M42 on 17 Nov 2005

Just dying to test the modified 350D, even under the full moon last night I
used a Ha filter as a luminance layer and then took a few colour shots as a
paintbrush.

The camera was attached to an 80mm F/5 refractor guided in ALT-AZ by a
celestron mount (thanks again Mike). The Celestron mount isn't much for
tracking, hence the short exposures but it is easier to carry than the LX90.

All exposures were 30s or less and stacked using MaximDL and processed using
the same. Paintshop Pro, Adobe Photoshop (in particular: FITS Liberator) and
AIP were also used to process.

If this is what the camera's capable of under a full moon (with the moon
within spitting distance of the target) I can't wait to test it under a dark
sky with a better guided mount.

Full FOV shot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_..._051117lge.jpg

Cropshot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_...M42_051117.jpg

Thanks for looking (comments and advice welcome)

Regards


Chris

Hi,

I have a 300D, what is the modification you talk about and does it work on
the 300D?

Mark.



"Chris Taylor" wrote in message
...

Just dying to test the modified 350D, even under the full moon last night
I
used a Ha filter as a luminance layer and then took a few colour shots as
a
paintbrush.

The camera was attached to an 80mm F/5 refractor guided in ALT-AZ by a
celestron mount (thanks again Mike). The Celestron mount isn't much for
tracking, hence the short exposures but it is easier to carry than the
LX90.

All exposures were 30s or less and stacked using MaximDL and processed
using
the same. Paintshop Pro, Adobe Photoshop (in particular: FITS Liberator)
and
AIP were also used to process.

If this is what the camera's capable of under a full moon (with the moon
within spitting distance of the target) I can't wait to test it under a
dark
sky with a better guided mount.

Full FOV shot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_..._051117lge.jpg

Cropshot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_...M42_051117.jpg

Thanks for looking (comments and advice welcome)

Regards


Chris

Hi Mark

There's an infrared blocking filter over the CCD in the Canon DSLR's. The
blocking filter also blocks light from Hydrogen Alpha wavelengths (the red
end of the spectrum). Without the filter you get better resonse in the red
end of the spectrum.

Removing the filter's a pretty risky affair. I broke my camera while doing
he mod and had to pay a premium to get it fixed.

For the 300D see: http://ghonis2.ho8.com/rebelmod.html

Regards


Chris


"Mark M" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I have a 300D, what is the modification you talk about and does it work on
the 300D?

Mark.



"Chris Taylor" wrote in message
...

Just dying to test the modified 350D, even under the full moon last night
I
used a Ha filter as a luminance layer and then took a few colour shots as
a
paintbrush.

The camera was attached to an 80mm F/5 refractor guided in ALT-AZ by a
celestron mount (thanks again Mike). The Celestron mount isn't much for
tracking, hence the short exposures but it is easier to carry than the
LX90.

All exposures were 30s or less and stacked using MaximDL and processed
using
the same. Paintshop Pro, Adobe Photoshop (in particular: FITS Liberator)
and
AIP were also used to process.

If this is what the camera's capable of under a full moon (with the moon
within spitting distance of the target) I can't wait to test it under a
dark
sky with a better guided mount.

Full FOV shot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_..._051117lge.jpg

Cropshot:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/taylor_...M42_051117.jpg

Thanks for looking (comments and advice welcome)

Regards


Chris

Thanks for looking (comments and advice welcome)

Chris,

Inspirational ! Every now and then, I think about setting myself up with a
scope and some nice shiny toys, but when I tot up the cost of my wish list I
tell myself its just too expensive. And then along comes a picky like
yours...

Thanks for posting the link.

Pete K

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:16:41 GMT, "Chris Taylor"
wrote:

Just dying to test the modified 350D, even under the full moon last night I
used a Ha filter as a luminance layer and then took a few colour shots as a
paintbrush.

The camera was attached to an 80mm F/5 refractor guided in ALT-AZ by a
celestron mount (thanks again Mike). The Celestron mount isn't much for
tracking, hence the short exposures but it is easier to carry than the LX90.

All exposures were 30s or less and stacked using MaximDL and processed using
the same. Paintshop Pro, Adobe Photoshop (in particular: FITS Liberator) and
AIP were also used to process.

If this is what the camera's capable of under a full moon (with the moon
within spitting distance of the target) I can't wait to test it under a dark
sky with a better guided mount.

I came home from Patrick's observatory last night and did a quick
set-up to capture M42 with an 8" Mak Cas + a Canon 20Da. The Moon was
bright in the sky so the exposures were kept short. Here's a single
frame from the session...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/M42-20Da.html

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
I came home from Patrick's observatory last night and did a quick
set-up to capture M42 with an 8" Mak Cas + a Canon 20Da. The Moon was
bright in the sky so the exposures were kept short. Here's a single
frame from the session...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/DSO/M42-20Da.html


Hi Pete

Nice shot. How long was the exposure?

Is the 20Da any good? I got the 58mm XNite filter for the 350d and can't
tell the difference between shots using this with auto white balance and
shots from before it was modified. I'm every bit happy that the camera is
now good for daytime and astro use.

Regards


Chris

a single frame....one exposure...no stacking...but...but...but....!

Ok, i wont start

On 21 Nov 2005 07:33:50 -0800, wrote:

a single frame....one exposure...no stacking...but...but...but....!

Ok, i wont start

I only did it for you Rob ;-)
--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

In article , Pete Lawrence wrote:
On 21 Nov 2005 07:33:50 -0800, wrote:

a single frame....one exposure...no stacking...but...but...but....!

Ok, i wont start

I only did it for you Rob ;-)

I think that for Christmas you should post some of your 'less successful'
pictures. You know, "M42+thumb", that sort of thing. Just to reassure
some of us that you _are_ capable of getting it wrong once in a while :-)

Jim
--
Find me at http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk
JediGeeks http://www.jedigeeks.com
Is anyone interested in helping produce a whisky podcast?
If so, please visit http://www.UrsaMinorBeta.co.uk/theDram/

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:47:30 +0000, Jim
wrote:

In article , Pete Lawrence wrote:
On 21 Nov 2005 07:33:50 -0800, wrote:

a single frame....one exposure...no stacking...but...but...but....!

Ok, i wont start

I only did it for you Rob ;-)

I think that for Christmas you should post some of your 'less successful'
pictures. You know, "M42+thumb", that sort of thing. Just to reassure
some of us that you _are_ capable of getting it wrong once in a while :-)

Very, very capable!
--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk