Astrophotography photos


by Phobos
Tags: astrophotography, photos
Chronos
Chronos is offline
#325
May29-10, 03:37 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,172
Thanks a lot, guys, I just purchased new scope, ccd, and accessories. Only spent twice as much as planned [and still short a few extras]. I won't be ordering out for pizza in the foreseeable future. I will, however, be able to take beautiful close up shots of neighbors' pizza ... putting up sign next to scope - 1 slice per observer.
mikeph
mikeph is online now
#326
Jun4-10, 03:48 AM
P: 1,197
Im going to go back and read this entire thread, but just thought I'll ask this now rather than later...

I am trying to do astrophotography with a DSLR. I just bought a D5000 + kit lens. I'm not expecting to take photos of galaxies or anything, hopefully just capture some detail on the moon and maybe some planets. Is this achievable with a standard 50mm f/1.8 lens? I'm thinking of buying one. I understand that if you want more a detail you can spend a lot on a telezoom lens but then you have to do some sort of tracking as well?

Going to try and get Mars which should be in the sky tomorrow I think, hopefully a series of 30 second images put together will give some brightness.


PS that moon picture above is awesome.


edit- considering getting the ridiculously cheap Nikon 70-300mm lens and try to get some 30 second exposures to put together. It seems that a lot of the "real" amateur stuff (telescope, tracking software, mounts) comes in at above a PhD student's budget so hopefully I can learn some things this way and then move up slowly.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#327
Jun4-10, 05:44 AM
Mentor
P: 21,994
The moon is a lot smaller than it looks to your eyes: you need a pretty long telephoto lens to take good pictures of it with a dslr. You don't need tracking or long exposure: it is very bright.

Mars is also very bright: you don't need long exposure for it either.
mikeph
mikeph is online now
#328
Jun8-10, 08:12 AM
P: 1,197
Thanks Russ. Is 200mm long enough? I really only have a choice between a 55-200mm and a 70-300mm in my price range. The former would be much more useful in other areas, and it has VR.

Plus the camera has 1.6 crop factor.
chemisttree
chemisttree is offline
#329
Jun8-10, 12:40 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
chemisttree's Avatar
P: 3,725
Quote Quote by Chronos View Post
Thanks a lot, guys, I just purchased new scope, ccd, and accessories. Only spent twice as much as planned [and still short a few extras]. I won't be ordering out for pizza in the foreseeable future. I will, however, be able to take beautiful close up shots of neighbors' pizza ... putting up sign next to scope - 1 slice per observer.
Was that the 10" SN on the LXD75 mount?
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#330
Jun8-10, 08:12 PM
Mentor
P: 21,994
Quote Quote by MikeyW View Post
Thanks Russ. Is 200mm long enough? I really only have a choice between a 55-200mm and a 70-300mm in my price range. The former would be much more useful in other areas, and it has VR.

Plus the camera has 1.6 crop factor.
I'm not really sure how it works with DSLRs, but the math on that works out to 6x zoom. That's marginal, but should be OK for a start.
baywax
baywax is offline
#331
Jun22-10, 12:43 AM
PF Gold
baywax's Avatar
P: 2,215
Thanks for inspiring me and my youngest boy, guys. First we need to master the telescope and get some clear skies. Then we need to figure out the camera end of it! We have an observatory in the middle of town... lots of light pollution. But Russ has shown how that can be overcome. There's another out at the university with less lights around. This is great, thanks again!
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#332
Jun24-10, 10:54 PM
Mentor
P: 21,994
You're welcome!

The camera part is dangerous - once you rip the lens off a webcam and slap it onto the back of your telescope, there is no going back!
Chronos
Chronos is offline
#333
Jun24-10, 11:03 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,172
Still mastering the scope, it is obdurate. Added 2 wraps of foam to mount dew cap. Looks good so far. Will need to add thumbscrew.
baywax
baywax is offline
#334
Jun25-10, 09:05 AM
PF Gold
baywax's Avatar
P: 2,215
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
You're welcome!

The camera part is dangerous - once you rip the lens off a webcam and slap it onto the back of your telescope, there is no going back!


We're headed to the interior this summer with an old crappy 40 mm telescope but, the sky is so clear and extremely dark where we're going that you can see all 14 of the 7 sisters and one entire arm of our galaxy like it was attached to your shoulder. Webcams, web, cells, shoot 'em up games be damned! We've got a date with some very nice horses!
Stanwyck66
Stanwyck66 is offline
#335
Jul3-10, 02:11 PM
P: 20
I just moved to the DC area and took my scope out for the first time..this is the best Jupiter I've taken so far. I darkened it a little to see more detail and color.
Attached Thumbnails
Jupiter.jpg  
Mikeral
Mikeral is offline
#336
Jul12-10, 10:31 PM
P: 6
Hello astrophotographers
I am new to the whole domain and just posted my first shots on youtube, i shot a couple short passes of stars with a webcam (logitech C200) and my telescope (Link). Anyway, if anyone has any tips for me, would be nice to hear some, mind you i don't have a big budget for equipment, university tuition ftw. I'm mostly looking for tips on noise reduction and better image quality. i have a mac, for any software related issues, which tends to be very picky.
Chronos
Chronos is offline
#337
Jul13-10, 12:22 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,172
yes, lxd75-sn10. optical tube is a bit heavy for mount, but, am juicing it up. i am a mechanical engineer so [perhaps mistakenly] assume i can manage the task. my observing area is fenced and surrounded by trees. i can only view about half the sky, but, wind is rarely an issue. i put diy wilcox rings on tube for convenience. handles are still hillbilly, but, working on that.
mikeph
mikeph is online now
#338
Jul14-10, 12:34 PM
P: 1,197
Hi all again.

Was just wondering what this object is in the night sky.

I took a photo with it on a wide angle lens, it caught my eye as something much brighter than any star, and it did not twinkle so I believe it might have been a planet!
When I zoomed in I thought "no star can be this circular" - the angular size is too big, right?

Also I think it might be interesting to note the "sunstars" that I got out of the camera from the road lights are not also present on this object- why? It was taken at wide angle of 15mm (35mm equivalent), with a 6 second exposure on f/22.

The location was the Canary Isles, 24th June, and the direction of the object is pretty much dead west.



400x zoom




Please tell me it's Mars!
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#339
Jul14-10, 04:52 PM
Mentor
P: 21,994
Quote Quote by MikeyW View Post
Hi all again.

Was just wondering what this object is in the night sky.

Please tell me it's Mars!
Sorry: Venus.

Also sorry, but that pic doesn't show the disk, it is just blown-out and/or out of focus. At that resolution, the disk would probably be just a little less than a pixel across.....it would also be a fat crescent shape. Venus has phases!
Also I think it might be interesting to note the "sunstars" that I got out of the camera from the road lights are not also present on this object- why?
I'm not sure what you mean - could you rephrase?
chemisttree
chemisttree is offline
#340
Jul14-10, 06:56 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
chemisttree's Avatar
P: 3,725
I think he means diffraction spikes. Likely from an effects filter on his camera or its coming from the iris. He is stopped down to f22! Some of that is his wide angle lens which I believe acts like a focal reducer. He probably doesn't have a round iris at that f stop. I'm thinking it is a hexagonal shape.

You won't see those spikes on any but the brightest objects. If you had a tracking mount and cropped it to exclude the foreground and focused venus to a tiny point (half moon shaped thing) and increased your shutter speed to 1 minute, you would likely see it.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#341
Jul14-10, 08:19 PM
Mentor
P: 21,994
That makes sense - I agre with all of that. I also didn't notice before, but now that I'm looking for it, Venus is noticeably hexagonal in that picture.....except that no camera would need 1 minute of exposure. I have imaged Saturn at f50 and use about a .1 sec exposure. That's a little too much magnification, so most of my planetary imaging is done at f25, with ~1/30th second exposures.
chemisttree
chemisttree is offline
#342
Jul15-10, 12:07 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
chemisttree's Avatar
P: 3,725
Yes, shorter speeds are needed for range and detail but if it is the spikes you want instead, longer times would exaggerate that. He is already using a 6 second exposure and the spikes are only faintly there.

BTW, I'm going to take back my "focus Venus to a tiny point" recommendation. At that f number what he has is likely the best focus he can achieve. Any bluriness is most likely due to seeing.

That is a very nice picture, MikeyW! Just like a postcard.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Amateur Astrophotography General Discussion 3
astrophotography limitations Photography 34
Astrophotography Question General Astronomy 9
My Astrophotography Site General Discussion 23
QuickCam Astrophotography General Astronomy 4