OV9

Ascender wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:15 am

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 9:48 am

Ascender wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 9:19 am So, this has to be witchcraft right? Or as someone said, a bunch of library images...

Not really. The key is just long exposures and stacking. Its a different thing entirely to visual stargazing.

That photo is OK but not all that sharp in reality.

Yes, I was wondering about the sharpness if that's just the limit of the hardware or can be tweaked in settings.

If you look at the edges of the moon you can see they're jagged (i.e. not soft focus) so it is more likely to be atmospheric diffraction than optical quality. Colder evenings will lessen the effect.

Mito Man wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 9:50 am The moon pics aren’t stacked, they’re regular single photographs.

What length exposure - I presume they're still reasonably long exposures of a few seconds or more?

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:36 am

Mito Man wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 9:50 am The moon pics aren’t stacked, they’re regular single photographs.

What length exposure - I presume they're still reasonably long exposures of a few seconds or more?

Not really, the exposures I’d guess are less than 0.5 second. It’s pretty instant but I don’t have the exact details as I leave it in auto and the picture file doesn’t say.

You can shoot in RAW and I think that’s how people get really amazing results but I’m not one to spend ages editing photos.

Mito Man wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2024 11:02 am
Not really, the exposures I’d guess are less than 0.5 second. It’s pretty instant but I don’t have the exact details as I leave it in auto and the picture file doesn’t say.

I'm surprised by that - usually the file metadata has all that info.

Weirdly, the stacked images do give an exposure - most recent nebula one is 9940 seconds!

994 10 second exposures I assume.

Erm, messed up the comet. I assumed it would be smart enough to do its own comet mode but it just turned into a very long exposure and…


I have the setting on to save the individual subframes which look fine but just noisy.

Now I’m wondering if there’s a simply way to stack maybe just 10 of these so it looks good

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGd8jmcxS/

I want pics…

dinny_g wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2024 9:00 am https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGd8jmcxS/

I want pics…

Thanks for the heads-up. No pun intended.

If someone can take a genuine picture with these, of Jupiter, with moons visible, I'm buying one ...

dinny_g wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2024 9:00 am https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGd8jmcxS/

I want pics…

Go on @Mito Man @Ascender, give it your best shot! I want to see moons!

I'll have a go if the weather is clear. I haven't tried planets with it though as I know it's magnification is far too small so it may just be a smudgy dot and the moons will be pin head sized if visible. Apparently there is a way to take a video and process/stack it in the app which will resolve the details better though.

I have a bigger old fashioned refractor telescope which is good for planetary imaging but the cost of the kit get it to take photos is prohibitively expensive which is why I bought the smart telescope.

How come it can capture the Pillars of Creation but not Jupiter ??

Because those deep space objects are massive, many light years in size but relatively close as all the nebulas and emissions which we can observe from Earth are within the Milky Way.

After that the next thing we see are entire galaxies.

So you're saying...

Exactly

Brilliant

Can’t believe how bad the weather has been. Noticed I could see some stars last night and it wasn’t going to rain overnight so I didn’t usual trick of just pointing the telescope at a target overnight.

This picture was done using the mosaic feature which is a recent update. The lens is too zoomed in to picture a large object such as the Orion Nebula in one frame, so you can zoom out and it will stitch it together. Looks like some clouds/fog rolled in shortly after it got the centre of the image.
Next time I will try the Andromeda Galaxy which I tried before but just resulted in a fuzzy white blob as it’s also massive.

It'd been a long time since anything'd been visible, last night was back to mostly cloudy

Andromeda Galaxy


Looking closely there’s a lot of detail there but it seems like the contrast is hiding it all. I think results would be far better if the individual images are stacked in a purpose built software on a computer but the whole reason I got this was because I didn’t want to faff about with all that.