Wow, I'm a little late on this topic....

I had pretty good luck with the 208xt, but I do remember that it took me awhile to get
it singing.  I recall that playing with the calibration settings was the biggest factor to get
it to run correctly.

Other tips I can remember:

- It does need to be fairly square to the axis.
- Take a new darkframe each time the exposure setting is changed.
- I *think* there is a "seeing" adjustment, that is basically the "agressiveness", and can
make a difference when turned up a bit.
- Focus is fairly critical - those cheap chinese 10mm plossls are parfocal.

I do remember that the 208xt was able to guide on some pretty faint stars for me - I was amazed actually at how faint it could go.
It is a bit of a trick figuring out the settings with your own mount.

It sounds like mechanically adjusting out some of the backlash is a good idea (if possible).  I used to have a
classic LX200, and it was a VERY good scope, and had no real backlash.  At the same time, it had been Supercharged
by Dr. Clay.   He is very knowlegable about the ins and outs of the LX200's - you might wish to contact him regarding
supercharging - it makes a huge difference.

At any rate, your 10min shot looks great, so you must be doing something right.  I agree with the others that it sounds
like backlash may be the culprit.  I'll post more if I can remember what else I did.

-Jake

After a long hiatus of bad weather (8 months) which always seemed to fall on new moon, I finally had a good night and dusted off the imaging gear again. 

It took me a bit to remember how to run the autoguider, since it has been so long, but I did get it up and running.  The only downfall is that by then, the wind had picked up substantially, and was giving the autoguider a run for it's money.  This is only a four shot stack, so not as good as it could be, but I just wanted to see how much signal I could get out of this object using the unmodified version of the digital rebel - I think it is not bad considering it is unmodified. 

This is only 4 images stacked, 10mins each exposure.  ISO=1600.



-Jake

Hi Robert -

That sample looks much better - the image smoothing is not pronunced, and the result is a much more natural looking image.  It is very easy to get carried away with smoothing and sharpening.  I know from experience that the difficulty in making good images is to process, but not give an "overprocessed" look.

Again, I think your image looks very good - there is alot of detail there.  I think if you take it a little easier on the smoothing, it will look even better.

I think you have made some good progress, I remember it wasn't very long ago that your images looked like this:  


So keep up the good work, and please don't assume that comments on this forum are intended to slam your imaging skills.  The atmosphere at the ArkSky has always been a friendly and helpful one - this is a great group of people and we are all trying to help each other along.

-Jake

Steve -

Good to hear from you again!  I know what you mean about the weather, we have had it here on the west coast also.

That is a fantastic image!  The detail around the rim of the galaxy is super.  Congrats on a good job - I look forward to more shots from the DSI Pro.

-Jake

The Trous Wavelets is a form of smoothing, that is the effect I am talking about.  



If you mean this thread:  http://www.arksky.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=592

It is obvious that I was paying you a compliment.  You complained by saying:

 "I am at times frustrated as I know my scope is capable of much better images so long as the seeing cooperates. "

My response was:

"A very nice image - the seeing effects are only really ruining the edges of the planet, the rest is quite clear. "



I am not quite sure what your meaning is by that comment, but if you have critiques of my images, I would love to hear them.  As I stated in the post for the image you are referring to, I knew it was not a very good image.  

Both Rick and Steve (on this forum), have critiqued my images for several years now, and I consider it a tremendous help from the both of them to take the time to point out what I have done wrong, and how to improve my images - I have become a better astrophotographer for it.    

Personally, I don't like strong smoothing in images - it gives them a "painted" look, and can also destroy small details.  Like any type of processing (saturation, sharpening, etc.), it can easily be overdone, and needs to be used with care.  It seems very common lately for astrophotographers to over-smooth images, and I see it all the time - but if you look at the best astrophotographers (Rick is a good example), you will see that they avoid using smoothing techniques.  The result is a much more natural looking image.  

I think you are doing a good job, and have said so in every one of my comments to you, including this one - if you think I am trying to be "harsh", you have me all wrong.  

At any rate, try to lighten up a little - I'll say it again that I think you are doing a fine job, and I think that if you use a lighter hand on the smoothing, your image will look even better.  

Is that a little clearer?  

-Jake (moderator of this forum)

Looks pretty good.

One thing I noticed is that it looks a bit unnaturally smoothed - do you use some type of noise reduction or smoothing program?  

BTW - what codec are you using for capture these days?

-Jake

Hi Ron -

Thanks for the consolation - I know you have had more than your share of bad luck with equipment!  Did you get your scope back from the factory yet? I hope they get it fixed up right for you.

I am currently taking a break from observing Jupiter and again it is excellent seeing - I am using 400x currently (what am I doing inside??).  I really wish I could image - these nights have been few and far between for me this year.  

-Jake

Hi Ron -

I was observing Jupiter last night under excellent conditions, and did indeed see the oval you mentioned.  It is very white, and between the two festoons.  It does appear to be similar in size to the GRS, and I noticed the distinct but faint outline.

I would have taken an image, but my computer is broken - this has been my year of problems for imaging Jupiter - it is starting to feel like an episode of "I love lucy"!

-Jake

These just popped up in the last two days:



(image from spaceweather.com)

Unfortunately, I have been too busy inside with work to get a peek at these - looks pretty wild on the sun again!

-Jake

Hi Ron -

That looks quite good, with lots of detail evident.  I am always amazed at the results you get with your digital camera - you are right there with the "web-cammers".  

As for the color changing, I have only seen that when I left my camera on "auto white balance" - you might want to check your camera settings, as I am not sure what else could cause that.

I'm still waiting for it to clear up here, but I did order an equatorial mount for my 12.5" scope in anticipation for mars, so I am probably asking for another six months of clouds!  

-Jake

Looks good, Robert!

The cap will keep getting smaller, but you will get some detailed shots of it before it shrinks.  

I'm looking forward to imaging Mars too, but we are back to rain and clouds here in S. California - this year has been the strangest weather I have ever seen in L.A.  I would  be happy to have just one decent Jupiter image.

-Jake

A very nice image - the seeing effects are only really ruining the edges of the planet, the rest is quite clear.  

-Jake

Yes, that is very good.  I haven't yet seen Mars this year, it doesn't even clear my house yet!

-Jake

Glad to see you guys are trying anyways, despite the altitude.  

It will get better.  Mars is expected to be more towards the zenith than the last apparition, so we should get a clearer look, even if the apparent size is smaller.  

Here is something to give you hope:



(one of mine from the last apparition)

I'm looking forward to shooting Mars again!!!

-Jake

Nicely framed, Mike!

Thanks for the comet fix!

-Jake