Bruce Donzanti:
Hi Lynn
Thank you for your feedback. I greatly appreciate it as it is how we continue to learn and share experiences. To address/comment on a couple of your valid points:
- I actually have the Askar 300 as a travel scope that I pair with an ASI2600MC. However, I have only used it twice so I can't speak on a vast amount of experience, but it does seem to work extremely well and friends of mine who own one really like it. I considered replacing my Baby Q, which is currently piggybacked on my C11 in my observatory with the Askar, but when I saw the new reducer become available, I immediately changed my mind. I was hoping, of course, that it would work as advertised. Also, I just think the FSQ85 is an overall better built scope.
- As far as the testing goes, it was initially all done (as it should be) with only a starfield and a luminance filter- not a Ha filter. NINA was used, along with an ASG Photon Cage, to adjust both the tilt and backfocus. The idea was to get as close as possible with only those tools while working with live 20s images, redoing focus in between each minor change in either backfocus or tilt. It is a slow and finicky process, and it took two full precious clear nights to get it to an acceptable level. I then took and processed the Ha images you are seeing and checked them out before using BXT on them. They were reasonable acceptable to me but by no means perfect. I doubt they ever would be. Of course, BXT helped them out in a couple of corners but the scopes with the reducer during the initial testing that was the heavy lifter in getting the images nicer- not BXT. BXT is not a miracle cure for tilt. It works best on good data. The final images I am producing here are with a Ha filter and with BXT because I primarily image in NB due to my LP and BXT is now part of the normal processing workflow. So, to me, it is the definitive test as this would be the final image I want to see and share- not one without using BXT. Anyway, I see your point and I guess we can disagree on this but that is fine. I also learned from all of this is that you should do not always trust the numbers. Look at the images on the laptop as you are testing as the visual is the final determining factor. To your point, I will post when I do RGB. I usually only do them for color stars to add to a NB image but I can post them, nonetheless. Your situation is way different than mine as I am at Bortle 7- not a dark site where you will be.
- I know what you mean about the butterfly spiked stars. They are annoying and I am fearful that they probably still exist. Time will tell.
Hopefully, you will have success at your dark site and I would like to hear how it goes for you.
Again, that you for your opinions and feedback.
Bruce
Hi Lynn
Thank you for your feedback. I greatly appreciate it as it is how we continue to learn and share experiences. To address/comment on a couple of your valid points:
- I actually have the Askar 300 as a travel scope that I pair with an ASI2600MC. However, I have only used it twice so I can't speak on a vast amount of experience, but it does seem to work extremely well and friends of mine who own one really like it. I considered replacing my Baby Q, which is currently piggybacked on my C11 in my observatory with the Askar, but when I saw the new reducer become available, I immediately changed my mind. I was hoping, of course, that it would work as advertised. Also, I just think the FSQ85 is an overall better built scope.
- As far as the testing goes, it was initially all done (as it should be) with only a starfield and a luminance filter- not a Ha filter. NINA was used, along with an ASG Photon Cage, to adjust both the tilt and backfocus. The idea was to get as close as possible with only those tools while working with live 20s images, redoing focus in between each minor change in either backfocus or tilt. It is a slow and finicky process, and it took two full precious clear nights to get it to an acceptable level. I then took and processed the Ha images you are seeing and checked them out before using BXT on them. They were reasonable acceptable to me but by no means perfect. I doubt they ever would be. Of course, BXT helped them out in a couple of corners but the scopes with the reducer during the initial testing that was the heavy lifter in getting the images nicer- not BXT. BXT is not a miracle cure for tilt. It works best on good data. The final images I am producing here are with a Ha filter and with BXT because I primarily image in NB due to my LP and BXT is now part of the normal processing workflow. So, to me, it is the definitive test as this would be the final image I want to see and share- not one without using BXT. Anyway, I see your point and I guess we can disagree on this but that is fine. I also learned from all of this is that you should do not always trust the numbers. Look at the images on the laptop as you are testing as the visual is the final determining factor. To your point, I will post when I do RGB. I usually only do them for color stars to add to a NB image but I can post them, nonetheless. Your situation is way different than mine as I am at Bortle 7- not a dark site where you will be.
- I know what you mean about the butterfly spiked stars. They are annoying and I am fearful that they probably still exist. Time will tell.
Hopefully, you will have success at your dark site and I would like to hear how it goes for you.
Again, that you for your opinions and feedback.
Bruce
