Celestial hemisphere:  Northern  ·  Constellation: Leo (Leo)  ·  Contains:  NGC 2903  ·  NGC 2905
Getting plate-solving status, please wait...
Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann

Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try.

Getting plate-solving status, please wait...
Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann

Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try.

Equipment

Loading...

Acquisition details

Loading...

Description

Well, for all who know me a bit closer, know how much I love those galaxies ๐Ÿ˜Š, hence the little sarcastic subject line for this image ๐Ÿ˜Š. But hey, there was almost no question that I had to go for one, since the morning hours of our nights are already deep in galaxy season territory. And wasting any clear skies is for some time now not allowed anymore, even if it is a galaxy image ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š.

And I added another little experiment with this image: I wanted to see what changes with the camera "only". So using the very same setup, but instead of using the ASI1600 as done in 2021 the ASI6200 was in action. Will I see in any form a difference that is significant (Version E)? Almost same integration time, not sure about the sky conditions though, that could have played a role here.

The result nevertheless was for me stunning! Significant? I would say so! Sure, the processing changed the last 3 years, and yes, maybe, very maybe, that made a huge difference, I doubt it though since I remember how much time I spent with the 2021 image to get any nice color into it, really fought hard for it (those fights are one of the reasons why I LOVE those galaxy images ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š).

And this time I did not do anything spectacular with the image, yes, BXT and NXT are helpers to make the image cleaner, but for galaxies not that relevant (good choice by me LOLOL). I am actually not that fond of the stars in this image, hence my conclusion, it could not have been those tools. In order to make a statistically significant judgement I would need to do that at least 10 more times, still, my gut feeling for this significant difference is indeed the much higher sensitivity of the new sensor in the 6200 (yes, that is why it costs much more too).

And a good thing on top: I actually like this result and might get excited for galaxy season (not really ๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚).

Carpe noctem!

P.S.: I really like galaxy images ... from all of you!

* This image was not and will not be submitted for IOTD consideration

Comments

Revisions

  • Final
    Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
    Original
  • Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
    B
  • Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
    C
  • Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
    D
  • Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann
    E

B

Title: Going closer

Uploaded: ...

C

Title: Annotated wider field image

Uploaded: ...

D

Title: Annotated close up image

Uploaded: ...

E

Title: The comparison image with the trial 3 years ago using the ASI1600

Uploaded: ...

Sky plot

Sky plot

Histogram

Yes, a galaxy ... OMG ๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š๐Ÿ˜Š. NGC 2903 in LRGB, another check with a previous try., Uwe Deutermann

In these collections

Galaxies