olivufu

Vixen SSW 10mm en face à face avec Pentax XW 10mm

Recommended Posts

Advertising
By registering on Astrosurf,
this type of ad will no longer be displayed.
Planetary Astronomy
Observing, imaging and studying the planets
A comprehensive book about observing, imaging, and studying planets. It has been written by seven authors, all being skillful amateur observers in their respective domains.
More information on www.planetary-astronomy.com

Il y a 1 heure, Adamckiewicz a dit :

sur newlon

Je ne sais pas si c'est le Newton qui va bouder suite à la déformation de son nom, ou si c'est le Mewlon qui va bouder:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Il y a 1 heure, jldauvergne a dit :

si tu préfères les photos de groupe 

on remarque très très nettement le compositing, et on voit bien qu'il n'y a finalement qu'un C8 sur ton balcon...... (et qu'il a même mal été peint en blanc) xD

 

Edited by olivufu
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 40 minutes, olivufu a dit :

Je ne sais pas si c'est le Newton qui va bouder suite à la déformation de son nom, ou si c'est le Mewlon qui va bouder

C’est le mewlon qui va bouder, c’est sûr, sur un chauffe-eau comme ça vaut mieux y mettre de jolis oculaires :D,

sur newton ce serait sans doute pas bon du tout.

Edited by Adamckiewicz
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Citation

Je crois que c'est surtout vrai pour les 20 et 14mm en dessous de F7, à confirmer par les connaisseurs.

 

Exactement ! Le 10 est moins concerné effectivement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

    • By yapo
      Salut,
      je voulais comparer mes vieux filtres coulant 31.75 à des nouveaux en 50.8mm sur mon Dobson avec un porte-filtre interne. Le PO est en coulant 50.8 et les oculaires un peu des deux. A 83x (coulant 50), j’ai du vignettage avec un vieil OIII en 31.7 et à 271x (coulant 31.7), j’ai un affaiblissement général par rapport à un récent OIII.
       
      Est ce l’évolution optique normale ou alors il y a aussi un affaiblissement général de l’image à faible G que je n’ai pas remarqué ? Ou bien l’ancienneté du filtre est-elle à considérer ? 
      merci d’avance de vos lumières (mes notions d’optique sont limitées à des considérations pratiques...) !
    • By belier1762
      Bonjour,
      Je vais acheté un chercheur  droit genre  8 x 50 , sortie 1,25 et non redressé, mais ....
      Quelqu'un pourrait il me dire si l'emploi d'un renvoi coudé à 45° (prisme ou miroir je sais pas  ?) , es ce que  la vision dans l'oculaire est redressée sur les deux axes ..... merci
      Marc
    • By yann35
      Bonjour
      Je souhaiterai connaitre la formule optique des Taka LE,  sont ils considérés comme des eudiascopique (Type ERFLE) ?
      Merci
    • By yann35
      Je souhaite savoir si c'est jouable de mettre un oculaire Panoptique 35 mm 68° de champs derrière un RC Baader à prisme Zeiss T2 
      raccordement T2 coté télescope et 50,8 mm coté oculaire soit un cercle de pleine lumière de 34 mm.
      Optique 210 mm et 2415 mm de longueur focale.
       
      Quelle serait le pourcentage  d'assombrissement du champ ?
       
      Mes cours de math sont trop loin.... merci pour votre aide
    • By joko
      Bonjour,
      Je ne suis pas l'auteur mais je partage cette animation du Pulsar du Crabe (PSR B0531+21) faite il y a quelques jours en Allemagne par Martin Fiedler avec un oculaire OVNI-M (destiné à l'observation visuelle).
      Sur son Dobson de 600mm F/3,3 il a imagé avec une caméra QHY174M GPS.
      Animation, photo et détails ci-dessous.
       

       
      Les conditions étant loin d'être parfaites. 

       
      Le montage réalisé.

       
      « After many cloudy weeks a usable starry sky showed up here in Radebeul (Germany) again, I used the opportunity and started another attempt to finally resolve the pulsar in M1 temporally and spatially. After the first experiments some weeks before it was clear that this faint part cannot be resolved directly in time even with a night vision device (OVNI-M), at least not with our astronomical conditions and with the for such a thing rather "small" 24" Dobsonian. But then I had an idea to crack the thing after all. According to my research on the pulsar, it has two maxima in the 33.5ms of its period, one bright and one fainter, both lasting about 5ms. This results in the minimum necessary exposure time (5ms). In addition, the pulsar is very close to another star and must be spatially resolved accordingly. So I extended the focal length, which also helps to recognize the pulsar, because the high background brightness due to the nebula is reduced.
       
      On a 5ms frame you can't recognize stars with 15 or 16 mag even with a cooled CMOS camera + NVD, for that the noise too high. The only option, as is often the case, is to stack enough images to get the faint pulsar out of the noise. That's when I had the idea to use our QHY-174M-GPS camera, which is actually there to measure star occultations by asteroids and can set an accurate GPS time stamp. With this, one could assign to each frame its exact location in the period of the pulsar, and then stack them precisely. For this purpose I equipped the telescope with the Baader-FFC, the OVNI-M NVD without lens/eyepiece and the QHY camera with a 50mm f/1.4 lens. But this construction was too much for the focuser and I had to fight with image field tilts. But in the end I accepted it, there is no other way. The NVD was running at maximum gain and also the camera was at the limit with the gain but cooled down to -40°C.
       
      I made many video sequences and tried a little bit, here is an example video: https://www.dropbox...._Video.avi?dl=0 The video has 3035 frames and was recorded for about 15s. Unfortunately the tracking is already so inaccurate in this short time that you need a star for stacking, so I took the brighter star at the bottom still in the field of view. If you look at the video, you can see just three stars in total. But the recording was the easier part in the end.
      Then I had to get the timestamp from the single images, rounded appropriately, into the file name. For this I searched for a long time for a useful OCR software. It would be easier if the SharpCap would do it right away (somehow I couldn't manage that). Then I built an Excel table and took the timestamp of the first image as the beginning of the period. Then you need the exact period of the pulsar (0,033781965), which changes every year, I didn't know that before. Now I always add the full frequency to the first timestamp for the complete recording period. This resulted in the end in a column with nearly 500 values (times) in my case. Then you have to do the same for the remaining 33ms of the period (each new column +1ms). Then I built a program to find the frames matching the period time and copy them into the corresponding folders. In the end I had 34 folders with about 80 frames in each. I stacked them all manually in Fitswork, the flashing of the NVD makes an automatic detection of even the brightest star impossible. Since the star was also not clearly visible everywhere, I could usually only really use 50-60 images.
       
      The chance that this really works out I had rather classified as low, it was completely unclear whether the time stamp of the camera is accurate enough and whether the OVNI-M can even resolve 5ms in time. But it really worked and in the animation you can see the main and the secondary maxima cleanly separated. The image quality is grotty but it worked With a bigger telescope, better seeing and less noise I'm sure it would work without stacking, but I don't have it. Nevertheless I am very satisfied and happy with the results The image with the arrow is a average image from all frames of the animation. By the averaging the pulsar is clearly fainter than the near comparison star even if it is actually brighter in the maximum.
       
      Best
      Martin »
  • Upcoming Events