Beginner CCD image: M57

This is a beginner shot from a Meade DSI of the Ring nebula consisting of 50
stacked images with 0.775 sec exposure.

http://tek1systems.com/astro/wp-cont.../RingCropped3-
7_10_20101.jpg
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com

On 7/22/2010 3:02 PM, sjohns wrote:
This is a beginner shot from a Meade DSI of the Ring nebula consisting of 50
stacked images with 0.775 sec exposure.

http://tek1systems.com/astro/wp-cont.../RingCropped3-
7_10_20101.jpg
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com

Looks about like my first effort 50 years ago with film. I needed a 10
minute exposure to do as well.

Why such a short exposure time? Even an alt azimuth mount should do
far longer reducing read noise by a factor of 4 or 5 times giving an
even better image.

Rick

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

To: Rick Johnson
From Newsgroup: alt.binaries.pictures.astro

On 7/22/2010 3:02 PM, sjohns wrote:
This is a beginner shot from a Meade DSI of the Ring nebula consisting of
50 stacked images with 0.775 sec exposure.

http://tek1systems.com/astro/wp-cont.../RingCropped3-
7_10_20101.jpg
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com

Looks about like my first effort 50 years ago with film. I needed a 10
minute exposure to do as well.

Why such a short exposure time? Even an alt azimuth mount should do
far longer reducing read noise by a factor of 4 or 5 times giving an
even better image.

Rick


Just starting out... It is a CCD camera, and so far I don't see much of an
improvement compared for a DSLR. I have it on an equitorial mount. Yes, a
longer exposure would be better - I am experimenting with that.


--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com

Main difference with CCD and DSLR is cooling and the DSI has none. So
I'm not surprised you see little difference. DSLR is blocked for H
alpha unless the IR filter is modified so it will be better for emission
nebula that are rich in H alpha over an unmodified DSLR.

Even a poor equatorial mount should track for 15 or 20 seconds. Most
will go at least twice that. Some frames my be lost but just pitch them
and stack the good ones. Each time you read and image noise is
included. By going longer you add far less of this noise. Add guiding
and you can go far longer.

Open star clusters and bright planetary nebula are good targets for the
camera. Lots of both in the skies right now for you to choose from.

Rick



On 7/23/2010 5:14 PM, sjohns wrote:
To: Rick Johnson
From Newsgroup: alt.binaries.pictures.astro

On 7/22/2010 3:02 PM, sjohns wrote:
This is a beginner shot from a Meade DSI of the Ring nebula consisting of
50 stacked images with 0.775 sec exposure.

http://tek1systems.com/astro/wp-cont.../RingCropped3-
7_10_20101.jpg
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com

Looks about like my first effort 50 years ago with film. I needed a 10
minute exposure to do as well.

Why such a short exposure time? Even an alt azimuth mount should do
far longer reducing read noise by a factor of 4 or 5 times giving an
even better image.

Rick


Just starting out... It is a CCD camera, and so far I don't see much of an
improvement compared for a DSLR. I have it on an equitorial mount. Yes, a
longer exposure would be better - I am experimenting with that.


--
Correct domain name is arvig and it is net not com. Prefix is correct.
Third character is a zero rather than a capital "Oh".
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
--- Synchronet 3.14a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85
www.ohiofreenet.org - telnet://tek1systems.com


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