:: Post your Astronomy Images here ! ::

[Nighthound]

Mitch an John. Noels' Astro Tools(Actions) are very valuable tools for post processing astro. Noel is an expert at processing and software design. HIs actions are worth every cent if you plan to shoot deep sky and stack multiple exposures. Noel's astro tool actions are designed specifically for astrophotography.

[Nighthound]

Thanks for the detailed reply, Steve!

I'll need to do some more reading about "air-spaced doublet" and CA effects.

You mention at 18-50mm exposures of 15s or so should be ok, but at 400mm need to be shorter. This makes sense, I guess it's a bit of experimentation. I'll also give some star trails a go, but might have trouble finding Polaris down here ;)

Regarding your last comment about Deep Sky Stacker and your previous recommendation to try star trails, does that mean that you don't think I should be trying to stack images with my current setup?

Regarding "stretching" the image, do you mean playing with levels or curves to increase the contrast in each channel etc? I'm comfortable with that. I think.

I've read a couple of times in this thread you recommended this EQ1 mount and posted a link here: http://www.amazon.com/Orion-EQ-1-Equatorial-Mount/dp/B0000XMX7K/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1221772134&sr=8-14 I'm a little confused. It looks like a tripod for a telescope. But down further there are "customers also bought..." type links to an adapter (for what I don't know) and also an electonic drive. Is there a way to get a motorised drive thing on my current tripod and camera setup? Or do I need that tripod thing - so I'd be up for around $100 for EQ1 mount (tripod), and the motor drive $57. Is that all? 30D camera and 100-400 lens connect how? Or is there a beginners telescope and adapter to connect my 30D to it you recommend?

Sorry about all the questions, but since I took up SLR photography just over a year ago, I've been hooked. And when I saw some of these astro shots, particularly yours in the N&A section, I want to know more :) I've always been interested in astronomy.

Weird, hey? The things I want to shoot most with my camera are macro photos of the tiniest insects and astro photos of the most distant and massive objects. :)

And I can't shoot people to save myself :oops: :lol:

And thanks canonloader for asking about dark frames, I was also going to ask about that ;)

Troy, my apologies I wasn't paying attention to your location. Which by the way tops my list on places to visit. Between the dark skies and native bird species I'd never get any sleep there. :D


You'd be looking for Sigma Octantis to get close to the celestial south pole.

I've tried stacking very low focal length exposures of the Milky way and it does help but getting started I would concentrate on getting a feel for your gear limitations and strengths for the time being.

The EQ-1 has a very low weight tolerance. It's important that which ever mount you choose is capable of easily carrying the load you intend to top it with. Proper balance, level and total weight all play an important role in getting the best results and optimum performance from your mount.

The EQ-1 would be great for the 100-400 and camera alone. You would want the electronic drive to have tracking capability. This set up looks like a great starting point for anyone that doesn't want to sink a bundle into this and still get a feel for the hobby. I started at very high Focal length with a 10 inch Schmidt-Cassegrain. The views were excellent but getting long exposures with that rig was VERY difficult and frustrating. That's why I switched to a German Equatorial mount and lowered my focal lengths. I enjoy wider field shooting. Getting multiple objects in one frame and zillions of stars make very beautiful shots.

You would need a dovetail plate of some sort that you would mount your lens to and then slip the dovetail into the EQ-1 saddle. I have never used this mount so you should do as much reading as possible. I like the lightweight size/design of it for a quick set up rig. You'll need to find out the weight limit of the EQ-1 before hunting for a refractor that will fit the bill. There are some quality short tube refractors out there in the $600(US) range.

I stumbled into this hobby completely. I had no previous behind the camera experience. My first Moon images changed all that. Now I spend every spare moment behind a camera(or processing), day and night.

[troypiggo]

Can you guess what I'm going to ask for as a Christmas present? :)

Thanks for all of your help.

[Johnny9s]

Here is my new setup. I am slowly getting used to running the mount and GoTo controller. I also have the camera adapter and t-ring, canon timer remote, 2x Barlow and red flashlight.

The case and scope (don't mind the fingerprints)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3220/2868589859_be7b2f26cb_o.jpg

Eyepiece
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3273/2868589997_9a565cf114_o.jpg

Diagonal that the salesman threw in because it was used
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2102/2868589585_694a079d46_o.jpg

Finally the scope and mount
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3282/2869419906_0d82d1cda7_o.jpg

John

[_aravena]

^And how much did that all cost?

[Johnny9s]

I just bought Noels photoshop actions. Once i get DSS figured out maybe it will help my processing in CS3. I am also ordering the Stilleto to help me with my focusing and an illuminated reticule EP to help with my tracking. I really need to stop finding the most expensive hobbies!!

[Johnny9s]

^And how much did that all cost?

My original budget was $500....I walked out of the telescope store $2200 poorer. :o

[funhouse69]

That is what I am afraid of... I have about a $1000 budget :-)

My original budget was $500....I walked out of the telescope store $2200 poorer. :o

[_aravena]

My original budget was $500....I walked out of the telescope store $2200 poorer. :o

oh snap! Yeah...ok then.

[Ballen Photo]

Here is my new setup.
<SNIP>
Finally the scope and mount

This is getting exciting watching you put this together John! I'd have finger prints all over it too. ;)
-Bruce

[funhouse69]

I added a Kenko 1.4 TC to my 70-300 today and took these pics a few minutes ago. Obviously not a whole lot more reach but I am impressed with the IQ.

1. Canon 40D, ISO 100, f/5.6 @ 1/125th
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/375411303_PEbqm-XL.jpg
2. Canon 40D, ISO 200, f/7.1 @ 1/160th
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/375411280_dQcMV-XL.jpg

[Johnny9s]

You don't have to go as crazy as I did. You should be able to get a decent setup to start with for $1000. The first package I looked at at the shop was $1000 for a EQ3 mount and scope which would be fine. I just have this annoying habit of wanting the best I can get at the time and buying it.

What focal reducer would you gurus recommend for my 80?

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

You really get what you pay for in the astronomy hobby.

If you spend peanuts you will get peanuts. This is a universal law for astrophotography.

I wrote some pages that may help your general knowledge before you go comitting your dollars.

http://www.asignobservatory.com/tips_and_advice.aspx
http://www.asignobservatory.com/drift_alignment.aspx
http://www.asignobservatory.com/optical_trains.aspx
http://www.asignobservatory.com/astrophotography_guide.aspx

There is nothing worse than spending 1000 dollars, then six months later, deciding you should have spent $2000. You are now out of pocket $3000.

Get what I mean?

Baz.

[troypiggo]

There's also nothing worse than spending $2000 and you don't use the gear that much because you realise it was just a novelty or maybe you just don't get the time to use it ;)

What's the resale like on this sort of gear? In comparison with, say, Canon lenses which hold their value pretty well. Do telescopes hold value well? And the mounts?

[Ballen Photo]

Good questions Troy, Resale? I wonder how many folks put their Astronomy gear on the block not long after purchasing it?
Mounts? I'd really like to hear more about these. Types? Set up? Techniques?
Which ones are best? Which ones are best on a budget? Inquiring minds want to know these things. ;)
Thanks to those of You who have been tutoring the less informed amongst us.
Teachers/tutors, You know who you are. Thanks. :)
-Bruce

[_aravena]

That's interesting. What's the best gear set up to use for something you might be interested in but no all the way? $1000 probably which even f you get one of those star cluster or planet shots, IMO< it's worth it.

[Jeff]

Good questions Troy, Resale? I wonder how many folks put their Astronomy gear on the block not long after purchasing it?
Mounts? I'd really like to hear more about these. Types? Set up? Techniques?
Which ones are best? Which ones are best on a budget? Inquiring minds want to know these things. ;)
Thanks to those of You who have been tutoring the less informed amongst us.
Teachers/tutors, You know who you are. Thanks. :)
-Bruce

Astro gear holds it's value very well, just like camera gear. Some things like CCD cameras might lose some value over time just because the "new" thing came out. You can generally buy-then-sell used stuff for close to the same price if you find it doesn't suit you.

I'd say astro nuts are even more careful with their gear than camera nuts. It only gets used sparingly and under good conditions for the most part.

Check out astromart.com (http://astromart.com) to get an idea on prices for setups.

[Ballen Photo]

Check out astromart.com (http://astromart.com) to get an idea on prices for setups.
Thanks Jeff. :)
-Bruce

[Johnny9s]

Just trying to figure out which Stiletto to get. Which is better, the knife edge or the Ronchi screen. I just picked up an illuminated reticule EP and am waiting for my WO .8 focal reducer II to show up. I hope the clouds go away so I can get out and stop spending so much money!!

[Johnny9s]

I went ahead and ordered the Deluxe (Ronchi Screen) Stiletto. Anyone know any cloud busting dances??

[Jeff]

Yes, but it works only when there's a full moon, you have to work, or you're out of town away from your gear. Then the sky is perfect! :)

[bowtie`]

Anyone know any cloud busting dances??

Unfortunately I do not know that dance. But that does not mean that you can not image something in the night sky. This was taken last night. The bane of astrophotographers everywhere, cirrus clouds. They did make for a rather vivid ring around the moon. Just stuck the 24-70 on the 5D, pluncked it on the tripod, pointed it straight up and hoped a bird did not get dysentary in the middle of the night. I kind of liked the rainbow effect in the ring. I hope this is considered an astronomy image.

ISO 100, TV 405 sec., AV 8.0, Lens 24-70 @27mm

[BOSS]

I like that makes me think of an eye,don't know why, it just does.

[renderwerks]

Cool shot bowtie', as soon as I get more focal length (question forthcoming) I like the moon partially covered with clouds. Awoooo!

The question: For photography, do I need to get a telescope with a 2" focuser? I have a 40D. I ask because I'm considering a WO ZenithStar 66 for my first scope.

[Nighthound]

Baz, thanks for posting the informative links. Lots of wisdom in there for anyone in the hobby. Great work.

Bowtie, by all means an astrophoto and a darn nice one too. Great compositions with the inclusion of the tree.

John, you're putting together a very solid and functional astro imaging toolbox. I wish I had started the way you are, would have saved a lot of frustration.

Rick, Yes, a 2" focuser/draw tube is a standard for the hardware and accessories you'll need and also enough diameter to suit your camera sensor. I like the WO products, nicely made. I have the Talahashi FS-60 but haven't had a night clear enough to test it yet. I've had 4 nights out this year and three of them were ruined by cirrus clouds. hopefully the fall will bring clearer skies.

Here's a couple galaxy shots:

M51 & NGC 5195
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/PS%20Gallery/m51Rx2.jpg

M66
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/PS%20Gallery/m66x2.jpg

[Dusty]

Hey guys Pekka has made an announcement that there will be additional forums added to POTN.

We now have our own Astronomy and Celestial forum were we can share images, info, tips and techniques.
Click Here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=572394&page=2) to read the announcement.

Thank you to Pekka and the team and also everyone who has contributed to the thread and has requested a dedicated astro forum.

Looking forward to a great new forum where we can all share our work and help the new members interested in this branch of photography.

Dusty

[Jeff]

Yea, just saw that. Thanks to all who have kept the ball rolling on this & to Pekka for the awesome site.

[Dusty]

Wow Steve (Nighthound) your witchhead and M51 & NGC 5195 are awesome, thanks for sharing.

I'm really enjoying looking at everyones astro images, thanks for posting everyone.

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Nighthound,

Those Galaxy shots are absolutely beautiful.

Would you please be so kind as to give a full run-down on EXACTLY how these shots were taken?

Camera, scope, mount, software, capture details etc etc......

WOW mate......WOW!

Baz.

[ljrt]

I had just gotten my new Sigma 120-400 OS APO HSM and had to try shooting the Moon. It seems soft to me but this is the first of the moon for me. Shot at 400mm / f5.6.

[Jeff]

Were you shooting the moon wheen it was low on the horizon? If so, you were looking through a lot of atmosphere too. Try when it's up higher in the sky.

[Nighthound]

Thanks very much Pekka for granting us an astro/celestial section. There's a lot of great info in this thread, is there a way to somehow retain it in some form as reference?

Dusty, thanks. I hope you'll post more of your excellent work soon as well.

Baz, here's the info:

M51:
10" LX200R @ f/6.3 / Losmandy G-11(Gemini) / Canon 20D(unmod) @ ISO1600 / 30 x 90 sec. subexposures unguided / Images Plus, Photoshop CS3 / Noel Carboni's Astro Tools

M66:
10" LX200R @ f/6.3 / Losmandy G-11(Gemini) / Canon 20D(unmod) @ ISO1600 / 40 x 100 sec. subexposures unguided / Images Plus, Photoshop CS3 / Noel Carboni's Astro Tools

Len, that's a great first light shot with the new glass. judging by the warm tone, I'm guessing that the Moon was fairly low in the sky. That may have played a role in the softness due to atmospheric density/turbulence but it appears you may have missed focus slightly as well. Still a very nice shot, exposure is great and no noticeable false color at the rim. Looks like a well corrected lens.

[Johnny9s]

I just wanted to say thanks to Pekka as well. This thread has been a great help to me and with its own section it will get more visits and more info.

I have been playing around with peoples images on Cloudy Nights and have been learning a lot. People have been linking there stacked images pre-processing and letting us noobs and the experts have a go at them.I think we should definitely have a processing comparison thread in the new section.

[Johnny9s]

Have you guys seen this resource before? I have been keeping an eye on it and it is very handy for planning a night out. http://cleardarksky.com/csk/

Here is the chart for my area. White squares are bad, dark blue are very good. Doesn't look good for the next couple of nights.

http://cleardarksky.com/csk/getcsk.php?id=WhstlrBC

[Nighthound]

Great suggestion John.

The Clear Sky Clock and three or four weather sites help me decide if I want to pack up my gear and drive to the country for a night out. Unfortunately the Sky Clock is only as accurate as a weather forecast and weather here is tough to call. Aslo check out http://www.wunderground.com and click on astronomy at the far left. Type in your city/country at the top of the page that pops up and the Astronomy page for your location will come up. Now scroll down to Full Sky Chart and click. This is a great tool for planning your night out. It'll show what constellations are up and at what time on any given night from an overhead view or any direction at ground view too. As long as you know the objects you're wanting to shoot and the constellation they're in you can better plan your night. Also shows you when the moon rises or sets and it's phase. I bookmarked this for quick looks.

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

This one here is another good one. I am still trying to figure it out, but a lot of astronomers use it to get a look at the high altitude jet-streams. Upper-atmospheric stability and conditions are paramount, especially when attempting planetary photography.

A great tool for planning photography sessions.

http://weather.unisys.com/index.html

Baz

[troypiggo]

You guys have got this thread ROCKIN!

Reckon when the new section becomes available, there should be some stickies right away. Maybe all rolled into one FAQ, or split into a few stickies covering equipment recommendations, software to use and how to use it, techniques for taking the shots, and links to other helpful sites like you've just posted in the last few threads.

Keep it up! :)

[Jeff]

Here's one from a couple of nights ago. An observing buddy cobbled together a laser pointer mount out of little clips that hold computer wires. He was so proud it only cost a couple of bucks considering the cost of retail solutions. It got foggy pretty quick so I didn't get any other astro shots. I was just happy he could hold still for 8 seconds. He's usually pretty hopped up on caffeine so he can stay up late.

This was done on a tripod 30D Canon 18-55mm @ 18mm f/3.5 8 seconds.

[Jeff]

Let's see some rig shots too. Here's mine:

10" Meade LX200 GPS - UHTC with the camera, 10:1 focuser, f/6.3 focal reducer, counter weight, dew shield. My counter weight must be defective, it can't count past 5 with out starting over :) Had to take this shot with a point-n-shoot.

[Dusty]

My counter weight must be defective, it can't count past 5 with out starting over :)
LOL Jeff, just imagine if you have to add more counter waits !!!

I really like that shot of the laser, nice rig too.

[Nighthound]

Nice shot Jeff and nice rig. You have your LX200 tricked out much like I had mine.

First serious imaging scope:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/Astrophotography/Astro%20Equipment/scope2-1.jpg

Second:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/Astrophotography/Astro%20Equipment/lx200r.jpg

Now:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/Astrophotography/Astro%20Equipment/vix90a.jpg

I need to get a shot of my TAK Sky 90 and TAK FS-60 on the side-by-side plate. Might try the 90 side-by-side with the Vixen too.

[Johnny9s]

Those are some nice setups. Eventually down the road I would like to get a second bigger scope and try some autoguiding.

[Jeff]

Steve, I really like the idea of a GEM. Your Losmandy looks really nice. I've been going back and forth on the idea of getting a wedge (a good one like a Mitty) or de-forking the scope, selling the mount and putting the OTA on a good GEM. I figure I'd be adding about the same amout of cash either way.

Things I like about the current set up:
It works - accurate goto's, easy to use, etc.
It's a snap to get aligned.
I can import tours, comets, satellites, etc.
I can track the ISS.

GEM
I can eventually put multiple OTA's on one mount
Better tracking (than a wedge mounted scope) for long exposures? <--- The big question.

My other thought is that with a wedge, I can either use it if I want to take pictures or leave it at home if I don't. GEM I'd have to polar align each time.

Any thoughts?

[troypiggo]

Some dumb questions. What is a wedge used for? De-forking the scope? So many new terms to learn.

[Jeff]

What is a wedge used for? De-forking the scope? So many new terms to learn.

A wedge will put the scope on the same axis at the north celestial pole. That's better since only one motor needs to run to keep up with the tracking. It'll get rid of field rotation too (circling of stars around the center of an image)
Sorry - I'm probably not explaning it that well.
Here's a link to a photo: (not mine)
http://astro.welsh-house.net/img/scope-400-56-piggyback-small.jpg

De-forking = taking the tube part off the fork mount.
See Steve's 2 pics above, #1 has the tube on a fork mount, the other is an Equitorial mount (not a wedge, that's different)

This helped me a lot and I still keep it bookmarked. It's geared to astrophotography but it's still good for basic parts too.
http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/GLOSSARY.HTM

[zacm7]

canon 20d, sigma 17-70 at 17mm, f5, iso200, 318seconds,
.....Hand held! my cousin was using my tripod and i dont have a new remote for the 20s so i set it on the ground and held it on bulb for just over 5 mins, not bad for a hand held?

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/qq226/westpeak/northern-stars.jpg

[ljrt]

Thanks for the suggestion Jseivert. It was a little low. I will try again with it higher in the sky. Going to have to bite the bullet and start looking at scopes again I guess.

Len

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Ok, you asked for it! Here's mine.....

[Nighthound]

Thanks Jeff. I've seen where some have done pretty well with the wedge but many, if not most, were autoguiding. I gave it a try with my LX200 without guiding. I tried the iterative method of alignment and even when I was able to fine tune the alignment I couldn't get past the 2 minute barrier. I then sold the fork mount LX200 and got the G-11 and a 10" LX200R OTA. If I could have afforded to keep the first LX200 I would have, that scope was awesome for visual and ease of alignment. I only had to tweak collimation once or twice a year and it had dead on pointing. I went through two new LX200Rs and a new Celestron C-11 OTA(carbon fiber), all were optically defective, I spent hours trying to get them collimated like the LX200 but never could. So I went with the Vixen Newt and Sky 90 and have been thrilled with both. Sorry, I wandered a little off track but I would suggest you look into a quality GEM if you plan to continue long exposure work. I wasn't impressed with the gear quality in the LX200, sub par quality for imaging with an OTA that heavy IMO. If you can keep the OTA, by all means do it, it would be a great long FL imaging scope on a solid GEM. f/6.3 is fairly slow but manageable when autoguiding. I've just recently broke into autoguiding myself but the weather has had me shut down for a good part of this year. Keep in mind if you start looking at GEMs that you get one that will easily hold the weight of you scopes, A refractor guide scope on the LX200 is a good load. My Vixen i extremely light and he Sky 90 as well so I'm way under the imaging limits of the G-11 which is ideal.

[bowtie`]

I really like all the photos here and am glad that there maybe a separate category for astronomy soon.

With all the great photos, how about a flub that the law of unintended consequences got hold of and made...... well interesting. We all know that dew is one of the banes of night photography. This is an image from this weekend that dew *got* me. I knew that it was happening as I saw the dew forming on the lens hood. I was surprised tat the results. Here is a failed attempt at a moon ring. People spend alot of time and effort to get and master all the image processing software and along comes a yahoo from Indiana and goes *click* Voila!

Camera 5D, ISO 100, TV 125 sec., AV 8.0, Lens 24-70 @25mm

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

I like it! Beautiful composition Bowtie.

Baz.

[Ballen Photo]

Question for you guys in the know. Celestron Nexstar 5, how does this system rate? Would it be good for photography?
http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=13&ProdID=414#features
-Bruce

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

Question for you guys in the know. Celestron Nexstar 5, how does this system rate? Would it be good for photography?
http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=13&ProdID=414#features
-Bruce

Hi Bruce,

Its not bad as far as first scopes are concerned, but try not to get too impressed with all the fruit.

A computerised go-to telescope is good for people who don't already know the sky. I see the tripod has a built in wedge so that the scope can be polar aligned according to your lattitude. That is good. Tube mounted on one arm...I don't know, but I would think not so good. It's probably a very good grab and go scope for field trips away from the city lights and observational astronomy. It would probably be capable of some pretty good astro photos too. It depends on how far you want to take your photography. Your own skills in processing and capture will make a lot of difference too.

Really, the very best mount for any telescope used for photography is a German Equatorial Mount (GEM). I have an 11 inch Celestron on a fork mount. Great scope, let down by flex in the forks. If I could go back to when I bought this, I would have chosen a GEM. This is especially important when you start doing photography with the added weight of cameras and accessories. Balance gets shifted and tracking motors start suffering under load.

Celestron optics are of decent quality, which is important. The next thing to look at is their size. Aperture (Light Gathering ability) of a telescope is very important. The more light you can let in a diameter, the more photons you have to work with. A small aperture can be greatly magnified with eyepieces, but you are stretching a very dim image as the light entering the telescope is limited.

If you can afford it, buy the largest aperture telescope your budget will allow. One extra inch of aperture gives you LOTS more light gathering ability. Look it up, there is a formula somewhere on the web.

In short, barring all the bells and whistles, the three things you should look at are:

Sturdyness of mount (Type and weight capacity)
Size of aperture (Diameter)
Quality of optics (Glass and coatings)

I hope this helps.

Baz.

[Adrena1in]

Weather's been great in the UK lately...in the last couple of weeks there must have been at least ten clear nights. Been trying to shoot M52 and The Bubble Nebula in Cassiopeia. M52 is a star cluster, and these are usually quite easy, but I struggle to get nebulae to show up much. Guess I need HA or OIII filters to enhance this sort of thing?

I set my DLSR to ISO1600, as it was pretty cold out, and programmed it to take twenty 2-minute shots. Shot through my 102mm f/5.9 and autoguided with my ST80. Unfortunately only four subs showed almost no drift or errors at all, and here's the stack, with five dark files. (Reduced to 30% original size due to space issues on ImageShack.)

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/7649/m52bubble8minsrawspicaspe9.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=m52bubble8minsrawspicaspe9.jpg)http://img216.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

The Bubble is the bit in the middle, about a quarter of the way down from the top. In "proper" pictures it looks just like a soap bubble.

[Nighthound]

Question for you guys in the know. Celestron Nexstar 5, how does this system rate? Would it be good for photography?
http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=13&ProdID=414#features
-Bruce

Bruce, I have friends that have this scope and have imaged with it. The biggest issue is stability. The one arm mounted scopes like this are very good for visual but for imaging they are lacking. Vibration and dampening time is pretty bad, especially if there is any wind over 5 mph. I liken the one arm mount to holding your camera with one hand instead of two. The optics are very good but at these focal lengths precision gears and solid construction is a must for long exposure work. The wedge quality is also very minimal and has crude adjustment. When aligning a wedge mounted scope different procedures can be used to fine tune the polar alignment. When doing so you'll need to make some very finite adjustments. Crude or rigid mechanics add a lot of frustration to achieving accuracy. There are very well made wedges out there but they will cost as much as the entire rig you mentioned.

The hard truth is that at those focal lengths a very precise and solid mount is necessary. A quality GEM(mount and tripod only) for getting the job done at that FL would cost about $1,500. This mount is one example in that range: http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~category_id=mounts_and_tripods/~pcategory=accessories/~product_id=24338

Of course if you lower your focal length you can get by with a lesser mount but quality and accurate alignments/balance will still be crucial.

Note the weight limitations and remember that down the road you may add more gear like a guide scope/hardware and of course you have to include camera/hardware weight as well. If a mount limit is listed as 40 pounds, cut that to 1/2 to 2/3 for imaging. An overloaded mount is a recipe for frustration and potential damage to the mount as well.

[Ballen Photo]

Really, the very best mount for any telescope used for photography is a German Equatorial Mount (GEM). I have an 11 inch Celestron on a fork mount. Great scope, let down by flex in the forks. If I could go back to when I bought this, I would have chosen a GEM. This is especially important when you start doing photography with the added weight of cameras and accessories. Balance gets shifted and tracking motors start suffering under load.

<SNIP>

If you can afford it, buy the largest aperture telescope your budget will allow. One extra inch of aperture gives you LOTS more light gathering ability. Look it up, there is a formula somewhere on the web.

In short, barring all the bells and whistles, the three things you should look at are:

Sturdyness of mount (Type and weight capacity)
Size of aperture (Diameter)
Quality of optics (Glass and coatings)

I hope this helps.

Baz.

The hard truth is that at those focal lengths a very precise and solid mount is necessary. A quality GEM(mount and tripod only) for getting the job done at that FL would cost about $1,500. This mount is one example in that range: http://www.telescope.com/control/pro...oduct_id=24338 (http://www.telescope.com/control/product/%7Ecategory_id=mounts_and_tripods/%7Epcategory=accessories/%7Eproduct_id=24338)
Thanks Baz & Steve. It looks like for the time being I'll have to be content with looking at images posted by you guys. ;)
-Bruce

[Nighthound]

Weather's been great in the UK lately...in the last couple of weeks there must have been at least ten clear nights. Been trying to shoot M52 and The Bubble Nebula in Cassiopeia. M52 is a star cluster, and these are usually quite easy, but I struggle to get nebulae to show up much. Guess I need HA or OIII filters to enhance this sort of thing?

I set my DLSR to ISO1600, as it was pretty cold out, and programmed it to take twenty 2-minute shots. Shot through my 102mm f/5.9 and autoguided with my ST80. Unfortunately only four subs showed almost no drift or errors at all, and here's the stack, with five dark files. (Reduced to 30% original size due to space issues on ImageShack.)

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/7649/m52bubble8minsrawspicaspe9.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=m52bubble8minsrawspicaspe9.jpg)http://img216.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

The Bubble is the bit in the middle, about a quarter of the way down from the top. In "proper" pictures it looks just like a soap bubble.

The Bubble is a stubborn object. I've yet to get a decent result. If I understand you correctly this is a total of 8 minutes(4 x 2 min. usable)? If so I'd say you did great, I can clearly see the Bubble so if you can add more time from future sessions you'll have an excellent image. Looks like you nabbed a faint meteor in the upper left.

[Nighthound]

Thanks Baz & Steve. It looks like for the time being I'll have to be content with looking at images posted by you guys. ;)
-Bruce

You're welcome Bruce, but don't be discouraged. Shooting with a low FL lens or scope won't require the accuracy or expense of a mount needed for a 1250mm(5" SCT) or greater OTA. I've been enjoy shooting at 400mm and am looking forward to shooting even shorter FL with my FS-60.

[Adrena1in]

The Bubble is a stubborn object. I've yet to get a decent result. If I understand you correctly this is a total of 8 minutes(4 x 2 min. usable)?
Yep, that was all. :( My impatience with regards to Polar Alignment is probably to blame. I did try the method of syncing to a target, then slewing to Polaris and adjusting the mount for the error, but I'm not quite sure how the Sync to Target thing works on my GOTO. Do you slew to a target, then immediately select Sync to Target, adjust with the arrows and press enter?

I've tried again to process my stack, and got the Bubble more noticeable, but blown everything else out. Like you say, I just don't have enough time on it.

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1583/m52bubble8minsrawspicastz8.th.jpg (http://img135.imageshack.us/my.php?image=m52bubble8minsrawspicastz8.jpg)http://img135.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

[A.S.I.G.N. Observatory]

YAY!!! We now have a dedicated forum!!

Well done all who fanned the flames to get this happening! Thanks to the mods for hearing the masses!

Baz.

[Nighthound]

Yep, that was all. :( My impatience with regards to Polar Alignment is probably to blame. I did try the method of syncing to a target, then slewing to Polaris and adjusting the mount for the error, but I'm not quite sure how the Sync to Target thing works on my GOTO. Do you slew to a target, then immediately select Sync to Target, adjust with the arrows and press enter?

I've tried again to process my stack, and got the Bubble more noticeable, but blown everything else out. Like you say, I just don't have enough time on it.

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1583/m52bubble8minsrawspicastz8.th.jpg (http://img135.imageshack.us/my.php?image=m52bubble8minsrawspicastz8.jpg)http://img135.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

When you snyc on any given object it only helps your GoTo point with more accuracy. It has no effect on tracking. I use sync(goto star/center/press sync) to better locate and center(or as close as possible) those very dim objects that can't be seen easily in the camera viewfinder. A test exposure then allows me to tweak the composition. Drift alignment will help best with the tracking error. If you have periodic error correction, it can help too but shouldn't be operating while auto guiding(works in conflict with the guiding software). It's best to do your PEC training very near the object that will be imaged.

It sounds like you were using the Iterative method of alignment? I had limited success with it when I had my LX200. Fine adjustments needed were difficult with the Meade wedge I was using.

Be careful with your black point(histogram). By clipping the black point you eat up the very faint signal. Those subtle shades of red around the bubble for instance are diminished as a result and stars will begin to get hard edges or loose their soft glow. Space is not pure black, I know it makes things pop and masks noise to get it that way but over stretching to get detail ends up clipping and in the end no real detail is preserved or gained. You can only stretch the stacked image so much in PS before noise floods the signal which usually leads to clipping the black to hide it. The more time the better and the easier processing will be, especially on dim objects like the Bubble. When you reach the 2 hour mark great things start to happen, when you reach 4-5 it really gets good. You'll get there, no one I know started out getting multiple hours of perfect sub exposures.

As long as you're making progress and having fun then you're right on track. :D

[Nighthound]

YAY!!! We now have a dedicated forum!!

Well done all who fanned the flames to get this happening! Thanks to the mods for hearing the masses!

Baz.

Here, Here! Three cheers for the Mods!!

[Pekka]

Mods cheer back :) I'm looking forward to seeing more photos from "out there" - they are beautiful.

[Celestron]

I agree with all !! If i could i'd shake your hands ! Thanks !

[Adrena1in]

As long as you're making progress and having fun then you're right on track. :D
Exactly. It's a bit disappointing to spend hours setting up and taking photos and ending up with only four usuable frames, but I'm still pleased I got enough of the Bubble to recognise it.

As for my polar alignment, yes, I think I've heard it called the Iterative Method. My mount is easy to physically move, which is why I thought it would work. However, I didn't even get the first step right, which is why I gave up on and it trusted my Autoguiding to sort the problems out...which in some ways it did.

As for Photoshop, "clipping black points" and "stretching", these are still just words to me. I very rarely touch the histogram because I don't know what I'm doing! :o ;)

Ah, and YAY to the dedicated forum. With Winter approaching I'm sure it's going to be popular.