Amateur astronomy: Space is pretty awesome

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Hobbies, Crafts, & Houses > Amateur astronomy: Space is pretty awesome

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

duodenum posted:

Both scopes would be fantastic. The 12" is where these dobs start to feel like wheeling around unwieldy water heaters IMO. The 10 is about the same bulk as the 8, just a bit heavier and thicker, same length. Which is great for comfortable eyepiece height (no tall ladders in the dark), but the 10's focal ratio is shorter than the 8, which makes it more sensitive to collimation error.

If the 10" is pushing your budget, definitely get the 8" and at least one eyepiece. If you can only get one, supplement your 25mm plossl with something that has a good planetary 200x magnification. The eyepieces make or break your experience at the telescope, don't go too cheap on them, you get what you pay for usually.

5mm (240x)
Baader Hyperion, 70deg FOV, $120, great eye relief
Celestron X-Cel LX, 60deg FOV, $100, great eye relief
Agena Starguider, 60deg FOV, $65, decent eye relief <-- this whole series is a great value

5.5mm (220x)
ES62, 62deg FOV, $150, no experience, not sure it's worth $150

There are plenty of really great options above $200. Pentax XW and Morpheus up to Delos and Ethos. The difference in clarity and comfort is noticeable, and the wider fields of view are luxurious. These are what I use.

Don't buy a cheap eyepiece kit. A Barlow can make your 25mm stock eyepiece a 12.5mm, but its eye relief is already 20mm+ and will get even longer and more difficult to use if you Barlow it. You could get a 10mm or 12mm eyepiece, then you'd have 100x or so and you could then 2x Barlow up to ~200x, but I'd rather get two eyepieces in that situation.

Thanks for this informative post. I've been a telescope owner for 5 days now and I'm doing my best to find good info on which eyepieces to start off with. I noticed that Celestron has a starter kit that looked practical, but when I checked prices at Anacortes Telescopes I discovered that their cheapest eyepieces are about the price of that whole Celestron set. It doesn't seem like there's any consensus on what magnifications are a good starting point, is that fair to say? It seems like eyepieces are a bit of a personal journey. I'm trying to avoid the temptation to buy lots of fancy stuff upfront and ladder up as needed, but when each individual eyepiece is like $150+ it feels like an awfully fraught decision.

I got the Celestron 5SE and so far I'm loving it, but I'm absolutely baffled by the LCD display being more or less useless in temperatures below 30 F. Like... wouldn't they want to design a handset that can be used easily for more than half the calendar year for people in the northern hemisphere? Seems crazy.

# ¿ Dec 30, 2022 23:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 20:01

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

PerniciousKnid posted:

I found this essay helpful, it seems to encapsulate most of the common beginner advice.

https://www.eyepiecesetc.com/1X_2X_3X_Magnification_Protocol_p/ep-selection-1x-2x-3x.htm

Thanks so much, took me a second to wrap my mind around this, but now it makes sense. Just to pay it forward, I found this to be a good resource and helped me go from raw numbers to choosing an actual product (some Tele Vue Plossls): https://telescopenights.com/best-te...ear%20by%20GSO.

Separately, does anyone have any good beginner's resources beyond the concatenation of websites that people have mentioned previously and in the OP? I'm trying to assemble a bit of a syllabus for myself to learn some fundamentals about visual astronomy, optics, the history of astronomy, the nature of certain celestial bodies, celestial motion etc. Is there a general-purpose textbook(s) for people getting into the hobby? Paging between an endless regress of websites and youtube videos works somewhat well but certainly doesn't seem very efficient, and you have to put some faith in the sources you're using, which are sometimes unclear or contradictory. I'm not sure if joining a local club is practical for me at the moment, so it's going to be a matter of self-teaching for a while.

Lastly, I haven't seen any chatter in this thread about the upcoming comet in late Jan/early Feb. Am I correct to assume that viewing and tracking any object of that approximate size within the solar system will follow the same basic heuristics of viewing the planets/moons? Just want to make sure I don't miss a unique opportunity while I'm still getting the rudiments down

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Jan 9, 2023

# ¿ Jan 9, 2023 01:10

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

I'm curious what people do to keep their equipment organized during a viewing session. I'm just getting started, and even doing some casual observing in my driveway with a little table for my various lenses, flashlight, book, etc. was clearly inadequate. Do people have fancy travel cases that they also use as storage solutions for outside? I've been browing B&H and see plenty of travel cases and all kinds exotic accessories, but am surprised to see so few (or no) organization solutions.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2023 15:45

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Thanks! Was a bit confused when I opened the link and saw some handguns but I get it now lol.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2023 17:22

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Hi there. I have a two-part question: is there any utility to using a laser collimator instead of a simple collimation eyepiece if you have a standard beginner's reflector? Secondly, I can't imagine there's any quality variation in different collimation eyepieces, they're all the same right?

# ¿ Feb 17, 2023 17:04

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Thanks both. I hadn't seen that some of these laser collimators are somehow half as expensive as the eyepiece. Who would've though? Thanks!

# ¿ Feb 17, 2023 18:15

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

I was thinking of joining an astronomy club to boot strap myself into competence (this one in particular https://www.aldrich.club/, in central Mass). It's a bit far for me, but I'm hoping it'll be a productive way to learn. Does anyone have any positive/negative experiences with clubs that aren't super specific to their situation?

# ¿ Feb 20, 2023 00:40

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

I�m so envious. Questions for you (and anyone else in the thread with experience): how long have you been in the hobby? Did you come at it from a particular direction (prior experience with astronomy, photography, etc)? Has it been mostly a solo-adventure or have you had mentors/clubs?

# ¿ Apr 3, 2023 13:49

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Achmed Jones posted:

zero! i just want a "this is what you need, this is how you put things together, and this is how you do the software thing to make the pretty pictures" guide. for all the reading i did before buying my telescope and a dslr, i didn't find anything saying "oh by the way, you 100% absolutely can't do prime photography with this telescope." and it kind of stings that there's eighty million reviews out there, but nothing thought to mention that i wouldn't be able to take pictures through the danged thing without eyepiece projection, you know? i still have no idea what i should've bought, and it's still not at all clear to me what the best I can do is, whether I could buy an aftermarket equatorial mount if I wanted to, and in general what the space of options is unless I just want to waste $100 at a time on "oh, that didn't work" over and over

all that said, the site you linked seems like exactly what I need. I'm looking at his first couple of beginner articles and I think they'll be precisely what I was after. Thank you!

e: oh, I have a real question! There's a street light across from my house. Without it, it'd be pretty dark but with it, it's not so great. Is there some way I can figure out what the wavelength is and then get a filter for my camera (or telescope, or whatever) that would eliminate that light? I know I could buy a filter, but I've absolutely no idea which filter I should buy

You could try this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuMZG-SyDCU

As for the streetlight, is it blindingly white? If so, it's LED and you're screwed. Otherwise it's either sodium or magnesium.

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Apr 3, 2023

# ¿ Apr 3, 2023 20:40

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

I'm heading to my first dark sky site next month (Katahdin Woods, Maine). I'm very excited. In preparation, I'm looking to buy my first large FOV eyepiece, but I'm struggling to understand what the rate limiting factor is when I'm shopping around. I have a Celestron 1250mm / 6" SCT. Currently the highest TFOV I can achieve with my 32mm Tele Vue Plossl (50 degree AFOV) (https://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_page.asp?id=51&Tab=EP_EPL-32.0) is 1.28. The TFOV for 1.25" eyepieces seems to cap out at 100 degrees (like a 10mm Tele Vue Ethos, for example). That still only gets me a .8 TFOV. Is the numerator that is represented by my scope's focal length the issue here? I was hoping I could hit 1.6 degrees TFOV, or thereabouts, but it doesn't seem possible? So my only option is to lower the denominator and go for a low mag eyepiece? It seems like with my specs, it's possible to get a nice wide-angle FOV for DSOs, but a wide-angle FOV for planetary viewing just isn't really suited for this? Or is the answer to just couple a higher-mag wide-angle FOV eyepiece with a focal reducer (which I don't yet own)...?

# ¿ Apr 23, 2023 20:58

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Thanks. I was seeing random posts here and there about planetary viewing that made it seem like it might allow for high magnification, but mitigate the low FOV somewhat (despite the apparent contradiction). Helps to know that I can stick to the low magnification end of things. I certainly can't afford that eyepiece, but I'll try to find something within my budget.

# ¿ Apr 24, 2023 01:38

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

duodenum posted:

I have an Explore Scientific 68deg 34mm and it is very comfortable (with glasses) and wide, though I've not compared it to a Panoptic or tried to use it in a fast scope. It's about $250 and its 40mm brother is just a little more. It's a good alternative, and it gets 85% of the way to a Tele Vue at about half the price. poo poo, even closer if you're a casual visual observer using an SCT.

You can get a 2" visual back and a 2" diagonal separately, or you can get a 2" SCT diagonal (that threads straight onto the scope) for a bit cheaper. You'd be wide(r) field observing for about $400 with the ES 68 40 and the GSO 2" SCT diagonal.

edit: oh, and the thing about planetary viewing and FOV is that you don't *need* a 70 degree SWA or 82 degree UWA eyepiece to appreciate viewing planets at high magnification. If you're going to have that planet centered in your view, a devastatingly sharp TV Plossl will do the trick at 52 degrees or whatever, as long as you can track it smoothly.

Thanks again for the advice. I bought the star diagonal and eyepiece at your recommendation. Unfortunately the Star diagonal is too big for my 6� SCT, it interferes with the focuser and the mount. Dang it

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Apr 27, 2023

# ¿ Apr 27, 2023 00:02

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Liquid Chicken posted:

On your 6SE you would have better served with the focal reducer rather than a 2" diagonal. The baffle opening in the 6SE is only 27mm. The maximum field stop in a 1.25" eyepiece is 27mm. The reason why 2" eyepieces exist is in order to have wider AFOV at mid to low powers you need a field stop greater than 27mm. A 2" eyepiece with a field stop greater than 27mm is just going to produce vignetting and you won't get the full field of view. It might not be too noticeable if an eyepiece's field stop is just a little more than 27mm, but if you were to use a wide field low power eyepiece with a 46mm field stop you'll notice. You're going to be missing a good chunk of your outer viewing area. On SCTs a 2" diagonal is really only worthwhile on the 8" sizes and greater. Even on the 8SE the baffle opening is only 37 or 38mm.

As for a 1.25" eyepiece with the widest view and greatest magnification w/o a focal reducer would be either the Explore Scientific 24mm 68 AFOV or the Tele Vue 24mm Panoptic. The former is on sale right now.

Thanks. I already have a 32mm Tele Vue with a 50 AFOV which yields a 1.28 TFOV versus the above, which would yield 1.30, so that's not a difference worth investing in.

I'm getting a bit of conflicting advice as to whether I should a focal reducer or the 2" diagonal, but perhaps AstroZamboni's advice was independent of my particular stats (also I misspoke earlier, my Celestron 5SE has a 5" aperture, not 6" the OTA itself is 6"

AstroZamboni posted:

Instead of getting a focal reducer, get a 2" visual back and diagonal, and get a 40mm Panoptic. 1.8� true field on a C6.

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Apr 27, 2023

# ¿ Apr 27, 2023 14:33

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

AstroZamboni posted:

Yeah I also made the stupid assumption the individual who said they had a C6 actually had a C6. My bad.

Yeah that was my bad, sorry

. I do appreciate everyone�s generosity in sharing knowledge in this thread though.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2023 00:14

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Apropos of this chat, I went to my first dark sky site last weekend and totally botched it, on account of my 5SE's GoTo stuff. I've never had much trouble getting alignment and having the scope find targets from my driveway, but for some reason it just wasn't locating the targets I was looking for. I had a whole agenda for the night and couldn't find any of the objects I was hoping for (except M31, which was disappointingly blurry). It was a useful, if tragic lesson that I need to get better at locating objects manually, and not relying on the software. Like learning math via calculator without doing any of the fundamental stuff.

Finding stuff wasn't made any easier by the fact that anytime I looked through the scope there was legitimately like 100+ stars in view, a significant amount more than I see when I take a peek at open clusters like the Pleiades from home. It was really disorienting (if beautiful).

# ¿ Jun 5, 2023 21:49

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

This was in central Maine, outside Baxter, and fortunately the fires from Halifax had significantly dodged that area. Cleardarksky indicated the seeing conditions were not optimal but certainly good. There was a waxing moon which I literally waited for 2am to set, which gave me about 2 hours before dawn to find stuff. I was very careful about all of that hand controller input, and had to do it many times over while I tried to error-correct. When doing the 2-star align, the scope was able to precisely locate the second star every time (i.e. you show it Dubhe and it slews precisely to Aldebaran or whatever). I don't know what that indicates, if you can achieve alignment but then none of the targets are visible, but yeah (can 2-star align possibly work with the wrong coordinates or date/time? I guess since the stars are fixed in relation to one another, maybe? But then so would the rest of the objects be). I'll grant that I was doing this at 3-4 am after a long day of hiking, so maybe my brain wasn't working properly, but this wasn't an issue I've encountered before at home to any significant degree.

It makes sense to me that the open clusters would get lost among all the "noise" of the other stars, but the globular clusters I looked for (M53, M3, M13, M92, M5), weren't visible, and most distressing of all, none of the nebulae or galaxies I was hoping for were visible (ring, dumbbell, swan, lagoon, M51, M101). Some of these were admittedly somewhat close to the eastern horizon, but I specifically chose the whirlpool and the pinwheel since they'd be roughly overhead all night. I'm not sure I'll be able to troubleshoot what happened, but it was an object lesson in making sure I can find things the old-fashioned way if need be.

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Jun 5, 2023

# ¿ Jun 5, 2023 23:02

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Liquid Chicken posted:

I would just say recheck things to see if there was anything skipped.
What eyepieces are you using to find these targets? A few of them like M101 will be hard to find with a 5SE even on a good night. There are limitations due to your aperture size. Even with a 16" dob it's just gray fuzzies. Globular clusters should have been visible even under moonlight. Nebulas can be difficult - you're looking for gray wispy ghost farts. A good narrowband or O-III filter can help improve contrast somewhat. It is better to wait till such objects are higher in the sky.

I was using a 32mm Televue (39x magnification) with a focal reducer and this filter. My targets were all chosen out of Turn Left at Orion, which so far has seemed fairly reliable.

# ¿ Jun 6, 2023 02:48

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

With a set up like that, did you basically own the scope already, and then go all in on the EQ mount, camera, etc all at once?

It�s hard for me to chart a path through learning astrophotography without a decent roadmap for what components you want to buy, and in what sequence, so that you don�t plonk down $10k hoping that it catches on.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2023 22:17

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

That�s so loving cool. I can�t imagine how that must�ve felt when it clicked with you what you were looking at.

# ¿ Dec 8, 2023 16:19

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

pumped up for school posted:

Interest check - I've got a Star Adventurer 2i Pro I found buried in my closet. It hasn't been used all year. I got a MSM for the camera-based stuff and a ZWO mount for scope. Anyone want this weird in-between, or have a friend getting into the hobby who might benefit? I'd much rather keep it friendly than go to eBay.

I have no idea what I�m doing but would be interested.

# ¿ Dec 22, 2023 00:09

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Raikyn posted:

Another wide-angle shot I've been working on over the last week.
Vela Supernova remnant, big object in the southern sky.

Nothing to contribute except to say wow, and thanks for sharing.

pumped up for school posted:

Ok. Sometime next week I'll get it all together and pm you when I am ready to put it on SA Mart. Give you first dibs.

Thank you! I'm excited to dive in.

# ¿ Dec 22, 2023 19:45

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

How are the folks in this thread who have been in the hobby for a long time and who have amassed these very complicated, expensive rigs feeling about these telescopes? As arbitrary as it is, it seems like making it tooeasy would take the fun out of it, in a way. Though I don't know any serious or professional photographers who bemoan the advent of smartphone cameras.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2024 15:32

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Baby's first astrophoto, compliments of pumped up for schools Star Adventurer. It took me an agonizingly long time to get to this point. I'm definitely going to spring for a zoom lens- the 70mm I have just doesn't cut it, clearly.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Feb 12, 2024 00:17

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Would love to see those images after a bit of processing.

My photo had an incredible amount of blue chromatic aberration and extreme vignetting, which I gather is the result of using a zoom lens, and without any reduction in f-stop (I was at 4.0). I shot about 60 30-second subs, but I'm not sure if trying for longer exposures is going to make any difference with this less-than-ideal hardware.

I am curious though: in terms of light gathering, is the ratio of exposure time to number of shots interchangeable? In other words, are 5 one-minute exposures going to be nearly the same as one 5-minute exposure, or is there an exponential function to exposure times? My guess is that due to the complexity of the optical chain, you can't simplify it quite that neatly, but I'm just curious.

# ¿ Feb 12, 2024 17:58

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Interesting, thanks, I wasn't sure if the sensor heating up during the course of a long exposure would have a marked adverse effect compared to a exposure that's half as long (not necessarily in that ratio, just an example).

I can feel pretty good about buying a Rokinon 135 mm f/2.0 as my first lens, right? I'm using a 30-70mm zoom right now. I'm trying to exercise some restraint and not buy some fancy prime lens with a long focal length in the 200mm range since I'm still very new to my star tracker and haven't acquired a ton of confidence yet with getting polar aligned/avoiding star trails etc.

# ¿ Feb 20, 2024 00:54

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

My second ever photo is here. Thanks once again to Pumped Up For School for the Star Adventurer 2i to speed me on my way. Two questions:

1. I took 80 light frames (60-second exposures at f/2.8, ISO640 with a Rokinon 135mm). I was out all night watching the intervalometer count down, and hearing the shutter every minute and yet... when I got back inside I only had 40 images. This was true of my darks as well (10 shots instead of 20). How the hell did that happen? My only guess is that the intervalometer is out of sync with the camera and when the LCD screen on the camera is reading "Processing..." it's getting a bit behind while it works on the photo I just took. Is that likely? I can't fathom how else I ended up with half as many frames. Having to space out each image by an additional 30-45 seconds will be a real pain.

2. I was really excited to get a faint hint of the horsehead nebula in this shot (and a decent look at the flame nebula). I was going to spring for an Optolong filter but was gob smacked at the price. I wouldn't have imagined that it would be the same price of cheaper to get my camera astro modified. Is there any reason not to get my camera astro-modified if I'm eager to capture some more reddish nebulas like the horsehead or rosette?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Mar 9, 2024 20:01

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Oh poo poo, it was probably the Long Exposure Noise Reduction feature huh? Ugh! Lesson learned.

# ¿ Mar 9, 2024 21:11

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

No, I got a Sony E-Mount for my A7r. I was a bit torn about it because I understand that Sony isn�t the most reputable brand in this space but it was in the family so I couldn�t really justify buying a new Canon.

# ¿ Mar 10, 2024 01:54

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

pumped up for school posted:

That's a great camera but aw shucks. I have a Canon T2i that is modified but I can't use it (no glass, switched to all Fuji) so I was just going to send it to you, see if you thought a mod would be worth it.

Aw jeez, that's an extremely kind offer. I assume that people avoid using lens adapters in this space whenever possible? It seems like it's not easily to anticipate what problems it'll create since it's so equipment-dependent. I wouldn't be averse to trying to combine the Rokinon lens with that body if only for experimental purposes.

Has anyone tried renting from this site? https://www.lensrentals.com/? It seems like it might be a good way to explore a few additional focal lengths without having to jump in with both feet (was thinking of just renting a 200mm just for fun).

simble posted:

That�s not true. Sony makes arguably the best sensors for astrophotography. Especially in terms of price to performance.

Oh ok hm, that's heartening. I think I was basing this off of 1) a single statement in Terence Dickinson/Alan Dyer's book which says, "In our tests of a Sony A7 III, it exhibited odd edge glows in long deep sky exposures. For the most demanding tasks, we suggest Canon or Nikon" and 2) the "star eater" issue which doesn't seem like a dealbreaker but a genuine nuisance to deal with sometimes.

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Mar 10, 2024

# ¿ Mar 10, 2024 16:58

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

fralbjabar posted:

This is, unfortunately, not easily possible. The back focal distance on E Mount is 18mm and EF is 44mm, to mount an E Mount lens on and EF body you'd need to have the rear element of the lens physically inside the mirror assembly. You can mount it anyway, but you lose the ability to focus on distant objects (similar to using an extension tube). There have been adapters with optics in them to solve this problem for other mounts, but I'm not aware of any for E mount, and the ones I have seen have been for less extreme differences than that and they still resulted in image quality degradation. If it exists, expect it to be several hundred USD.

They're extremely legit, I've rented from them personally several times in the past and it's always been extremely smooth. With their recent purchase of BorrowLenses they've pretty much monopolized camera/lens rental in the US outside of Cinema rental houses.

Yeah, a B&H sales rep agreed that the flange lens distance is the problem and there's no adapter for it, unfortunately.

Golden-i posted:

It's been one step at a time for me since 2015. Started with an unmodified DSLR on a cheap 8" reflector and a celestron goto mount. It evolved over time as I didn't have the money to drop on all this and, honestly, this whole process has been "fix/improve one issue, move on to the next."

Over several years it went something like:

-New camera and Pixinsight for post processing (ZWO ASI294MC-PRO color CCD - HUGE step up from an unmodified DSLR or phone when combined with Pixinsight. Cannot stress that enough.)
-The mount is struggling with the heavier camera and mounting gear. New mount that supports EQMOD and heavier payload (EQ6-R). Used EQMOD/ASCOM with SharpCap and guiding via Stellarium.
-Hmm, tracking is better but not great. Got a guide scope/camera and added PHD2 to my workflow.
-The optics on my telescope are horrible, the primary mirror is constantly out of collimation, and, even with a focal flattener, the build on the tube/focusers was trash. Time for a new scope (Skywatcher Esprit80)
-There's too many drat pieces to tracking/guiding/shooting and every time I set this up I want to die. Picked up an ASIAIR and eliminated SharpCap/PHD2/Stellarium/EQMOD/ASCOM all in one go. (Holy poo poo this made my life so much easier)
-Couple years later, now I want to try mono shooting. Picked up a ZWO ASI6200MM last winter (This was me spoiling myself, but I happened to have the extra cash to do so at the time. You can do a hell of a lot with smaller mono cameras than this). Also got a filter wheel and some LRGB filters.
-I live in Minnesota and changing filters with my stupid fingers in December sucks. Picked up a 5-spot EFW and integrated seamlessly with my ASIAIR
-Hmm, I never realized that changing filters changes the focus on the camera because high school physics was a long time ago and I'm an idiot. Picked up a ZWO EAF a couple weeks ago and installed it on my Esprit80

I really enjoy the process of debugging issues and improving processes, so this worked well for me. I wouldn't recommend someone go out and get all this gear straight out unless you're already well established in this hobby and comfortable with your workflows, that'd be crazy. Start with whatever camera you can afford, whatever scope can get the stars in focus, and a tracking mount that doesn't fall over. Go from there and improve whatever bits you can, when you can.

Circling back to this, as it was a helpful post. I'm obviously trying to actually get practice with the equipment I own rather than just furiously spending cash, but I'm curious in particular about the jump from the non-astromodified DSLR directly to the ZWO camera. I image that would be quite a leap (and would also imagine that you'd have to pair it with a guide camera/scope from the get-go)? My spending map is to astro-modify my DSLR and buy either/or a narrowband clip-in or h-alpha clip-in, then maybe getting an apo refractor (Redcat?), and thenjumping to a ZWO camera and the ASIAIR and all that fun stuff.

Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Mar 16, 2024

# ¿ Mar 16, 2024 15:27

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

I'm having difficulty understanding from Astrogear's website which astro-mod I should go for with my Sony Alpha7R. As far as I can tell, it would make sense to choose the first option (UV/IR blocking bluish filter removal only), and pair it with this Astronomik clip-in light pollution filter. However, the combined cost of the mod and the filter is $400, which is $50 more expensive than mod #2 (Enhanced Spectrum Conversion with Optolong Luminance Filter). Is the drawback of option #2 that the Optolong filter is a permanent installation and can never be swapped out for any other type of filter (like a Ha-filter) in the future? I can't quite figure out why they refer to #1 as the less expensive version if you are inevitably going to pair it with a filter of some type.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2024 17:31

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Really terrible news, I'm very sorry for your loss. I'm new to the hobby and have really enjoyed watching his videos this past year or so. He seemed like a good soul.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2024 01:17

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Beautiful, thanks for sharing!

Does anyone know just how far-reaching light pollution from mercury and sodium lights can be? I'm about to plonk down some money for a CLS filter. I'm in a suburb and the streets in my vicinity have all already switched to LED streetlights- is there enough ambient light pollution from mercury/sodium that your immediate LED-lit surroundings don't render CLS useless?

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 20:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 20:01

Jewmanji: Dec 28, 2003

Amazing stuff. I guess I can't complain too loudly about missing this after a perfect eclipse viewing. I read that there's a chance for more activity tonight, is that correct?

# ¿ May 11, 2024 14:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Hobbies, Crafts, & Houses > Amateur astronomy: Space is pretty awesome