Most effective processing approaches for small astronomical targets

12 replies•274 views
Interactive Sky avatar

Hi everyone 🙂

I’m just wondering what people typically use for imaging small planetary nebulae.

What setups have worked well for you in terms of:

  • focal length and aperture

  • camera choice (pixel size, sensor type)

  • exposure strategy

Also curious what processing approaches you find most effective for bringing out detail in such small targets.

Thanks!

Well Written Respectful Engaging
Spacey avatar

In my opinion you need at least 2000mm focal length to start with planetary nebula and then you’ll only get a handful. If you are imaging from under light polluted skies you will need a larger sensor to make plate solving work and at that focal length a crop sensor camera will almost be required.

Well Written Concise Engaging
Interactive Sky avatar

Hi, Spacey

Thank you for your suggestion. I also wonder which type would work best. RC, SCT, or Mak?

Respectful
andrea tasselli avatar
Image scale between 0.8"/px to 0.65"/px to 0.5"/px (remote only) so focal lengths between 2m to 1.2m (most recent). Except for very few a 4/3 sensor would suffice.
andrea tasselli avatar
Interactive Sky:
Hi, Spacey

Thank you for your suggestion. I also wonder which type would work best. RC, SCT, or Mak?

*If you can find a Russian Mak of generous aperture then that. Otherwise Classical Cassegrain or RC or Modified DK.
Spacey avatar

Practically speaking F/10 or F/11 is the slowest optical system I would try to use and given my own experience with my edge 8” at F10, you are better off reducing it to F/7 for imaging work.

I used it at F10 for 1 image and it was not fun to throw out 50% of the frames. I use a reducer for the scope, operate at F7 at around 1500mm focal length where the performance is much better and you can easily live with it.

I recently captured the medusa and headphones nebula. I think there may be one or two more that I can yield a tennis ball sized image to work with.

Well Written Helpful Concise Engaging
John Tucker avatar
Tony Gondola avatar

Basic advice as I’ve some a bit of this lately. For shooting small PN and most galaxies you need focal length. Independent of aperture it’s practical and possible to image all the way up to F/12. You’ll have to fight a bit more for the needed integration time and pick your targets wisely but It’s not imposable to image at those ratios. The type of scope is less important than the quality of the optics. It has to be sharp because you’re going to be pushing it. Don’t be afraid to oversample and despite general advice, you can use a Barlow, just make sure it’s high quality and well color corrected.

The really big factor in how far you can push this is your local seeing. I’m in the central United States where the seeing is highly variable. When I’m imaging at 0.66” per pixel, I can still get useful data on rough nights, not so at 0.33”. At least not with a huge amount of culling which is the last thing you want to have to do with a slow system.

On the processing side, good sharping tools become really important. BlurX is the gold standard right now as it tightens up the images while preserving star profiles. Cosmic Clarity by Seti Astro is powerful but you’ll have to work hard to preserve your stars. The sharpening tools in Affinity are also excellent and can be layered in to get that final finish. This is an area were it pays to experiment with frequency separation, wavelets and so on. All of these tools are powerful and can ruin an image quicker than boiled asparagus so you’ll need a light hand and good judgement.

Well Written Helpful Engaging
Brian Diaz avatar

Hi,

Ideally, the setup would involve a high focal length and a properly aligned optical train.

However—in my opinion and based on my experience—that alone is not sufficient to achieve the ultimate goal: a high-quality image.

I have seen setups that were technically sound produce images that were subsequently ruined during processing; I have also seen hundreds of hours' worth of data destroyed during the stretching phase.

It all comes down to striking a balance, where every single component—both hardware and processing—plays a vital role.

CS

Brian

Well Written Respectful Concise Engaging Supportive
John Hayes avatar

Interactive Sky · Mar 27, 2026, 09:00 PM

What setups have worked well for you in terms of:

  • focal length and aperture

  • camera choice (pixel size, sensor type)

  • exposure strategy

Also curious what processing approaches you find most effective for bringing out detail in such small targets.

1) The longer the EFL, the better. I personally use 4,200 mm with a 600 mm aperture. If you want to see image detail you need to couple all of that focal length with good seeing. A big scope with a long EFL under 4” conditions isn’t going to work well. That’s why I operate in Chile. You don’t have to go all the way to S. America to find good conditions but putting your scope in a location with mostly clear skies and good seeing will make a huge difference.

2) Properly sampling to about 1/3 of the best possible seeing blur diameter for your location is a good balance between signal and sampling. (This is a simplification because the actual formula is a bit more complicated.) Here’s a chart based on MTF analysis for optimal sampling for various seeing conditions.

📷 image.pngimage.pngAlternatively, here’s a “reverse” calculation showing optimum seeing conditions for any given combination of focal ration, aperture and pixel size.

đź“· image.pngimage.png

3) Exposure strategy depends on a lot of factors (including the brightness of the object) but in general, using the shortest possible exposure with the lowest read noise for each sub is your best bet. Take a lot of subs! The higher the SNR, the easier it becomes to extract image detail.

4) Process for detail. BXT is a must. BXT is the most accurate and easiest to use deconvolution algorithm in existence for astronomical image processing. Experiment to learn how to get the best results without overdoing it. Gentle application of detail contrast enhancement with tools like bandwidth sharpening and MultiScaleLinearTransform can help enhance small features. Again, the more SNR you start with, the easier it is to extract image detail.

Good luck with it!

John

Well Written Helpful Insightful Engaging
Scott Badger avatar

Like Tony, I have highly variable seeing, so I shoot luminance when it’s best and then can be pretty liberal about what seeing conditions are acceptable for R, G, and B. If you’re using a mono camera.

Cheers,
Scott

Helpful Concise
John Stone avatar

Interactive Sky · Mar 27, 2026, 09:12 PM

Hi, Spacey

Thank you for your suggestion. I also wonder which type would work best. RC, SCT, or Mak?

Coming soon … SkyWatcher 8”/2000mm Mak

đź“· image.pngimage.png
https://skywatcheraustralia.com.au/shop/otas/maksutov/skymax-200dx-maksutov-cassegrain-telescope/

Interactive Sky avatar

John Stone · Apr 3, 2026, 08:36 PM

Interactive Sky · Mar 27, 2026, 09:12 PM

Hi, Spacey

Thank you for your suggestion. I also wonder which type would work best. RC, SCT, or Mak?

Coming soon … SkyWatcher 8”/2000mm Mak

đź“· image.pngimage.png
https://skywatcheraustralia.com.au/shop/otas/maksutov/skymax-200dx-maksutov-cassegrain-telescope/

Hi John,

This is an interesting OTA,

will go check out.

Related discussions
Stacking multi-telescope imaging data with different focal lengths and sensors
Hi everyone! 👋 I have a question for the DSC team (and anyone working on collaborative imaging projects). If you’re willing to share, I’d love to learn a bit about how you approach stacking data from different telescopes and setups. For example, comb...
Discusses stacking with different focal lengths and sensors for imaging targets.
20 days ago
How much sharpening is too much?
As a small sensor user (585) I depend on sharpening to create images that look good full screen. The question is, how much is too much. In lunar/planetary work, sharpening is a basic and required part of the work flow. Deep sky images also suffer fro...
Addresses sharpening techniques relevant to planetary nebula processing and detail.
Nov 6, 2025
Review of the QHY5III678M for ground-based satellite imaging
This is a review that shows the performance of the QHY5III678M planetary camera for ground-based imaging of satellites, I will showcase the specifications of the camera and example images I have taken with it of several satellites. I also want to kin...
Relevant for processing techniques applicable to small astronomical targets like satellites.
Jan 12, 2026
Jupiter and Io – First Attempt with a Deep-Sky Setup
This is my first attempt at Jupiter using a setup that’s primarily optimized for deep-sky imaging: C8 EdgeHD with 0.7× reducer and ASI294MC Pro. At this focal length, Jupiter comes out to roughly ~65 pixels across the disc, so resolution is clearly l...
Covers deep-sky imaging setup optimization similar to planetary nebula requirements.
Feb 16, 2026