightness in every square arc-second of sky.

If you were to get a Sky Quality Meter, that's the value they show on the display after measuring the sky.

TCampbell wrote in post #18142105
I wonder if he's talking about the sky quality. One way of measuring sky quality is to rate in in magnitudes per arc-second squared.

The "idea" of this is that it represents how much "glow" would be in the sky if there was a star at that brightness in every square arc-second of sky.

If you were to get a Sky Quality Meter, that's the value they show on the display after measuring the sky.

I'm just really wanting to know how he knows stars are 21.4mag and if his camera can actually pickup stars that dim ?? My C8 SCT has a limiting mag 14 which is the dimmest star that can be seen in my scope . However a 11" is only slightly more which is 14.7mag and a 14" goes to 15.3mag . For a scope to reach 21mag would have to be a huge scope , I'm guessing 20"+ SCT or Dobsonian . I would love to look at a 21.0 mag star in any scope !! Not saying impossible , saying I would love to see one cause that is extremely dim mag. !!

Celestron wrote in post #18142328
I'm just really wanting to know how he knows stars are 21.4mag and if his camera can actually pickup stars that dim ?? My C8 SCT has a limiting mag 14 which is the dimmest star that can be seen in my scope . However a 11" is only slightly more which is 14.7mag and a 14" goes to 15.3mag . For a scope to reach 21mag would have to be a huge scope , I'm guessing 20"+ SCT or Dobsonian . I would love to look at a 21.0 mag star in any scope !! Not saying impossible , saying I would love to see one cause that is extremely dim mag. !!

If it's the sky rating, you get that either from a "Sky Quality Meter" (see: http://www.unihedron.c​om/projects/darksky/ ) or you can get an app for a smartphone. The smartphone apps don't seem to be nearly as accurate as the dedicated meter (probably not a surprise).

My guess about this being the rating of the sky is based on the context "at my darksite, mag 21.4" (so I am thinking the darksite is rated at 21.4 -- not that he sees magnitude 21.4 stars through a telescope.)

TCampbell wrote in post #18142671
If it's the sky rating, you get that either from a "Sky Quality Meter" (see: http://www.unihedron.c​om/projects/darksky/ ) or you can get an app for a smartphone. The smartphone apps don't seem to be nearly as accurate as the dedicated meter (probably not a surprise).

My guess about this being the rating of the sky is based on the context "at my darksite, mag 21.4" (so I am thinking the darksite is rated at 21.4 -- not that he sees magnitude 21.4 stars through a telescope.)

I use a Clear Sky Chart which all you have to do is have a link to check your area . Click on the little blue square according to the time it is and it will show you sky conditions . Very accurate too but it doesn't give you #s .

http://www.cleardarksk​y.com/csk/

Celestron wrote in post #18142913
I use a Clear Sky Chart which all you have to do is have a link to check your area . Click on the little blue square according to the time it is and it will show you sky conditions . Very accurate too but it doesn't give you #s .

http://www.cleardarksk​y.com/csk/

If you read the key on Danko's charts, he mentions that he uses moon phase phase & position, etc. to determine darkness, but doesn't factor in local light pollution.

Incidentally, a similar site to Danko's is clearoutside.com. I believe Danko only covers North America but Clear Outside covers the world. I often check both.

It doesn't show a map like the CSC does , CSC much easier to understand cause you can see actual clouds and as far as LP if you know how to read the map colors you can see LP effects . Just compare the shaded color to the chart on the side which tells you how seeing is . I can tell if it's going to be a clear night or not .

I look out the window.

Celestron wrote in post #18143863
It doesn't show a map like the CSC does , CSC much easier to understand cause you can see actual clouds and as far as LP if you know how to read the map colors you can see LP effects . Just compare the shaded color to the chart on the side which tells you how seeing is . I can tell if it's going to be a clear night or not .

You're referring to the map link?: http://djlorenz.github​.io …/lp2006/overlay​/dark.html
Danko's site will show a small excerpt from that larger map based on the location of a known observing site.

As for cloud cover, the Clear Outside chart gives you clouds based on layers of low, medium & high level clouds and then a combined total clouds value.

I check multiple maps if the weather is uncertain for viewing because they sometimes give wildly different predictions.

My favorite tool (which they took away but I think will be coming back) is Wunderground "model" data. This was a feature of the "Wundermap". It used to be possible to view the forecast models (not just the report where they tell if you they think it will be clear vs. cloudy, but the visual "model" where the computer shows the prediction for where it thinks the clouds will be. This was REALLY handy because sometimes an "iffy" forecast really just meant that you are located near an edge where a system might clip just barely to the north or just barely to the south... and if that's the case, I might be able to pick a different observing site and dodge the clouds.

Wunderground simplified their site and took a lot of these more technical features away. I think they were using Google maps and may have switched to a different map (I no longer see the Google maps logo when I view the "Wundermap" feature.) In any case, they seem to have indicated that some of these features will be returning to the new map as they re-develop the Wundermap. I really hope they bring back the modeling feature. That was incredibly useful for planning out observing nights & locations.