A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Astro Pictures
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ASTRO: Kohoutek 2-1 (PN in Auriga)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 8th 17, 11:53 PM
slilge slilge is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Aug 2008
Posts: 151
Default ASTRO: Kohoutek 2-1 (PN in Auriga)

Kohoutek 2-1 is a rather large (3 arcminutes) and rather faint planetary nebula, but definately not an extremely weak object. It surprised me when I found it somewhere in the internet about a year ago because I would have thought that I would have heard of such a nice PN.

I imaged it in two nights at the end of November and two at the end of December. Taken as usual from Berlin with my 10" Meade ACF at f/8, mount was a Skywatcher AZ-EQ6.
Exposure time was:
OIII: 100x5min with ASI1600 camera, 10x10min with Trius SX694
Ha: 61x5min ASI1600, 4x10min Trius SX694
RGB: 4x2min each with Trius SX694
Image scale is 0.75 arcseconds/pixel.

Stefan
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Kohoutek2-1HaOIIIneugut.jpg
Views:	432
Size:	871.7 KB
ID:	6484  
  #2  
Old January 9th 17, 05:51 AM
WA0CKY WA0CKY is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Feb 2008
Posts: 689
Default

Nice. So how does the CMOS camera compare to the CCD?

I'm starting to see a few take this one but none any better than this yet were done from darker skies.

Rick

Quote:
Originally Posted by slilge View Post
Kohoutek 2-1 is a rather large (3 arcminutes) and rather faint planetary nebula, but definately not an extremely weak object. It surprised me when I found it somewhere in the internet about a year ago because I would have thought that I would have heard of such a nice PN.

I imaged it in two nights at the end of November and two at the end of December. Taken as usual from Berlin with my 10" Meade ACF at f/8, mount was a Skywatcher AZ-EQ6.
Exposure time was:
OIII: 100x5min with ASI1600 camera, 10x10min with Trius SX694
Ha: 61x5min ASI1600, 4x10min Trius SX694
RGB: 4x2min each with Trius SX694
Image scale is 0.75 arcseconds/pixel.

Stefan
  #3  
Old January 9th 17, 09:05 PM
slilge slilge is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Aug 2008
Posts: 151
Default

The CMOS does quite well. Uncalibrated images look clearly inferior but after calibration the ASI1600 is almost as good as the Trius SX694. This was the first time I have compared both cameras in the same night and the comparison has some flaws (was experimenting with gain and temperature of the ASI also), but still I see an advantage for the ICX694 in long (10 minute) exposures. For short exposures the ASI is much much better due to it's low read noise.

I have attached 80 minutes of OIII data, taken in the same night with the same telescope. The ASI had 16x5 minutes while the SXV had 8x10 minutes. But that is no disadvantage for the ASI as it is easily background limited in five minutes even with narrow band and f/8.
I only had the ASI at -10 celsius though which is a slight disadvantage as it cools as well as the Trius, which was at -20 celsius.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CompASI-SXV-Kohoutek2-1.jpg
Views:	127
Size:	856.1 KB
ID:	6488  
  #4  
Old January 10th 17, 06:54 AM
WA0CKY WA0CKY is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Feb 2008
Posts: 689
Default

-20C is warmer than my ambient temperature!

Looks like the Trius picked up a bit more nebula in the same time. Least I see the fainter parts better. How's the QE compare?

Rick

Quote:
Originally Posted by slilge View Post
The CMOS does quite well. Uncalibrated images look clearly inferior but after calibration the ASI1600 is almost as good as the Trius SX694. This was the first time I have compared both cameras in the same night and the comparison has some flaws (was experimenting with gain and temperature of the ASI also), but still I see an advantage for the ICX694 in long (10 minute) exposures. For short exposures the ASI is much much better due to it's low read noise.

I have attached 80 minutes of OIII data, taken in the same night with the same telescope. The ASI had 16x5 minutes while the SXV had 8x10 minutes. But that is no disadvantage for the ASI as it is easily background limited in five minutes even with narrow band and f/8.
I only had the ASI at -10 celsius though which is a slight disadvantage as it cools as well as the Trius, which was at -20 celsius.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ISON, the flop that made Kohoutek seem bright RichA[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 1 December 1st 13 03:03 PM
ISON, a bigger bust than Kohoutek in the 1970's RichA[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 15 November 20th 13 03:40 PM
ASTRO: Kohoutek 1-14 Rick Johnson[_2_] Astro Pictures 0 August 6th 12 07:34 AM
ASTRO: Sharpless 2-224 (supernova-remnant in Auriga) Stefan Lilge Astro Pictures 2 February 28th 11 10:32 PM
ASTRO: Constellation Auriga George Normandin Astro Pictures 2 January 21st 07 07:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.