* Jeff R. wrote :
Troy Piggins wrote:
[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 19 lines snipped |=---]
that may have been too long. Maybe should have kept it down to
60 secs or so. Jupiter spins so fast you have to get in and get
out real quick, so you're using as fast a fps as you can get.
Some guys are shooting 45-60fps. The avi file size I took for
this was 1.5GB! Just to get a measly little 15kB image!

Cooled camera?

Nope. This one:
http://www.theimagingsource.com/en_U...yer/dbk21au04/

I'm considering (don't tell my wife) a cooled CCD for longer
exposure, deep sky stuff. They're the duck's nuts. But won't be
getting the top of the line ones. They go for $10k or multiples
thereof. Reckon something like this will do me:

http://web.aanet.com.au/~gama/QHY8.html

Hand or auto-guided?

No guiding. Not for 90 secs or so. Mount was just tracking
sidereal rate on its own.

Suburban location? Country?

Centre of Brisbane. Don't think you could find a much more light
polluted location in Queensland

Fortunately light pollution doesn't seem to affect planetary
imaging so much because the targets are so bright. I'm talking
Jupiter, Saturn, Venus, Mars, even Mercury here. For Uranus and
Neptune you use more deep sky imaging techniques I think - longer
exposures and light pollution does come into it a bit.

This sort of stuff it's more about atmospheric conditions, the
jetstream, and scope focus and collimation. I have yet to come
to terms with tweaking all that.

(fun, idd'n it!)

Oh, ya!

--
Troy Piggins