A Collection of Galaxies

RustierOne · Sep 9, 2014

Hi All.

I wanted to pull together a collection of galaxies that I have captured recently to show the variety in shape, size and form that is available for astrophotographers to explore. While most are not as colorful as many of the nebulae, they are quite interesting nonetheless. I’ll start with the latest ones, which are of higher quality compared to earlier ones. The latter were taken as I was still learning to use DeepSkyStacker and Phd for auto-guiding. These were all captured using a Celestron-8 or Celestron-11 telescope, unless otherwise noted.

NGC 247, The Needle's Eye Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, three 20-minute exposures

NGC 6288, Barnard's Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, seven 20-minute exposures

NGC 253, Silver Coin or Sculptor Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, four 15-minute exposures

The next image shows the diminutive galaxy NGC 6207 in the same field with the Great Globular Cluster in Hercules, M13.

M13 showing galaxy NGC 6207 (upper rt.), C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 800, eighteen 10-minute exposures. Also shown is tiny galaxy IC 4617 about 1/2 way between M13 and NGC 6207

The two galaxies in the above image are more typical of the vast majority of galaxies visible using small telescopes.

M106 with faint NGC 4248 (lt.), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N

NGC 4244, the Silver Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 min. exposure

M64, the Blackeye Galaxy, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 5-minute exposures

M104, Sombrero Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, 1760 mm, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M105, NGC 3384, NGC 3389 (lt. to rt.), C-11, 1760 mm, F/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, twelve 5-minute exposures. I like to call this group the Leo Trio as distinct from the Leo Triplet (M65, M66, NGC 3628).

NGC 4565, the Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

In the above image in bottom right is little spiral galaxy NGC4565A.

M95, M96 (rt.), C-8, 1420 mm f.l. Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 7-1/2 minute exposures

NGC 4631, Whale Galaxy, NGC 4627 (above), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

M82, M81 (rt.), Bode's Nebulae, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, stack of eight images

M65, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 178-second exposure

M66, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 183-second exposure

I hope you have enjoyed these, and are moved to give galaxy photography a try.

--

Best Regards,
Russ

NareshKlick · Sep 10, 2014

RustierOne said:
Hi All.

I wanted to pull together a collection of galaxies that I have captured recently to show the variety in shape, size and form that is available for astrophotographers to explore. While most are not as colorful as many of the nebulae, they are quite interesting nonetheless. I’ll start with the latest ones, which are of higher quality compared to earlier ones. The latter were taken as I was still learning to use DeepSkyStacker and Phd for auto-guiding. These were all captured using a Celestron-8 or Celestron-11 telescope, unless otherwise noted.

NGC 247, The Needle's Eye Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, three 20-minute exposures

NGC 6288, Barnard's Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, seven 20-minute exposures

NGC 253, Silver Coin or Sculptor Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, four 15-minute exposures

The next image shows the diminutive galaxy NGC 6207 in the same field with the Great Globular Cluster in Hercules, M13.

M13 showing galaxy NGC 6207 (upper rt.), C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 800, eighteen 10-minute exposures. Also shown is tiny galaxy IC 4617 about 1/2 way between M13 and NGC 6207

The two galaxies in the above image are more typical of the vast majority of galaxies visible using small telescopes.

M106 with faint NGC 4248 (lt.), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N

NGC 4244, the Silver Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 min. exposure

M64, the Blackeye Galaxy, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 5-minute exposures

M104, Sombrero Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, 1760 mm, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M105, NGC 3384, NGC 3389 (lt. to rt.), C-11, 1760 mm, F/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, twelve 5-minute exposures. I like to call this group the Leo Trio as distinct from the Leo Triplet (M65, M66, NGC 3628).

NGC 4565, the Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

In the above image in bottom right is little spiral galaxy NGC4565A.

M95, M96 (rt.), C-8, 1420 mm f.l. Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 7-1/2 minute exposures

NGC 4631, Whale Galaxy, NGC 4627 (above), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

M82, M81 (rt.), Bode's Nebulae, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, stack of eight images

M65, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 178-second exposure

M66, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 183-second exposure

I hope you have enjoyed these, and are moved to give galaxy photography a try.

--

Best Regards,
Russ

Great shots Russ.

I am following this talk forum closely and one day I look forward to getting all these super nice images myself and share with all for joy! Will be getting Samyang 14mm 2.8 shortly.

Before actually shooting the stars, I am getting to know what is round the earth and what are the names of various galaxies and identifying through charts. But still pieces of information everywhere on internet. Any good place for learners with all information of the subjects in this universe.

Warm regards,

Naresh

AlvinNo9 · Sep 10, 2014

Those are some amazing pictures, thanks for sharing.

shenango · Sep 10, 2014

Very nice images, Russ. My favorite has to be the Whirlpool you have pictured. Some day I hope to be able to post some deep space images. Until then I will watch and learn from you and the other great AP's on this forum. Thanks for sharing your images with us.

Jerry

RustierOne · Sep 11, 2014

shenango said:
Very nice images, Russ. My favorite has to be the Whirlpool you have pictured. Some day I hope to be able to post some deep space images. Until then I will watch and learn from you and the other great AP's on this forum. Thanks for sharing your images with us.

Thanks Jerry for your kind comment. It is very enjoyable to share deep sky photos with those who appreciate such things.

As for capturing images of galaxies the equipment varies somewhat. For a very few such as the Andromeda Galaxy (M31) and our own Milky Way galaxy, the equipment needed can be fairly basic camera lenses. Here’s one of the Milky Way with a fisheye lens on a barn-door tracker.

Milky Way from Sagittarius to Perseus, Samyang 8 mm f/2.8, 2-1/2 minute exposure

But even for close by galaxies like M31, a small telescope would be useful. Here are two images of galaxies taken using a 55 mm legacy film lens on a crop sensor digital camera.

In the first image below, the bright star Mirach (Beta Andromedae) is visible below M31 in lower right. If you click "Original Size" and look closely, you can see M110 (NGC 205) directly above M31. This is a typical 1/3° elliptical galaxy. So you can see the image scale needed for most galaxies.

Andromeda Galaxy, 55 mm Mamiya-Sekor f/1.4 at f/2.8, six minute exposure

Triangulum Galaxy, 55 mm Mamiya-Sekor f/1.4 at f/2.8, six minute exposure

The image immediately above shows the bright star Almach (Gamma Andromedae, far left) with open cluster NGC 752 and M33 to its right. The constellations Triangulum (below center) and Ares (lower right) are also visible.

As you can see a lot more image scale would be in order. A small high quality refractor would be very useful even for the nearer galaxies like NGC 253 (1/2° in greatest angular extent). Beyond these the angular size of galaxies increasingly favors a telescope with bit more focal length. Many of the galaxy images I have posted in this thread were taken with a fairly basic, 1981 vintage Celestron-8. This allows for focal lengths of 2080 mm and 1420 mm (with focal reducer).

Of course once you are utilizing the longer focal lengths, the mount becomes increasingly important. And this can easily cost as much or more than the telescope. Welcome to the interesting and sometimes expensive world of astrophotography. Fortunately there are lots of other avenues here using less expensive setups.

--
Best Regards,
Russ

PhotoLutz · Sep 11, 2014

Really amazing stuff! I just got a Celestron-6 and I am finding out just how tricky this is! I have a Nex-7 as well any tips on the best way to combine the photos?

RustierOne said:
Hi All.

I wanted to pull together a collection of galaxies that I have captured recently to show the variety in shape, size and form that is available for astrophotographers to explore. While most are not as colorful as many of the nebulae, they are quite interesting nonetheless. I’ll start with the latest ones, which are of higher quality compared to earlier ones. The latter were taken as I was still learning to use DeepSkyStacker and Phd for auto-guiding. These were all captured using a Celestron-8 or Celestron-11 telescope, unless otherwise noted.

NGC 247, The Needle's Eye Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, three 20-minute exposures

NGC 6288, Barnard's Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, seven 20-minute exposures

NGC 253, Silver Coin or Sculptor Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, four 15-minute exposures

The next image shows the diminutive galaxy NGC 6207 in the same field with the Great Globular Cluster in Hercules, M13.

M13 showing galaxy NGC 6207 (upper rt.), C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 800, eighteen 10-minute exposures. Also shown is tiny galaxy IC 4617 about 1/2 way between M13 and NGC 6207

The two galaxies in the above image are more typical of the vast majority of galaxies visible using small telescopes.

M106 with faint NGC 4248 (lt.), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N

NGC 4244, the Silver Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 min. exposure

M64, the Blackeye Galaxy, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 5-minute exposures

M104, Sombrero Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, 1760 mm, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M105, NGC 3384, NGC 3389 (lt. to rt.), C-11, 1760 mm, F/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, twelve 5-minute exposures. I like to call this group the Leo Trio as distinct from the Leo Triplet (M65, M66, NGC 3628).

NGC 4565, the Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

In the above image in bottom right is little spiral galaxy NGC4565A.

M95, M96 (rt.), C-8, 1420 mm f.l. Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 7-1/2 minute exposures

NGC 4631, Whale Galaxy, NGC 4627 (above), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

M82, M81 (rt.), Bode's Nebulae, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, stack of eight images

M65, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 178-second exposure

M66, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 183-second exposure

I hope you have enjoyed these, and are moved to give galaxy photography a try.

--

Best Regards,
Russ

RustierOne · Sep 11, 2014

DLutzer said:
Really amazing stuff! I just got a Celestron-6 and I am finding out just how tricky this is! I have a Nex-7 as well any tips on the best way to combine the photos?

Thanks, DLutzer for viewing my photos and for your kind remark.

If I understand your question you are asking how to take astro-photos with your C-6 and NEX-7. For all but perhaps some Moon shots your telescope will need to be mounted on an equatorial mount. Most of the go-to mounts are alt-azimuth mounts. These will track your subject quite well. But as it's tracking, the field will rotate around the object being tracked. This will ruin any astro-photo being attempted. It is possible to tip an alt-az. mount up on an equatorial wedge, effectively turning it into an equatorial mount. This will align the formerly vertical axis to be parallel with the Earth's rotational axis.

Another consideration is how to attach camera to telescope. A good source of adapters is

CNC Parts Supply (AKA Telescope Adapters.com).

This is the most basic setup for through-the-telescope astro-photography. But things can grow from there. For long exposure imaging (say more than a minute or so) you will likely need a guide 'scope or off-axis guider with video camera and guiding software. PHD software is free and very good for this purpose.

You may want to use focal reducer to shorten the focal length and expand the field of view. I have used the Celestron f/6.3 reducer corrector, which works OK. In combination with the SCT (Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope) it does produce quite a bit of vignetting. But this can be corrected with stacking software like DeepSkyStacker or with post-processing programs like Lightroom 5.

I hope this information will be of use. If you need any further information, I'm happy to help.

--
Best Regards,
Russ

PhotoLutz said:
RustierOne said:

Hi All.

I wanted to pull together a collection of galaxies that I have captured recently to show the variety in shape, size and form that is available for astrophotographers to explore. While most are not as colorful as many of the nebulae, they are quite interesting nonetheless. I’ll start with the latest ones, which are of higher quality compared to earlier ones. The latter were taken as I was still learning to use DeepSkyStacker and Phd for auto-guiding. These were all captured using a Celestron-8 or Celestron-11 telescope, unless otherwise noted.

NGC 6288, Barnard's Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, seven 20-minute exposures

NGC 253, Silver Coin or Sculptor Galaxy, C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-7, ISO 800, four 15-minute exposures

The next image shows the diminutive galaxy NGC 6207 in the same field with the Great Globular Cluster in Hercules, M13.

M13 showing galaxy NGC 6207 (upper rt.), C-8, 1420 mm, f/7, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 800, eighteen 10-minute exposures. Also shown is tiny galaxy IC 4617 about 1/2 way between M13 and NGC 6207

The two galaxies in the above image are more typical of the vast majority of galaxies visible using small telescopes.

M106 with faint NGC 4248 (lt.), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N

NGC 4244, the Silver Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony Nex-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 min. exposure

M64, the Blackeye Galaxy, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 5-minute exposures

M104, Sombrero Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, 1760 mm, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy, twelve 5-minute exposures, C-11, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600

M105, NGC 3384, NGC 3389 (lt. to rt.), C-11, 1760 mm, F/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, twelve 5-minute exposures. I like to call this group the Leo Trio as distinct from the Leo Triplet (M65, M66, NGC 3628).

NGC 4565, the Needle Galaxy, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

In the above image in bottom right is little spiral galaxy NGC4565A.

M95, M96 (rt.), C-8, 1420 mm f.l. Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, six 7-1/2 minute exposures

NGC 4631, Whale Galaxy, NGC 4627 (above), C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 7-1/2 minute exposure

M82, M81 (rt.), Bode's Nebulae, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, stack of eight images

M65, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 178-second exposure

M66, C-11, 1760 mm, f/6.3, Sony NEX-5N, ISO 1600, 183-second exposure

I hope you have enjoyed these, and are moved to give galaxy photography a try.

Click to expand...

RustierOne · Sep 11, 2014

AlvinNo9 said:
Those are some amazing pictures, thanks for sharing.

Well thanks so much for viewing these images and for commenting. There are indeed many amazing objects to be photographed in the heavens. I have found that photographing these objects reveals much more than what can be seen just looking at them through the same telescope. Such is the power of long exposure imaging.

siwerida · Sep 12, 2014

What a great post Russ and some super images! As a newbie have been thinking I might have a go at galaxies in due course. Am intending to buy my first mount at the end of the month - an HEQ5 pro synscan (after much deliberation!) Am going to use my exisiting photography stuff first but have started to think about a telescope. I had imagined I would go for a small refractor though like the sound of the Schmidt Cassegrain scopes but am a bit concerned by what I've read about 'mirror flop' so would be interested to know about that from an experienced user. Am not sure if they are a reasonable choice as a first scope. The Celestron 8 would be too heavy for an HEQ5 though there are plenty of other options (as usual!) - the Vixen 200L weighs 6kgs and might be okay on the HEQ5 though I believe it's a slightly adapted Schmidt Cassegrain and haven't managed to find a full review yet.

Thanks again for the really interesting post.

Siw

geo444 · Sep 12, 2014

" I hope you have enjoyed these "

I did ! Very nice Collection of Galaxies ! Congratulations for all that night work !

Have you tried night shots at base ISO with long exposures ?

gives better DR & Colors :
Pentax K5 iso 80 Astro

the last Pentax Q10 " Kawaii-Astro-Folie " :
www.dpreview.com/galleries/7467909648/photos/3022577/

--
http://en.astronomike.net/m/6809.html
http://en.astronomike.net/m/134251.html

RustierOne · Sep 13, 2014

NareshKlick said:
Great shots Russ.

I am following this talk forum closely and one day I look forward to getting all these super nice images myself and share with all for joy! Will be getting Samyang 14mm 2.8 shortly.

Before actually shooting the stars, I am getting to know what is round the earth and what are the names of various galaxies and identifying through charts. But still pieces of information everywhere on internet. Any good place for learners with all information of the subjects in this universe.

Warm regards,

Naresh

Thanks for viewing the galaxy shots and for your kind remarks, Naresh. I have enjoyed sharing these and all the nice comments. As for knowing Earth's neighbors, the closest full-sized galaxy is Andromeda, followed by the Triangulum Galaxy. Of course there are many dwarf galaxies and fragments in the neighborhood like the Magellanic Clouds and NGC 6822. Sky and Telescope magazine has a nice article on this in the October, 2014 issue. It mentions a couple of dozen companions and plots them in a sort of 3-D illustration. Most of these are faint and would require long exposure photography to show. Also some of the astronomy apps and PC programs are a great tool for learning your way around. I use SkySafari for iOS, but there are many others. Also I highly recommend Sky and Telescope's Pocket Star Atlas. I use that one almost exclusively although I have three other larger atlases.

Best wishes for an enjoyable trip as you explore the universe!

--
Russ

NareshKlick · Sep 13, 2014

RustierOne said:
NareshKlick said:

Great shots Russ.

I am following this talk forum closely and one day I look forward to getting all these super nice images myself and share with all for joy! Will be getting Samyang 14mm 2.8 shortly.

Before actually shooting the stars, I am getting to know what is round the earth and what are the names of various galaxies and identifying through charts. But still pieces of information everywhere on internet. Any good place for learners with all information of the subjects in this universe.

Warm regards,

Naresh

Click to expand...

Thanks for viewing the galaxy shots and for your kind remarks, Naresh. I have enjoyed sharing these and all the nice comments. As for knowing Earth's neighbors, the closest full-sized galaxy is Andromeda, followed by the Triangulum Galaxy. Of course there are many dwarf galaxies and fragments in the neighborhood like the Magellanic Clouds and NGC 6822. Sky and Telescope magazine has a nice article on this in the October, 2014 issue. It mentions a couple of dozen companions and plots them in a sort of 3-D illustration. Most of these are faint and would require long exposure photography to show. Also some of the astronomy apps and PC programs are a great tool for learning your way around. I use SkySafari for iOS, but there are many others. Also I highly recommend Sky and Telescope's Pocket Star Atlas. I use that one almost exclusively although I have three other larger atlases.

Best wishes for an enjoyable trip as you explore the universe!

RustierOne · Sep 13, 2014

siwerida said:
What a great post Russ and some super images! As a newbie have been thinking I might have a go at galaxies in due course. Am intending to buy my first mount at the end of the month - an HEQ5 pro synscan (after much deliberation!) Am going to use my exisiting photography stuff first but have started to think about a telescope. I had imagined I would go for a small refractor though like the sound of the Schmidt Cassegrain scopes but am a bit concerned by what I've read about 'mirror flop' so would be interested to know about that from an experienced user.

Thanks so much for your kind and encouraging comment! I highly recommend giving galaxies a go. Where else can you photograph what has been called an "Island Universe"?

My experience with Schmidt Cassegrain telescopes (SCTs) began around 1973 with Celestron-5 - then on to a C-8 in 1981 and C-11 in 2008. But I can't say that I've ever knowingly experienced any mirror flop, at least anything noticeable in visual observing. But I don't doubt that it can happen. If it does, it's a one time event most likely to happen when you track across the meridian. The worst consequence would be one frame of a series of images being ruined. I've had lots of other reasons for a frame being ruined, like bumping the telescope or a wind gust during an exposure. So if/when mirror flop happens, it's just one of the many things that can go wrong. But it's by no means some sort of fatal flaw. Good results can be obtained with SCTs. All telescopes have their pluses and minuses.

One important thing the Celestron manual mentions is to always approach final focus turning the adjustment knob in the counterclockwise direction. I believe that takes up some of the slack in the focus mechanism. My C-11 also has a JMI Crayford focuser which is used along with a Bahtinov mask for all the final focusing. But the last time I move the stock Celestron focus knob is in the counterclockwise direction, touching up final focus using the JMI.

SCTs offer a lot of bang for the buck, having a sealed tube and seldom needing collimation. Their biggest drawback for someone new is their long focal length, which can make auto-guiding a challenge. A focal reducer helps tame that down to somewhat shorter focal length and faster optics. But many galaxies and planetary nebulae benefit from the larger image scale.

I've never owned a modern high quality refractor. But they are quite nice in the 100 mm and smaller sizes. Above that they get very expensive. But they don't place high demands on your mount being relatively light and with shorter focal lengths. Newtonian reflectors also offer good bang for the buck. You can get a large aperture (diameter) telescope for a reasonable cost. They can be a bit heavy. But as Michael S. has shown can produce excellent results.

My comments here are by no means an exhaustive discussion of the relative merits of different designs. All quality telescopes can produce good results. You just need to take advantage of their strong points and compensate for their weaknesses. Also selecting a suitable subject for your telescope helps a lot. What might be a good subject for an 80 mm, f/7 refractor would be a poor choice to image with a C-11 with 2800 mm focal length.

siwerida said:
Am not sure if they are a reasonable choice as a first scope. The Celestron 8 would be too heavy for an HEQ5 though there are plenty of other options (as usual!) - the Vixen 200L weighs 6kgs and might be okay on the HEQ5 though I believe it's a slightly adapted Schmidt Cassegrain and haven't managed to find a full review yet.

I wish I still owned my C-5. If I did, it would be used a lot for certain subjects. I really enjoyed the clean, almost refractor-like images it produced. As much as I would have liked to, I couldn't keep all my telescopes. While I now own 2 Newtonian reflectors (home-made 8-inch, 10-inch Dob) and 2 SCTs, only the latter are used for astrophotography.

So all of these comments are just my view based on my experience. But I hope they will be of some use. Any other questions, I'd be happy to give my 2-cents worth.

siwerida said:
Thanks again for the really interesting post.

Siw

--
Best Regards,
Russ

RustierOne · Sep 13, 2014

geo444 said:
" I hope you have enjoyed these "

I did ! Very nice Collection of Galaxies ! Congratulations for all that night work !

Thanks so much for the encouraging remarks! Galaxies are something well suited for imaging with a SCT.

geo444 said:
Have you tried night shots at base ISO with long exposures ?

I might give that a try. I saw a report on my Sony NEX-7 sensor showing that the read noise and dynamic range were both relatively favorable in the ISO 100-200 range. Now that my auto-guiding is improving, some 40-minute exposures at ISO 100-200 might be in order. If the histogram peaks too much at the dark end, exposures will need to be lengthened, but it might be a good experiment.

geo444 said:
gives better DR & Colors :
Pentax K5 iso 80 Astro

the last Pentax Q10 " Kawaii-Astro-Folie " :
www.dpreview.com/galleries/7467909648/photos/3022577/

That's impressive work even for a much larger sensor than the Q10's.

geo444 said:
--
http://en.astronomike.net/m/6809.html
http://en.astronomike.net/m/134251.html

--
Best Regards,
Russ

mauibreeze · Sep 15, 2014

Amazing

Via Lactea · Sep 15, 2014

Nice pictures Russ, it takes a lot of effort to dig that deep into the universe!

I'm working on a few time lapses (processing the data)

in a week they will be online.

bjorn

RustierOne · Sep 15, 2014

RustierOne said:
siwerida said:

What a great post Russ and some super images! As a newbie have been thinking I might have a go at galaxies in due course. Am intending to buy my first mount at the end of the month - an HEQ5 pro synscan (after much deliberation!) Am going to use my exisiting photography stuff first but have started to think about a telescope. I had imagined I would go for a small refractor though like the sound of the Schmidt Cassegrain scopes but am a bit concerned by what I've read about 'mirror flop' so would be interested to know about that from an experienced user.

Click to expand...

Thanks so much for your kind and encouraging comment! I highly recommend giving galaxies a go. Where else can you photograph what has been called an "Island Universe"?

My experience with Schmidt Cassegrain telescopes (SCTs) began around 1973 with Celestron-5 - then on to a C-8 in 1981 and C-11 in 2008. But I can't say that I've ever knowingly experienced any mirror flop, at least anything noticeable in visual observing. But I don't doubt that it can happen. If it does, it's a one time event most likely to happen when you track across the meridian. The worst consequence would be one frame of a series of images being ruined. I've had lots of other reasons for a frame being ruined, like bumping the telescope or a wind gust during an exposure. So if/when mirror flop happens, it's just one of the many things that can go wrong. But it's by no means some sort of fatal flaw. Good results can be obtained with SCTs. All telescopes have their pluses and minuses.

One important thing the Celestron manual mentions is to always approach final focus turning the adjustment knob in the counterclockwise direction. I believe that takes up some of the slack in the focus mechanism. My C-11 also has a JMI Crayford focuser which is used along with a Bahtinov mask for all the final focusing. But the last time I move the stock Celestron focus knob is in the counterclockwise direction, touching up final focus using the JMI.

SCTs offer a lot of bang for the buck, having a sealed tube and seldom needing collimation. Their biggest drawback for someone new is their long focal length, which can make auto-guiding a challenge. A focal reducer helps tame that down to somewhat shorter focal length and faster optics. But many galaxies and planetary nebulae benefit from the larger image scale.

I've never owned a modern high quality refractor. But they are quite nice in the 100 mm and smaller sizes. Above that they get very expensive. But they don't place high demands on your mount being relatively light and with shorter focal lengths. Newtonian reflectors also offer good bang for the buck. You can get a large aperture (diameter) telescope for a reasonable cost. They can be a bit heavy. But as Michael S. has shown can produce excellent results.

My comments here are by no means an exhaustive discussion of the relative merits of different designs. All quality telescopes can produce good results. You just need to take advantage of their strong points and compensate for their weaknesses. Also selecting a suitable subject for your telescope helps a lot. What might be a good subject for an 80 mm, f/7 refractor would be a poor choice to image with a C-11 with 2800 mm focal length.

RustierOne said:

Am not sure if they are a reasonable choice as a first scope. The Celestron 8 would be too heavy for an HEQ5 though there are plenty of other options (as usual!) - the Vixen 200L weighs 6kgs and might be okay on the HEQ5 though I believe it's a slightly adapted Schmidt Cassegrain and haven't managed to find a full review yet.

Click to expand...

I wish I still owned my C-5. If I did, it would be used a lot for certain subjects. I really enjoyed the clean, almost refractor-like images it produced. As much as I would have liked to, I couldn't keep all my telescopes. While I now own 2 Newtonian reflectors (home-made 8-inch, 10-inch Dob) and 2 SCTs, only the latter are used for astrophotography.

So all of these comments are just my view based on my experience. But I hope they will be of some use. Any other questions, I'd be happy to give my 2-cents worth.

RustierOne said:

Thanks again for the really interesting post.

Siw

Click to expand...

Thanks Mauibreeze and all others for viewing my images and for the encouraging comments. They have inspired me to search out still more galaxies suitable for imaging with my equipment. There are likely many more of sufficient brightness and angular size to make for an interesting shot.

I also want to enlarge on the comment I made earlier about never having noticed any problem with SCT (Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope) mirror flop. The mechanical circumstances in the focuser giving rise to mirror flop are easily seen during focusing. When changing from clockwise to counterclockwise motion of the focuser knob there will be a slight shift in the image as the mirror tips slightly in the focuser. But always ending with a counterclockwise movement in approaching focus is the best practice to minimize the chance of mirror flop during imaging.

The possibility of mirror flop is best considered in light of some of the major benefits of SCTs, such as a tremendous range of back focus. SCTs can focus from as close as 50 feet to "beyond" infinity. This allows for much freedom in attaching adapters, extension tubes, off-axis guiders, filter wheels, cameras, etc. and still being able to achieve focus. Most other telescope designs focus by moving the eyepiece or camera assembly closer to or further from the telescope tube. The SCT changes focus by varying the distance between the primary and secondary mirrors. While this can result in mirror flop it does allow for secure attachment of the camera assembly to the rear of the SCT's optical tube. Everything is attached via the threaded rear port on the telescope's rear casting, which gives a very solid connection. Many other telescope designs hang the entire weight of the camera assembly on a moving draw tube. This places a lot of demands on the mechanical stability of the focuser. This requires a well-designed and expensive focuser to avoid misalignment of the optical axes.

These comments are not meant to ignite a debate on the relative merits of different telescope designs. The intent is to inform those considering an SCT of some relevant factors. And I have not mentioned other negatives of the SCT, leaving that for later discussion. Every design has its strong and weak points. All designs of telescopes have the potential of producing commendable results. Just look at what has been posted on this forum.

--
Best Regards,
Russ

RustierOne · Sep 15, 2014

Via Lactea said:
Nice pictures Russ, it takes a lot of effort to dig that deep into the universe!

Thanks, Bjorn. Part of the effort involves using SkySafari to display a rectangle representing the camera's field of view. By this means I discover some worthwhile subjects to photograph. Enticing fields include large galaxies with unusual shapes and interesting features, like the Blackeye Galaxy (M64). Other good targets are fields showing multiple galaxies like M81/M82, the Leo Triplet or one of my favorites, the "Leo Trio".

I've learned from galaxy imaging that my total exposure needs to be much longer. There is a great benefit to multiple hour exposures. Faint details rise out of the dark background while noise abates.

Via Lactea said:
I'm working on a few time lapses (processing the data)

in a week they will be online.

PhotoLutz · Sep 16, 2014

Hey Russ,

Thanks for taking the time to share all the information!! I am up on a lot of it and I apologies for not being clearer. I do have a CS 6 on an EQ mount. Additionally, I did buy the NEX T mount and adaptor so I can hook it up to my scope and take photos no problem!

My issue seems to be on the photos and stacking I think. For instance, I had some shots of mars last month. and on all the shots (even the under exposed ones) all I could see was a white dot. Absolutely no resolution what so ever. Saturn looked pretty cool, but the photos were not as clean or as clear as the view through the eye piece. So how would one go about cleaning it up? Do you take multiple shots and stack them in DS? I have yet to figure out how to use any stacking program they seem a bit more complex than I was expecting.

Secondly, I tried the other day to find M31.... beloved Andromeda. I know where it is. My scope was correctly aligned. But when it would track to M31...... nothing... couldn't see a thing. No fuzzy blur... no nothing..... is it just that small? Is it an issue of focus? What are your thoughts?

Thanks again and keep up the amazing work!

Dave

Greg VdB · Sep 17, 2014

Oh my, that's a lot of galaxies Russ! It's the result of an impressive amount of effort, and the results look very good indeed! It definitely inspires me to finally try my first M31 shoot (using the humble tools I have, that will be difficult enough).

One question: did you shoot flats with all of these? (that's not criticism, I'm just curious since there seems to be vignetting in some of the images)

regards,

A Collection of Galaxies

Senior Member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts