ASTRO: IC410's "Tadpoles" at 3366mm from Dream Machine

Last night I had somewhat better seeing than the night before so my tests of
the new IMG1024S Dream Machine continued but with somewhat better results.

I ended up concentrating on the "tadpoles" in IC410, continuing on an object
that I had taken a few test exposures of the prior night.

I used the very nice "suburban friendly" Custom Scientific 3nm FWHM Halpha
filter to take seven exposures of a half hour each. I can say with zero
hesitation that the 3nm Custom Scientific Ha filter is the best Halpha
filter I have ever used. My comparison set so far consists of the set of 3nm
Cs, 4.5nm CS, 6nm AD, 9nm pre-AD Schuler. I still haven't yet tested the new
7nm Baader but am excited to see a nice $300 solution for 50mm that, based
on the work of others, appears to work every bit as well as the higher
priced 6nm filters that seem to be so popular, but at less than half the
price!

The seeing still was not all that great due to upper air disturbances caused
by the position of the jet stream, but was definitely better than Wed night.
Hopefully I will have good seeing soon, because I would like to shoot the
scope at full focal length, without the reducer (5760mm vs 3366mm), to
continue my testing.

The Dream Machine's big 24 x 24 micron back-illuminated pixels are like a
photon vacuum cleaner compared to the "ccd with sunglasses" performance I
see with the KAF3200ME sensor. Not a bad sensor at all, mind you, but it is
in a different league with the 6.8 x 6.8 micron microlensed pixels. When the
seeing is good, then it is a lot of fun to use on the stinger at 0.42
arc-sec/pixel.

The DM used with the reducer gives me 1.42 arc-sec/pixel and without it is
0.86 ASP.

I processed the image two ways: with and without deconvolution.

In this case due to the decent s/n I get from the big pixels exposed through
a 3nm filter at f/7.1 I can tolerate some deconvolution without mucking up
the image. It is a pleasure to have so much signal after operating in
starvation mode for the past month taking the data for Jones 1.

http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/ic4...ch_ha_page.htm

comments welcome.

Nice tadpoles. That captured all seeing would allow. When seeing gets
better it will be interesting to see what it does at f/12.6.

Last night I finally had great seeing, first in ages and then, without
warning there was an area wide power outage. After 3 hours it came on
allowing me to close up the observatory. But I only got the scope down
when it went off again. Ended up closing the roof manually, fortunately
that's not hard. Today it is snowing again but the power is back on.

Rick


Richard Crisp wrote:

Last night I had somewhat better seeing than the night before so my tests of
the new IMG1024S Dream Machine continued but with somewhat better results.

I ended up concentrating on the "tadpoles" in IC410, continuing on an object
that I had taken a few test exposures of the prior night.

I used the very nice "suburban friendly" Custom Scientific 3nm FWHM Halpha
filter to take seven exposures of a half hour each. I can say with zero
hesitation that the 3nm Custom Scientific Ha filter is the best Halpha
filter I have ever used. My comparison set so far consists of the set of 3nm
Cs, 4.5nm CS, 6nm AD, 9nm pre-AD Schuler. I still haven't yet tested the new
7nm Baader but am excited to see a nice $300 solution for 50mm that, based
on the work of others, appears to work every bit as well as the higher
priced 6nm filters that seem to be so popular, but at less than half the
price!

The seeing still was not all that great due to upper air disturbances caused
by the position of the jet stream, but was definitely better than Wed night.
Hopefully I will have good seeing soon, because I would like to shoot the
scope at full focal length, without the reducer (5760mm vs 3366mm), to
continue my testing.

The Dream Machine's big 24 x 24 micron back-illuminated pixels are like a
photon vacuum cleaner compared to the "ccd with sunglasses" performance I
see with the KAF3200ME sensor. Not a bad sensor at all, mind you, but it is
in a different league with the 6.8 x 6.8 micron microlensed pixels. When the
seeing is good, then it is a lot of fun to use on the stinger at 0.42
arc-sec/pixel.

The DM used with the reducer gives me 1.42 arc-sec/pixel and without it is
0.86 ASP.

I processed the image two ways: with and without deconvolution.

In this case due to the decent s/n I get from the big pixels exposed through
a 3nm filter at f/7.1 I can tolerate some deconvolution without mucking up
the image. It is a pleasure to have so much signal after operating in
starvation mode for the past month taking the data for Jones 1.

http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/ic4...ch_ha_page.htm

comments welcome.




--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".

That top one reminds me of E.T. Very cool shot Richard. Clear Skyz, LA


"Richard Crisp" wrote in message
...
Last night I had somewhat better seeing than the night before so my tests
of
the new IMG1024S Dream Machine continued but with somewhat better results.

I ended up concentrating on the "tadpoles" in IC410, continuing on an
object
that I had taken a few test exposures of the prior night.

I used the very nice "suburban friendly" Custom Scientific 3nm FWHM Halpha
filter to take seven exposures of a half hour each. I can say with zero
hesitation that the 3nm Custom Scientific Ha filter is the best Halpha
filter I have ever used. My comparison set so far consists of the set of
3nm
Cs, 4.5nm CS, 6nm AD, 9nm pre-AD Schuler. I still haven't yet tested the
new
7nm Baader but am excited to see a nice $300 solution for 50mm that, based
on the work of others, appears to work every bit as well as the higher
priced 6nm filters that seem to be so popular, but at less than half the
price!

The seeing still was not all that great due to upper air disturbances
caused
by the position of the jet stream, but was definitely better than Wed
night.
Hopefully I will have good seeing soon, because I would like to shoot the
scope at full focal length, without the reducer (5760mm vs 3366mm), to
continue my testing.

The Dream Machine's big 24 x 24 micron back-illuminated pixels are like a
photon vacuum cleaner compared to the "ccd with sunglasses" performance I
see with the KAF3200ME sensor. Not a bad sensor at all, mind you, but it
is
in a different league with the 6.8 x 6.8 micron microlensed pixels. When
the
seeing is good, then it is a lot of fun to use on the stinger at 0.42
arc-sec/pixel.

The DM used with the reducer gives me 1.42 arc-sec/pixel and without it is
0.86 ASP.

I processed the image two ways: with and without deconvolution.

In this case due to the decent s/n I get from the big pixels exposed
through
a 3nm filter at f/7.1 I can tolerate some deconvolution without mucking up
the image. It is a pleasure to have so much signal after operating in
starvation mode for the past month taking the data for Jones 1.

http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/ic4...ch_ha_page.htm

comments welcome.

"Richard Crisp" wrote
...
I ended up concentrating on the "tadpoles" in IC410, continuing on an
object that I had taken a few test exposures of the prior night.

Great image Richard!!


I used the very nice "suburban friendly" Custom Scientific 3nm FWHM Halpha
filter.........

"suburban friendly"?? It's approved by home owers' associations???


......... I still haven't yet tested the new 7nm Baader but am excited to
see a nice $300 solution for 50mm.......

Sounds like my kinda filter! I'll be very interested in what results you
get from the Baader filter if you get it. My only experience with h-a
filters is my Astronimik II 1.25" filter. However, I'd like to get at least
an h-a in 2-inch. As for CS, I use to use their 1.25" color imaging filters
until one broke, and then changed to the Astronomik's. I also have CS's
UBVRI photometric filters in 1.25" and of their color imaging filters in 2".


The Dream Machine's big 24 x 24 micron back-illuminated pixels.........

I've still had no luck getting Jim M, co-owner of FLI to drive 4 miles and
hook his cameras on our 20RC. He'd rather fool around in his backyard with a
10" SCT. Actually, I don't think Jim has that much time for astronomy now -
one of the bad parts of starting an astronomy related business. I've always
liked the idea of using big pixel back-illum chips at the 20RC's 161-inch
focal length. The 20 micron pixels of the ST-9 works OK, and on many nights
the 16 micron pixels of the 1301 are a little small, given our usual poor
seeing. The images you are getting are fine. Have you compared FWHM of a
very short exposure with and without the filter? It would be interesting to
see if it has an impact.

George Normandin