Adrena1in
12th of November 2008 (Wed), 05:41
Not much else to do last night, what with it being a little bit hazy and the moon being as bright as it was, but I'd not had my scope out for weeks, and I was getting itchy feet.
Prime photo through my 1200mm f/9.5 scope with my 450D at 12Mp resolution. ISO 400, 1/1000th of a second. Not cropped at all, as it gives a good idea what area of sky my "big" scope covers, but image reduced to 30% its original size for ease of use. Contrast, highlights, shadows...those sorts of things adjusted in Picasa.
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5003/img0566fg3.th.jpg (http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img0566fg3.jpg)http://img520.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)
I also wanted to see what configuration of barlows and eyepiece projection would work. Can never really get a decent image, but this one wasn't too bad. I think this was with my 2x Barlow *and* 3x Barlow *and* a 25mm eyepiece in my lens-projection adapter. Can't work out the overall magnification, but I'm guessing it was effectively roughly 12,000mm, f95. ISO 1600, 1/10th of a second. Lightened a fair bit, and edited to remove dust-blotches. (There were a couple of big hair-blotches too!)
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/4872/img055330he5.th.jpg (http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img055330he5.jpg)http://img521.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)
EDIT: Oh yeah, and with this second image I was using a filter...a Fringe Killer or Minus Violet filter. Not sure it made a great deal of difference, but I think perhaps it did.
Afterwards, even though I could hardly see any stars, even through the scope, I left it running and checked my polar alignment, using a 10mm eyepiece in the 1200mm scope. Stars weren't moving very much over the space of 10 or 15 minutes, which is pleasing, but I had to make a few minor adjustments to the mount, ready for my next session.
Prime photo through my 1200mm f/9.5 scope with my 450D at 12Mp resolution. ISO 400, 1/1000th of a second. Not cropped at all, as it gives a good idea what area of sky my "big" scope covers, but image reduced to 30% its original size for ease of use. Contrast, highlights, shadows...those sorts of things adjusted in Picasa.
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5003/img0566fg3.th.jpg (http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img0566fg3.jpg)http://img520.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)
I also wanted to see what configuration of barlows and eyepiece projection would work. Can never really get a decent image, but this one wasn't too bad. I think this was with my 2x Barlow *and* 3x Barlow *and* a 25mm eyepiece in my lens-projection adapter. Can't work out the overall magnification, but I'm guessing it was effectively roughly 12,000mm, f95. ISO 1600, 1/10th of a second. Lightened a fair bit, and edited to remove dust-blotches. (There were a couple of big hair-blotches too!)
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/4872/img055330he5.th.jpg (http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img055330he5.jpg)http://img521.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)
EDIT: Oh yeah, and with this second image I was using a filter...a Fringe Killer or Minus Violet filter. Not sure it made a great deal of difference, but I think perhaps it did.
Afterwards, even though I could hardly see any stars, even through the scope, I left it running and checked my polar alignment, using a 10mm eyepiece in the 1200mm scope. Stars weren't moving very much over the space of 10 or 15 minutes, which is pleasing, but I had to make a few minor adjustments to the mount, ready for my next session.