|
InternetJunky posted:My first real attempt at imaging: That's a lovely Pleiades. How many frames is that? Thread needs more amateur photos, but I think people are intimidated by the quality of the work of people like Jekub and co.
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 06:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
InternetJunky posted:My first real attempt at imaging: Nice picture! Did you use a filter to get the nebula?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2012 13:45
|
|
|
Page Downfall posted:That's a lovely Pleiades. How many frames is that? Seqenenra posted:Nice picture! Did you use a filter to get the nebula?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
Hi guys, just a random quick question without a lot of preamble. Would you: Pick up an older Meade LX90 of a larger diameter NOW or Wait a few more months and pick up a smaller diameter NEW LX200? I dunno how much AP I'll be doing, eventually some, maybe, but it's not a priority at this point. Alternative suggestions are welcome, nothing's horribly set in stone right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2012 08:20
|
|
|
I keep an amazon wishlist for stuff that I'm interested in but not necessarily going to buy. I added an Orion XT8 after reading this thread a few months ago, amd that was pretty much that. My mom had it sitting at her house waiting for me for Christmas yesterday. I put it together last night but it's overcast for the next few days, but I can't wait to try it out. Thanks, astronomy thread!
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:I keep an amazon wishlist for stuff that I'm interested in but not necessarily going to buy. I added an Orion XT8 after reading this thread a few months ago, amd that was pretty much that. Awesome!  The "EZ" Finder it comes with is rather poo poo, if you can afford to I'd get a Telrad for it. I think they're about $25 or $30 US, something like that. A Telrad will make your life much easier, trust me. Plus it looks badass on a scope that already looks like a badass. http://www.company7.com/telrad/products/telrad.html If you find that the base doesn't turn too smoothly (mine never really did but ymmv) you can do what I did and place a Slip Disc between the two sections of the base. A cheap solution that works. No cutting or other tools needed, it doesn't move around when it's in there and it's whisper quiet -- and smooth as butter -- when rotating the dob. (the link I provided is just to show what I'm talking about, I paid $16 for mine because I got it from a local RV dealer instead of being smart and ordering it online) As for observing I wish we had weather that wasn't -25C when it's not overcast.  Have fun out there!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 04:12
|
|
|
Has anyone built a dob from scratch? I got this book http://www.amazon.com/The-Dobsonian-Telescope-Practical-Telescopes/dp/0943396557 and I'm going to buy an 8 inch pyrex blank.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
So I've decided I want a telescope and I skimmed through this thread. I've convinced myself I should probably get the Zhummell Z10 over the Z8 and now I'm deliberating on this Z10 bundle. Any thoughts? The extra lens looks like it could be pretty awesome (16x, 100 deg apparent field) and the Telrad came up a lot in the thread. Would the filters be of much use?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 11:36
|
|
|
There is a conjunction of the moon and Jupiter on the 21st of January, is anybody planning on photographing this? For people in parts of South America, the moon will pass in front of Jupiter. http://www.space.com/16149-night-sky.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Here's is Jupiter and 3 moons taken by holding my phone to the eye piece of a 35 dollar plastic garbage telescope. Actually down the telescope looking it's not that bad. You can't quite make out any color bands, but 5 moons are easily visible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
For anybody with a Crayford focuser (like on the Orion XT8) - apparently, the rubber grips don't like cold weather. I've just kept the whole scope set up in my garage (SE Minnesota, so some cold nights), and the last time I took it out, the grips just stripped right off the focusing wheels. Orion is sending me a new set free of charge, but it was a bit surprising to have them just fall off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
dedian posted:For anybody with a Crayford focuser (like on the Orion XT8) - apparently, the rubber grips don't like cold weather. I've just kept the whole scope set up in my garage (SE Minnesota, so some cold nights), and the last time I took it out, the grips just stripped right off the focusing wheels. Orion is sending me a new set free of charge, but it was a bit surprising to have them just fall off. That sucks, but good on them for sending a new one. I keep mine indoors, I suppose that would make a difference? Not that I've been outside lately, our Manitoba weather has been poo poo for observing so far. Either really loving cold or it's mild and cloudy. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Jekub posted:
I'm coming into this thread very late, waffleimages is long-dead, so Google tells me this is a thing: http://www.astrotrac.com/Default.aspx?p=tt320x-ag So this looks like it hooks up to my Manfrotto tripod, which I already have, and my ball head, which I already have, and steers/stabilizes my camera (which I already have). If I'm reading this right, on its own I can align the tracking rig to Polaris, point the camera at something, and it will track what I've pointed it at, whether that's the sun, the moon, or something sidereal, right? Then it says quote:Get pin sharps stars at longer focal lengths with the TT320X-AG's right ascension autoguiding capability. Compatible with popular ST-4 autoguiders such as the SBIG SG-4, Orion Starshoot, LVI SmartGuider, and with popular autoguiding software such as MaximDL and PhD. I don't know what all that means, but I'm guessing it means I can hook a laptop up to it, and there'll be software running on the laptop that I can tell "Show me the Pleiades" and it will go and point my telephoto at the right place and keep tracking it? Would this system be a decent way of starting astrophotography and seeing if I get into it enough to spend a silly amount of money on something better?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Cherokee Jack posted:That sucks, but good on them for sending a new one. Hah, pretty much the same here for weather. Found a thread on cloudynights (http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4271567/Main/4256928) that this is a pretty well-known issue that Orion hasn't done anything about for a few years. I might not use the replacements they sent, and just figure something else out to wrap around the focusing knobs. We live in a split-level, so keeping the whole thing set up in the garage is really convenient for quick trips out to the back yard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
(Check it out, i'm  ing up the thread again without ever posting any pictures to prove my legitimacy because oh god I never actually feel like astrophotographing  )Phanatic posted:I don't know what all that means, but I'm guessing it means I can hook a laptop up to it, and there'll be software running on the laptop that I can tell "Show me the Pleiades" and it will go and point my telephoto at the right place and keep tracking it? Not quite, it means you can hook up something like a 50mm finderscope guider - I would heartily recommend one of the kinds that are self-contained in the camera head rather than involving a laptop in a hyperportable setup like an AstroTrac. An AstroTrac cannot do go-to due to its basic construction - the only thing handling the pointing of the camera is your ballhead. It would need an entire extra set of motors and the ability to rotate a full turn on both axises instead of the 15 degrees it is able to rotate and in general increase to probably over 10 kg in weight (my EQ6 motor head weighs 16 kg alone!) Anyway, the job of a guider is to correct for small errors in how accurately the mount is aligned to celestial north, as well as small variations in the drive motor's speed and mechanical accuracy. Not at all required to take pictures, ultimately very nice to have. Phanatic posted:Would this system be a decent way of starting astrophotography and seeing if I get into it enough to spend a silly amount of money on something better? With reservation that I have no personal experience of using one, but they get good reviews that I've seen (double check this, naturally) - yes, it would. Beware that lots of photographic lenses are fairly bad for astrophotographic use, because this is a hobby where many lens elements that are used to correct aberrations at closer-than-infinity focus are a liability both beacuse of unavoidable induced higher-order aberrations and because more surfaces = way more light lost. Even with a very nice multicoating you're still losing maybe 2-5% per glass/air interface and some in the glass itself, which means it will not compare in exposure times to an equal-aperture telescope. You also probably want to work in the 300+ mm range even for very large DSOs, in general, try to use fixed lenses whenever you have one, and trade down to zooms only for critical lack of focal length (exceptions to this rule naturally exist, you'll have to test whatever optics you own yourself to find out what actually works, like I said earlier it's not necessarily playing by the same rules as daytime photography). Your D300 and D600 are at about the same pixels/mm density, so I would choose the D600 both for wider fields and better signal amplification. Shoot at the max iso that isn't a software boost (6400 in your case). Use your 70-300 f/5.6 in DX-crop off and see where you actually get decent data and crop manually in postprocessing, there will be all sorts of falloff to correct regardless. If you have a longer lens or a similar prime, do use that instead. Enable d10 'Exposure Delay' to reduce mirror bounce. I have a full astrophotography settings bank set up on my D700. AF to AF-ON only, too, the only thing you will be able to reliably focus on is like the moon and maybe some of the brightest planets, and AF outside of live view contrast focus isn't accurate enough for the job anyway. Neither is the finder focus screen, always use live view. No other absolutely required settings that I can remember right now. This brings me to processing, which is the most difficult part once you own stable/reliable enough gear to avoid motion blur. The only choice for doing this properly is PixInsight, which is around $200, once you've eliminated the free options. I haven't personally tested it but Nebulosity is another good choice at $80 which I think has a trial, but it doesn't officially support Nikon (certainly not the automation part of the software) so you should send the author an email (or just test the trial on some NEF you have laying around from the correct camera). DeepSkyStacker exists but is mostly garbage. Supposedly does support NEF. There's a mountain of things to learn that I can't bring up here, but you'll probably know about it from reading the thread anyway. Good luck! I'm really curious to hear how the AstroTrac performs so I hope I didn't just scare you away from a fun hobby 
Wolf on Air fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Jan 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
dedian posted:Hah, pretty much the same here for weather. After reading this I might end up springing for a focuser with metal knobs. Not that I've had problems (yet?) but might be worth it for piece of mind. If I can spend $650 on an EP I can drat well upgrade the focuser. Anyone have any experience with JMI focusers? I can get them fairly easily in Canada with prices about the same as that from the States. As for my scope all we have is a really crummy wooden shed so it gets stored in the house in its Orion carry bag. Not that I've had to use it! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
squeakygeek posted:So I've decided I want a telescope and I skimmed through this thread. I've convinced myself I should probably get the Zhummell Z10 over the Z8 and now I'm deliberating on this Z10 bundle. Any thoughts? The extra lens looks like it could be pretty awesome (16x, 100 deg apparent field) and the Telrad came up a lot in the thread. Would the filters be of much use? I would go for the 10" myself. There is no substitute for aperture when the mirrors are of equal quality. The lunar filter will give you a better view of the moon than the naked eye will.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
I ended up getting the z10 basic set which also included a lunar filter. I've also gotten my first accessory, an Explore Scientific 82 AFOV 11mm eyepiece. I ordered a GSO 2x 1.5x Barlow which hasn't arrived yet. I'm hoping tonight will be my first night of observing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
Beautiful sky this evening in the mountains of Utah. Sadly it is -9ºF
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
Apologies in advance for my newbiness, but I know fuckall about telescopes other than what information the OP provides which is a good starting point but I'm still a bit lost. I'm looking for something affordable because I want to observe ISON later this year. Even if it's visible by the naked eye, stargazing is always something I've wanted to do but never did for various reasons, so this gives me an excuse and incentive to get started. I don't have a lot of dosh though, so I'm looking for something that can provide reasonable image quality for under $200, maybe $250. Any recommendations at this price point? Edit: Also this may be a fairly broad question, but what eyepieces are compatible with what scope systems? Is it pretty universal, or is it more like Nikon/Canon DSLR systems with specific mounts etc? Kibbles n Shits fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Jan 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 22:37
|
|
|
DarthJeebus posted:Apologies in advance for my newbiness, but I know fuckall about telescopes other than what information the OP provides which is a good starting point but I'm still a bit lost. I don't think you are going to get anything but frustration and disappointment with less than a $400 spent. The main thing I would advise (besides upping your budget) is to ignore anything selling massive telephoto numbers. My most enjoyable eyepiece is a 30º wide-field. Aperture (larger = more light gathering) is ridiculously more valuable than magnification power. The best bang for the buck for the low-end of the expenditure scale is a decent dobsonian of 8-10" wide. IMHO, in any event. edit: Consider a used dob from a good manufacturer. Fog Tripper posted:Beautiful sky this evening in the mountains of Utah. Sadly it is -9ºF It was -17ºF this morning when I took the pups out. 
Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 05:38 on Jan 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 05:35
|
|
|
Fog Tripper posted:I don't think you are going to get anything but frustration and disappointment with less than a $400 spent. Orion will give you a three month payment plan on orders over 350. http://www.telescope.com/content.jsp?pageName=Installment-Billing
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Atimo posted:Orion will give you a three month payment plan on orders over 350. OK, $360 then.  edit: Add a telrad and a decent entry level eyepiece and you broke $400
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Thanks for pointing out that payment plan, though I've decided to just grab the binoculars in the OP for now and see what I can see. I really want a telescope but I don't want a lovely one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
DarthJeebus posted:Thanks for pointing out that payment plan, though I've decided to just grab the binoculars in the OP for now and see what I can see. I really want a telescope but I don't want a lovely one. Binoculars are an awesome choice. Again, aperture > power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
Haven't posted in awhile, here are some of the images I took over the past few months: Orion & Running Man Nebula by elimisel, on Flickr  Andromeda Galaxy M31 by elimisel, on Flickr This along with the Witches Broom are 2 of the hardest objects I have imaged so far. So challenging and time consuming to process.  Horsehead & Flame Nebula by elimisel, on Flickr  Caldwell 49 - Rosette Nebula by elimisel, on Flickr I am thinking about getting a new scope to go deeper. I feel my skills have really improved over the last 3 years. Edit: I have definitely come a long way. Here is an Orion Nebula I took a few years back. Huge difference:  M42 - Orion Nebula by elimisel, on Flickr Choicecut fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jan 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:Astro pics Really great photographs there. Regarding the telrad discussion is there something it does beside act as a finder scope? I've read the description and watched this video which details its purpose and components but that's what it seems like to me and the reason I'm asking is because friends of mine all have finder scopes that cost ~£20 rather than £30-40. My next spend will be on a scope, I've read through Astronomy for dummies and I've just moved out of a city into a rural area with good viewing. Binoculars alone have shown me some exciting things so I can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Final Cause posted:Really great photographs there. It is basically an advanced red-dot finder. It has 3 circles that show, 0.5 degrees, 2 degrees, and 4 degrees in diameter, which can be useful for star hopping. I think the biggest benefit of a Telrad or red-dot finder(what I use), is that you don't have to stand on your head to get on target. I basically just crouch down and look up through the red-dot glass, get close to my object, then go to my eyepiece or if I am imaging, my laptop, and then fine tune to the object. I only use my red-dot for polar alignment. Edit: Here you can see the difference: Telrad:  Red Dot Finder:  Choicecut fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Jan 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
Thanks for clarifying, the pictures helped. I haven't researched finder scopes at all so I was surprised to hear the view would be upside down when I pictured essentially a straight tube. Ok, so commonly they're not straight tubes but instead like periscopes with only one mirror so yes the image would be upside down but I imagine I could just get a very basic small straight scope with cross hairs to roughly gauge where I am in the sky through the much more magnified scope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
Final Cause posted:Thanks for clarifying, the pictures helped. I haven't researched finder scopes at all so I was surprised to hear the view would be upside down when I pictured essentially a straight tube. Ok, so commonly they're not straight tubes but instead like periscopes with only one mirror so yes the image would be upside down but I imagine I could just get a very basic small straight scope with cross hairs to roughly gauge where I am in the sky through the much more magnified scope. Seriously, avoid frustration and just get a telrad. They are well worth it. Edit: Keep in mind that a mirror isn't the only thing that causes image flip. Lenses do too. Again with the telrad, when it is pitch black out, you really don't want to be futzing around with a magnified finder scope with 3 adjustment screws and upside-down image, or a red dot on a flimsy base. The quicker you can get on target, the more eyepiece time you will have to see what you were looking for. Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jan 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
I spent 20 minutes last night looking for Andromeda. In my hunt I stumbled across a cluster that I think is M34 which was amazing, but never did find Andromeda. I've also not been able to find the Crab Nebula despite quite a bit of hunting. I know the general area... do you need a very dark sky to see it? I'm rather near a large shopping center with a ton of lights in that direction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Fog Tripper posted:Seriously, avoid frustration and just get a telrad. They are well worth it. This man speaks truth. Choicecut fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Jan 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
I had a somewhat minor concern with the finder that came with my new dob, so telescopes.com is sending me a new Telrad for free and I get to keep the finder. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:Haven't posted in awhile, here are some of the images I took over the past few months: You know, I really have zero desire to get a setup that would take pictures like these (or the others in this thread). Why? Because I could save a boatload of money and simply view them here. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Fog Tripper posted:You know, I really have zero desire to get a setup that would take pictures like these (or the others in this thread). Why? Because I could save a boatload of money and simply view them here. I really love this thread and I know I'll probably never be able to take pictures like this I love see what you guys can do. I'm afraid if I ever buy all the equipment it'll just collect dust a month later. What are you able to see with a pretty cheap investment say like maybe $100? I'm sure I wouldn't be able see those awesome nebula's but maybe seeing some far planets or something would be cool every now and then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
smarion2 posted:I really love this thread and I know I'll probably never be able to take pictures like this I love see what you guys can do. There are times when my gear collects dust for months at a time and there are other times where I'm out every weekend for 2 months straight. I looked at it as a life long investment. I typically grab my 20x80 celestron skymasters for quick viewing. Small, lightweight, portable and no setup time make them a perfect fit for what you are looking for. I think I picked mine up for under 100 bucks. You can see banding on Jupiter, its moons..Orion nebula is visible through them as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
The moon and Jupiter were very close tonight, less then 1 degree. I hope someone took some better pictures then me with a camera phone. This was the best one, I had a moon filter on so Jupiter's moons didn't pick up on the camera phone but they where very clear in the eyepiece. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 04:42
|
|
|
This is only slightly better... didn't take the time to get the scope out (so cold here :/) so just shot with my 300mm on my DSLR, cropped quite a bit, and brought up jupiter's moons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 13:58
|
|
|
dedian posted:This is only slightly better... didn't take the time to get the scope out (so cold here :/) so just shot with my 300mm on my DSLR, cropped quite a bit, and brought up jupiter's moons. What exposure settings did you use? I have pretty decent Nikon gear, and never took the time to get a decently-exposed moon. I am assuming you didn't just set it on auto. edit: Have you a hirez version of the shot, or with that crop is it pixel/pixel? Something about seeing a planet with it's moons in the distance, with our moon in the foreground is wonderful perspective. Most space photos seem to 2 dimensional in comparison. Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Jan 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Fog Tripper posted:What exposure settings did you use? I have pretty decent Nikon gear, and never took the time to get a decently-exposed moon. I am assuming you didn't just set it on auto. Of the 4928x3264 original version (new D7000 yay!), the cropped version is 888x1341 (so, yeah, there's a little more detail than this pic, but not much). The exposure was ISO 400, 300mm (Tamron 70-300 4-5.6, VR on), at f/8, 1/320s. Sorry, didn't think that the exposure settings wouldn't show up on imgur I believe I set it to center weighted, or just spot metering (edit: exif says spot metering), and metered right on the moon. The moon is bright, it's reflecting the sun! So is Jupiter in this case... As far as Jupiter's moons, since neither Jupiter nor its moons had much detail in my capture, I just did a tiny spot adjustment for each of its moons and upped exposure and whites as much as I could. Jupiter's exposure is bumped up just a little bit itself. I did check Stellarium at the time, just to make sure the spots I made bright matched up to where its moons were, given my point of view. In a telescope you'd be able to see Jupiter's moons with your eyes (not sure if you could with the half-moon in view, though), so I decided to make them somewhat visible. Kind of wish I stayed up later to get a closer conjunction but it was at least -10F out, and past my bedtime on a worknight Anyway, here's the RAW if you'd like, it's everyone's moon and jupiter anyway http://dl.dropbox.com/u/13618436/DSC_0307.NEF dedian fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Jan 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 02:00
|
|