Mars at 5200mm

jgs001

jgs001

Brian Cox
Messages
12,646
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Skymax 102, QHY5v, 2x Ultima, 2x Tal, This combo, gives a 35mm EQ focal length of 44200mm (Yes... 44 meters :D)

It's really very hard to get I reckon... I don't know why I get the odd ring around stuff.... I think it might be my Mak...

But hey... I'm pleased... I got some detail

1000 of 2000 frames at 25 fps, Stacked in Registax.

marsx4290110.jpg
 
Good shot, wow a giant leap in equipment than for most lol, do you have an observatory ?
Patrick Moore lives in Sussex maybe your aquainted in this field ?
 
Last edited:
Expect to see a Large Pano next, was gutting last night, perfectly clear skies, good view of the Moon and Mars, I could do nothing as sat at work on the dreaded Night Shift :shake: :shake: :bang: :bang:
 
That is beautiful, I like it's hallo, gives it a nice effect.
 
Last edited:
Cool, never seen it so close before, except on astronomy books/websites etc...
 
Thanks (y)

Graham, the mount yes, the scope I used was a £50 second hander... this can be done with a simple webcam, but it's all a bit specialist gear. I have met him a couple of times, but I know a few people that meet with him regularly.

Blimey Stuart... you are kidding right :razz: I had a helluva time getting even this much image scale... I used a smaller crop of the sensor as it is ;)

Isabella, twas my first attempt at Mars, I haven't done much planetary imaging.
 
jgs001 said:
Blimey Stuart... you are kidding right :razz: I had a helluva time getting even this much image scale... I used a smaller crop of the sensor as it is ;)
Click to expand...

Nope, perfect viewing conditions, and I was working, so no chance of making the most of it, it was hell I can tell you :D
 
I bet, that's just nasty... and hellishly infuriating too.
 
I was just thinking - that's a pretty crap shot of the moon
then put on reading glasses - it's Mars

crikey that is phenomenally good :clap:
getting close to astronomer stuff here!

wonder what the moon would look like through that rig?

(is that what you used for a composite t'other day?)
 
Congratulations John on seeing and recording surface detail on Mars!
It looks to me like you are getting two focus points here which may be a property of the optical train used. Perhaps a minus violet filter would help?
Well done once again.
MBS
 
Thanks Mike. As for the moon, I don't have enough disk space to complete a mosaic at this image scale... it'll probably be a mosaic of 200 frames :nuts: it took long enough on 93 panes, I used the same scope and a single 2x barlow (TC) with the same camera.

Thanks MBS... In theory the Maksutov Cassegrain shouldn't need anything for CA correction. Although... it might be an effect of the none ED barlow, or the UV/IR filter I have on the nose of the camera. There does appear to be some odd ghosting on the avi. Hmm... it's a mono camera, so perhaps a red filter would be a good idea... :thinking:
 
i always thought mars was the red planet?? great shot though!!
 
Dave..:razz:... Ok... I used one of http://www.firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=mak102eq2 (fl =1300mm) with one of http://www.firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=cultimabarlow (for x2) and one of http://www.firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=talbarlows (for x2) combined for x4 (the operate like tele converters). The camera I used is slightly larger than VGA (752x480 pixels) so the crop factor works out at 8.5x, the effective focal length in 35mm terms is 44,200mm. Mars was at it's closest approach on the 29th, making it only about 55 to 60 million miles away :D... :LOL: The magnification of 4x is probably a little low, as the distance of the lens to the sensor affects the magnification. It was probably nearer 4.5x but I can't do the maths to work out the actual magnification and therefore focal length.

It is Pete, I'm using a mono camera and don't have a set of RGB filters to get the colours back.

Thank you both (y)
 
I'd have thought a decent telescope cost more than that, I might have to get one of those. Could I mount a DSLR to that?
 
Richard, the telescope is the cheaper bit... The little skymax scopes work well for the moon and planets. What's important is the mount. It wasn't on the mount in that link above, I bought the scope on it's own. I used it mounted on http://firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=SWHEQ5syntrek.

You can attach an SLR to one of these, and it'll work on the moon. The focal ratio is too slow for deep sky imaging. I tried it once, and the exposure lengths you need are extreme, and require something like the HEQ5 and guiding, especially with the focal length.
 
Norma, I'm afraid not... From here, none of the scopes have the resolution to get down to single meters. The smallest features I can find are about 4 or 5 miles across. One of the recent lunar probes (I think it was JAXA) has indeed captured photographic evidence of the lunar landers, and the tracks of the rover, but that was from orbit using high res imaging equipment.
 
Cheers, it's rather specialised, and therein lies the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top