The Moon!

cat001

cat001

Messages
154
Name
Catherine
Edit My Images
Yes
I took these two through my telescope this week...

5599292116_a27d5eb2c6_z.jpg


5602256143_1255eb4d5a_z.jpg


Quite pleased with them :)
 
Another shot I just took tonight!

5607343445_44b07846f9_z.jpg


and a cropped version
5607926930_6971015b71_z.jpg
 
Good work Catherine, plenty of detail there. What scope do you have ?
 
Skywatcher Evostar 90 AZ3

I'm currently looking into getting a better scope so I can photograph beyond the moon
 
Great work. What settings would you use on the camer to obtain this kind of photo??
 
How I did it was plug my camera into my telescope via t-mount/t-adapter, used my shutter release cable to take about 100 shots then ran them through registax to produce one final image.

I can't quite remember what the settings were, shutter speed was around 1/80..1/100 something like that, ISO I just played with until the picture taken of the moon was slightly under-exposed.
 
I got my mount for about £6 and my adapter for £15
 
cat001 said:
Skywatcher Evostar 90 AZ3

I'm currently looking into getting a better scope so I can photograph beyond the moon
Click to expand...

Cat, Deep sky, is, to be honest, less about the scope, and more about the mount... You need a mount that can track accurately, or be guided for 5 or 10 minutes at a time, and have the weight handling capacity to take all the kit you want to put on top in, ideally, 50% of the max load.

If I might suggest http://firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=makin_every_photon_count as a good starting point...
 
jgs001 said:
Cat, Deep sky, is, to be honest, less about the scope, and more about the mount... You need a mount that can track accurately, or be guided for 5 or 10 minutes at a time, and have the weight handling capacity to take all the kit you want to put on top in, ideally, 50% of the max load.

If I might suggest http://firstlightoptics.com/proddetail.php?prod=makin_every_photon_count as a good starting point...
Click to expand...

Thanks, I also understand aperture is important, my current telescope is only 3.5" but would like atleast 6-8". A decent mount which allows for accurate tracking is very much something I have in mind, at the moment I'm having to set my camera up on its tripod because it's too heavy for my telescope to hold.
 
Actually, aperture is only really important for visual... it's far less so for imaging, and the focal ratio has far more of an effect. If you're after deep sky, you want the smallest focal ratio you can manage... if you're wanting to do the moon/planets, then you want a large focal ratio... (I may have got the small and large the wrong way around... :thinking:) fast for deep sky, slow for moon and planets.

Virtually all my deep sky to date (and a lot of my moon and planets to be honest) has been done with an 80mm refractor at f/7.5. Not ideal, f/5 and lower is better... but...

What's the issue with the scope holding the camera at present ? does the focuser sag or slip ?
 
jgs001 said:
Actually, aperture is only really important for visual... it's far less so for imaging.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. I'd still take a 6" Takahashi over a 4" any day. check out a large scope imaging the filamentary nebula over a smaller one. See how much more fine detail it produces. In the world of telescopes light gathering power will always be king even for imaging.
 
Last edited:
Matty, true, but trying to keep it simple...

I did forget to mention, that aperture defines the resolving power of the scope... but as aperture climbs, so does the weight, and the need for a much beefier mount, and better guiding etc etc.

Equally, if that was purely the case that aperture of the objective is critical, then why is it, that I was able to capture the horsehead and flame nebulae with my 50mm f/1.8 with my unmodded camera at f/3.2, when I can barely touch it at f/7.5 ?? the 50mm, had a 15mm aperture, compared to the 80mm aperture of the scope.

Sorry Catherine, we're getting a little off topic....

For imaging, focal ratio is the key, but a larger aperture will allow for greater resolving power of the same subject, at the cost of weight.

As for your example, I'd take the 6" Tak too, but I'll never be able to afford one :D
 
jgs001 said:
Matty, true, but trying to keep it simple...

I did forget to mention, that aperture defines the resolving power of the scope... but as aperture climbs, so does the weight, and the need for a much beefier mount, and better guiding etc etc.

Equally, if that was purely the case that aperture of the objective is critical, then why is it, that I was able to capture the horsehead and flame nebulae with my 50mm f/1.8 with my unmodded camera at f/3.2, when I can barely touch it at f/7.5 ?? the 50mm, had a 15mm aperture, compared to the 80mm aperture of the scope.

Sorry Catherine, we're getting a little off topic....

For imaging, focal ratio is the key, but a larger aperture will allow for greater resolving power of the same subject, at the cost of weight.

As for your example, I'd take the 6" Tak too, but I'll never be able to afford
one :D
Click to expand...

I know a 4" Tak going for £3500 :D
 
more than my entire astro setup put together... *sigh* :D
 
Wow, nice detail!!
 
Excellent Catherine, you've done a very good job on the full moon, much harder to do right than the rest of the cycle except new...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top