The Official Shoot the Moon Thread

MalVeauX wrote in post #18638206
As for being spendy, well, this thread is full of 5D/Nikon/Sony A, etc, cameras with 400mm, 500~600mm lenses, etc, taking pot shots at the moon with $2k~5k instruments left and right in here. It's quite common to see a 6D, 5D, and a 100-400 or 150-600 or equivalent in this thread, costing $2k easily, and more.

I know my Celestron 6" SCT with a focal reducer (945mm f6.3) stomps my Sigma 150-600mm f6.3 for lunar photography, Telescope was less than half the price too, $450 to $989.

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18638375
I know my Celestron 6" SCT with a focal reducer (945mm f6.3) stomps my Sigma 150-600mm f6.3 for lunar photography, Telescope was less than half the price too, $450 to $989.

Sure it is, but the camera i use for lunar and planetary was $300, is this same as 6D or 5D? even 7D or 70D is more than this, also when i said spendy because if i go with heavier scope which may cost nearly $4000-5000 this will require a better or another EQ mount, i bought my mount for nearly $1700 and this is same price of those cameras of 7D or 6D somehow, but now for another scopes another mounts bigger will be above $2500 up to $15K, so i can't spend for photography and for astro and for something else, i do have another hobbies too, i already spent a lot in photography in the past and i lost job long time ago, so in the past i can spend $5000 easily within 2-3 months, not spending $1000 is a lot, so if i have to spend more then i have to wait months nearly a year, my last camera i bought for photography was A7R back in 2014 and it was expensive for me.

Ballen Photo wrote in post #18638366
Another question, do you prefer a cat scope, or a traditional?

I prefer refractors, overall. But big aperture and refractor, while possible, is a huge weight and cost (it's possible to get 8", 9" and 10" refractors at the consumer level, $4k to $10k, but the weight is unreal, and the actual physical length is crazy. I have an observatory, but I don't want a telescope that I cannot physically lift onto a mount. Reflectors are the cheapest way to get a good mirror and a huge aperture. You can get monster reflectors on dob mounts for cheap. Really cheap. But, imaging with them is another story. Hoisting a huge, monstrous 10~12" reflector tube onto a tracking mount that weighs 40lbs or more is just not a good way to go on most mounts. The moment arm of the sheer length is massive. So the SCT (cat) is the scope design I choose for big scopes, to get a big aperture, but keep the design compact, a low moment arm, and a lot less weight and difficulty with mounting.

One of the best, cost-effective, light weight, low moment arm scopes you can get for imaging lunar/solar/planetary, or anything in general, is the C8 SCT. You can get these used in the $450 ball park all day any day, they're so common. Great compromise of size, aperture, weight, focal length, cost and overall what can be done with it.

These days, I use a 250mm aperture (10 inch), 2500mm focal length, F10, Meade SCT. It's really big. But, for it's aperture, it's much easier to mount and track with, than a 10" reflector would be (due to the massive moment arm of the reflector's physical length). This scope is a Meade #2120, over 30 years old. I bought it used for around $600ish cash. Lots of big old scopes can be found for fairly good prices. The key is finding them local, because shipping a 30lb~40lb scope is really expensive, and they rarely survive the trip without problems without factory packaging. My mount is an Orion Sirius (Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro) and can handle it, I maxed out the capacity at 30lbs, but it's precision balanced and handles it quite fine, so I can image with it (this mount is around $1k roughly, $750 used commonly). These are not super costly things, as astrophotography doesn't have to be crazy costly. This still costs less than a 7D2 or 5D3 and a 150-600 lens, way less than a single Canon 500 F4L, etc, which are commonly found in this thread. My camera is a monochrome sensor ASI174MM, $400ish used. I typically image the moon with a Baader 610nm long pass red filter to help beat the seeing with long focal length (F30, so 7500mm commonly for me with this setup).

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/26rY​Ggh

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18638375
I know my Celestron 6" SCT with a focal reducer (945mm f6.3) stomps my Sigma 150-600mm f6.3 for lunar photography, Telescope was less than half the price too, $450 to $989.

This is the exact point I was making above. Your 150mm aperture C6 is better for high resolution lunar imaging than your much more expensive Sigma 150-600 F6.3 and the reason is aperture. Your C6 has 150mm aperture, which defines what resolution you can achieve. Mean while, your Sigma at 600mm F6.3 calculates to have a 95mm clear aperture. That's just under 4 inches. Your C6 has a 2" advantage in aperture, and while that may not seem like much, in terms of resolving power, it's significant in reality. Just like going from a 50mm (2 inch) to a 100mm (4 inch) is also a huge step up in resolution. Take this farther, and you start looking at 8", 10", 12", 14", 16" etc apertures, and you see crazy resolutions on an object like the lunar surface that while it has been imaged to death, at high resolution, it's an endless surface to truly comb and image.

So for resolution, Dawes Limit, let's take a quick look at some numbers that show a relationship. Small things, like camera lenses, will struggle with resolving detail because the aperture limits the resolution. But, there are prfound diminishing returns with respect to the resolving limit here, as you increase aperture. You can clearly see a significant gain and then a significant slow down in gain of resolution potential.

Canon 50mm STM (28mm aperture): 4.14 arc/secs
Canon 100-400 F5.6 (71mm aperture): 1.63 arc/secs
Sigma 600mm F6.3 (95mm aperture): 1.22 arc/secs
C6 1500mm F10 (150mm aperture): 0.77 arc/secs
C8 2000mm F10 (200mm aperture): 0.58 arc/secs
10" 2500mm F10 (250mm aperture): 0.46 arc/secs

A small 28mm aperture of a 50mm lens for example, is not resolving much. Huge jump, expected, as you move up to a 71mm aperture and 95mm aperture. Notice, not a big difference between the 100-400 and the 150-600 in reality, more of a jump though than what you get going from a C8 to a 10". The sweet spot for diminishing returns seems to be right around the 8" aperture mark. Everything is harder to use, heavier, more expensive, and limited by seeing even more so, as you go bigger and bigger from there.

Those 80mm~102mm refractors for example, are far better than typical camera big telephotos for imaging the moon, because they simply have larger aperture (focal length really doesn't matter here, you can control that, it's not your limiting property, aperture is). These cheap scopes are $100~200. You don't even need a tracking mount. Mean while, things like 6 inch reflectors and 6 inch SCT's outpace the smaller aperture instruments even more, lots more, and cost very little for the amount of aperture you get.

But this is why small aperture, but long focal length camera lenses, do not resolve as much as a larger aperture instrument.

That said, the Canon 600mm F4L ($10k?) is basically a C6 in that it has a 6 inch aperture (150mm). So it will match the resolution of the C6 ($399) for this purpose. But, this is just to point out using the right tool for the right job.

Very best,

Tareq wrote in post #18638402
Sure it is, but the camera i use for lunar and planetary was $300, is this same as 6D or 5D? even 7D or 70D is more than this, also when i said spendy because if i go with heavier scope which may cost nearly $4000-5000 this will require a better or another EQ mount, i bought my mount for nearly $1700 and this is same price of those cameras of 7D or 6D somehow, but now for another scopes another mounts bigger will be above $2500 up to $15K, so i can't spend for photography and for astro and for something else, i do have another hobbies too, i already spent a lot in photography in the past and i lost job long time ago, so in the past i can spend $5000 easily within 2-3 months, not spending $1000 is a lot, so if i have to spend more then i have to wait months nearly a year, my last camera i bought for photography was A7R back in 2014 and it was expensive for me.

I am retired now so I can't just spend like crazy either, luckily I bought a lot of stuff over the last 30 plus years that I have been selling or trading for newer stuff. I traded my Sony α6000 and a few old Contax lenses for my 5D mark III.

I used to pick up lots of old cameras at thrift stores, pawn shops and camera swap meets at very low prices, some of that old stuff I have sold for way more than I paid for it, like 15X to 20X more.

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18638445
I am retired now so I can't just spend like crazy either, luckily I bought a lot of stuff over the last 30 plus years that I have been selling or trading for newer stuff. I traded my Sony α6000 and a few old Contax lenses for my 5D mark III.

I used to pick up lots of old cameras at thrift stores, pawn shops and camera swap meets at very low prices, some of that old stuff I have sold for way more than I paid for it, like 15X to 20X more.

I understand that, me too have stuff left for sale and i couldn't find any good deals buyers, and it is like i may never sell or have to accept very big lose to sell it, so that i couldn't justify to spend again and waste again while i still have stuff around waiting to be sold, so it doesn't matter that some astro stuff are cheaper than photography items, but i spent a lot in the past that now i have to be careful much, in astro community they call it as a rabbit hole, so if i spend in one item it will pull more items later, and then again i will end up with some astro stuff i need to sell too, if i started into astronomy long time ago before photography maybe then i will waste a lot there and then i will cry if i want to start photography too after that, the expense of gear is subjective, and it shouldn't be comparable, so if i will buy a scope that is 10 times cheaper than a lens but i know that this scope is limited, and designed for a specific target or area, i never see people using scopes into terrestrial photography like sports or action or wildlife or portraits, not even the smallest scope, while we can use lenses into astro, even not that much great as scopes for some objects, but it can be done, so it is like the lens can do more than what a scope can do in one area only.

Another thing to add is, no need to have everything expensive to value it, if the atsro stuff is same expensive or more than photography then less people will get into it as well, and i may never try, i know it is more affordable, but as you said, the situation now for some people isn't same as in the past, before i can spend about $20,000 every year not a problem, but now if i can spend about $5000 per year then this is much, it doesn't mean that astro is cheaper or not expensive as it should be or it is same expense as photography, but i learnt hard lesson from photography, i shouldn't spend a lot as long it is just a hobby and after few years it will fade and i won't do anything more rather than watching my stuff growing and collecting dust, sure i want to have big expensive stuff in astro too, but if i can do fine with cheaper for a while so i should hold on that, i shouldn't rush for higher end and better quality even if it is less expensive than photography equipment, but it is only for night mainly and only when seeing is good enough, so the use of astro is way less than photography gear, so $1000 isn't much but if that is not been used enough for years then it is not better than wasting $5000 on a lens that i will use maybe every week and every month, i was fighting like an idi.t to those who told me to hold on or wait before i get 14" scope for example, i wanted to have it as soon as possible even if it expensive, but if i can't get much out of it and even if i get high details results, then what? either a waste if i can't resolve its quality or just a first time impression of WOW then next year nothing more i can do, Jupiter and Mars every year are same with very tiny changes, i don't know if i must blow about $8000-15K only to record those changes every year, that if i can see that clearly and can justify the spending.

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18638375
I know my Celestron 6" SCT with a focal reducer (945mm f6.3) stomps my Sigma 150-600mm f6.3 for lunar photography, Telescope was less than half the price too, $450 to $989.

Is this compatible to your scope? I googled "Celestron 6" SCT" which got me that one along with several others.

Will this work on a standard photography tripod? I have both Manfrotto 3021BPro Photographic and the iKan E-Image GA752T Video tripods

Would I need to buy an additional tripod for the Celestron C6-A SCT in my link?

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18638574
Is this compatible to your scope? I googled "Celestron 6" SCT" which got me that one along with several others.

Will this work on a standard photography tripod? I have both Manfrotto 3021BPro Photographic and the iKan E-Image GA752T Video tripods

Would I need to buy an additional tripod for the Celestron C6-A SCT in my link?

Any scope can be mounted on a standard photography tripod if you know the right dovetail or tripod shoe, but the idea with scopes and astro is how to track, all objects in the sky are moving, even the earth is moving, so if you will do tracking manually good enough then you can go with that, it is just with tracking automatically by decivces it will make it easier and then the processing will be easier too.

Look at some scopes cheap that came with EQ mount itself, this will get you start, the quality of EQ is about the design and tracking accuracy and also the capacity load, and also with less issues or errors, all told me to spend the best i can on mount, or best what i can afford because it will play the big rule here into astro of whatever in the sky, so i didn't wait long or i even didn't waste time to test my photography tripods and bought one that is actually very good, expensive sure, but it will hold for long time until i reach that limitation of weight and tracking accuracy.

The price in the link you sent is unreal, it should be about twice or three times of the price, unless you linked to a used one then yes, but if you can find a used one then go little higher and go with 8", from what i see this 8" or 10" scopes are the sweet spot, if this one which is reflector then 8", if refractor which are like lenses then something of 4" or 80mm can do the job and good for start, i hope you are interested in astro too, very long time ago i was interested in that but it was like a mystery for me, but last year everything happened for a reason to me so now i am here with astro, left photography for a while.

This is an image done with a cheap scope[e, less than $200 brand new, it is not a high end or best quality scope, but it can do the job, it gives 400mm, so this can be fun for some targets in the sky, but it is just to show you point about what you can do, even with lenses you can do, but in Astro i feel i do things different.

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18638574
Is this compatible to your scope? I googled "Celestron 6" SCT" which got me that one along with several others.

Will this work on a standard photography tripod? I have both Manfrotto 3021BPro Photographic and the iKan E-Image GA752T Video tripods

Would I need to buy an additional tripod for the Celestron C6-A SCT in my link?

Yup, a C6 is a C6. There are several variations over the decades (it's a long standing staple scope) such as the 6SE, C6A, 6" Evolution, etc, but at the end of the day if the specifications are 150mm (6") 1500mm (focal length), F10, then it's a C6. It will mount on typical hardware with a standard vixen style dovetail that it comes with. You may have to do something different to get that to work on a standard ballhead. Also, without tracking, it will take patience to manage to image with it. It's 1500mm focal length. It will be quite difficult to nail good shots with a still image and dSLR (it will take high ISO and fast shutter speed, remember it's F10 and it's really long). These are ideal to image with a tracking mount.

The C6 with an APS-C dSLR will produce a FOV of 0.85 degree x 0.57 degrees. This is just barely enough to completely frame a full lunar disc. It will easily frame a partial disc:

http://astronomy.tools …||1|1|0&solar_s​ystem=moon

Again, this will be difficult to image with with a standard tripod and ballhead with a dSLR doing still photography, because it's a lot of weight for a standard tripod and the focal-length is 1500mm plus the APS-C sensor's FOV. You'll want a very fast shutter speed, high ISO, and mirror lock. A gentle breeze, breathing, etc, will shake it.

You can attach a dSLR with a standard T-ring & T-adapter: for example, this.

You can however drift image with it, via video. This process would be shooting video to capture, letting the moon drift through the FOV. Then stacking the image and aligning the image to get a final resulting single image. You would lose FOV doing so, but you would be able to image at F20 (3000mm) to get some really great high resolution detail, such as single major crater imaging or for producing mosaics.

A simple 5" reflector on a tracking mount would do a great job for someone wanting to start out with high resolution imaging: Nexstar 130 SLT.

Very best,

Tareq wrote in post #18638594
Any scope can be mounted on a standard photography tripod if you know the right dovetail or tripod shoe, but the idea with scopes and astro is how to track, all objects in the sky are moving, even the earth is moving, so if you will do tracking manually good enough then you can go with that, it is just with tracking automatically by decivces it will make it easier and then the processing will be easier too.

Look at some scopes cheap that came with EQ mount itself, this will get you start, the quality of EQ is about the design and tracking accuracy and also the capacity load, and also with less issues or errors, all told me to spend the best i can on mount, or best what i can afford because it will play the big rule here into astro of whatever in the sky, so i didn't wait long or i even didn't waste time to test my photography tripods and bought one that is actually very good, expensive sure, but it will hold for long time until i reach that limitation of weight and tracking accuracy.

The price in the link you sent is unreal, it should be about twice or three times of the price, unless you linked to a used one then yes, but if you can find a used one then go little higher and go with 8", from what i see this 8" or 10" scopes are the sweet spot, if this one which is reflector then 8", if refractor which are like lenses then something of 4" or 80mm can do the job and good for start, i hope you are interested in astro too, very long time ago i was interested in that but it was like a mystery for me, but last year everything happened for a reason to me so now i am here with astro, left photography for a while.

This is an image done with a cheap scope[e, less than $200 brand new, it is not a high end or best quality scope, but it can do the job, it gives 400mm, so this can be fun for some targets in the sky, but it is just to show you point about what you can do, even with lenses you can do, but in Astro i feel i do things different.

There is a lot I need to learn for sure. First off, "EQ" is this the tracking ability need to track something in the sky?
I do own the iOptron Sky Tracker, but that would never work with any scope I know.

MalVeauX wrote in post #18638604
Yup, a C6 is a C6. There are several variations over the decades (it's a long standing staple scope) such as the 6SE, C6A, 6" Evolution, etc, but at the end of the day if the specifications are 150mm (6") 1500mm (focal length), F10, then it's a C6. It will mount on typical hardware with a standard vixen style dovetail that it comes with. You may have to do something different to get that to work on a standard ballhead. Also, without tracking, it will take patience to manage to image with it. It's 1500mm focal length. It will be quite difficult to nail good shots with a still image and dSLR (it will take high ISO and fast shutter speed, remember it's F10 and it's really long). These are ideal to image with a tracking mount.

The C6 with an APS-C dSLR will produce a FOV of 0.85 degree x 0.57 degrees. This is just barely enough to completely frame a full lunar disc. It will easily frame a partial disc:

http://astronomy.tools …||1|1|0&solar_s​ystem=moon

Again, this will be difficult to image with with a standard tripod and ballhead with a dSLR doing still photography, because it's a lot of weight for a standard tripod and the focal-length is 1500mm plus the APS-C sensor's FOV. You'll want a very fast shutter speed, high ISO, and mirror lock. A gentle breeze, breathing, etc, will shake it.

You can attach a dSLR with a standard T-ring & T-adapter: for example, this.

You can however drift image with it, via video. This process would be shooting video to capture, letting the moon drift through the FOV. Then stacking the image and aligning the image to get a final resulting single image. You would lose FOV doing so, but you would be able to image at F20 (3000mm) to get some really great high resolution detail, such as single major crater imaging or for producing mosaics.

A simple 5" reflector on a tracking mount would do a great job for someone wanting to start out with high resolution imaging: Nexstar 130 SLT.

Very best,

Would the Nexstar 130 SLT hold a DSLR camera to be able to take images in space?

Also the $378 price (I see it is a sale price) is enticing, but then clicking on "What's In The Box" scrolling down I see "Accessories I need" adds up even more $$$

The "Fully computerized Altazimuth mount" is this the "tripod"?

Thank you also for your input!

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18638644
There is a lot I need to learn for sure. First off, "EQ" is this the tracking ability need to track something in the sky?
I do own the iOptron Sky Tracker, but that would never work with any scope I know.

from what i learn in astro there is 2 mounts, one is EQ mount, and the other one is AZ/ALT.

EQ stands for Equatorial mount, also called German Equatorial mount, it is used to match the speed of earth i think and following the stars or targets such as the moon or the planets, that is why they call it astro tracking mount, i can't explain better about it as i am also learning, but it has a motor and programmed so it has a list of targets so you can follow, and there is a difference between "GoTo" and "tracking", before i thought they are the same, but later i learned the difference.

AZ/ALT is like a manual device, say it is like a tripod, it can have that goto feature, but it won't track.

Your iOptron is an EQ mount actually, but because of its limited programs and capacity load you can't use scopes as they will exceed or be at the edge of that capacity, and that will affect the quality or accuracy of the mount, but if you use smaller lenses and camera then it can do the job, the idea is the same, a device tripod and motor that can go to targets you select and track/follow it for longer exposures, or better imaging or can be used for visual too, but this will cost a lot once you think about better heavier EQ mounts to handle scopes.

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18638574
Is this compatible to your scope? I googled "Celestron 6" SCT" which got me that one along with several others.

Will this work on a standard photography tripod? I have both Manfrotto 3021BPro Photographic and the iKan E-Image GA752T Video tripods

Would I need to buy an additional tripod for the Celestron C6-A SCT in my link?

That is my telescope, I use a surveyor tripod, I got a cheap tracking mount for for about $75. The tripod I got weighs a ton but it is very stable, they are pretty cheap on Amazon.

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18638650
Would the Nexstar 130 SLT hold a DSLR camera to be able to take images in space?

Also the $378 price (I see it is a sale price) is enticing, but then clicking on "What's In The Box" scrolling down I see "Accessories I need" adds up even more $$$

The "Fully computerized Altazimuth mount" is this the "tripod"?

Thank you also for your input!

Yes it can, but i doubt if the mount underneath and tripod will hold more weight, if that DSLR is lightweight then it won't harm much, that is why i use an astro camera that is super light and doing better job if you know how to operate them, and that will cut down the total weight as well.

All mounts need something down to support, either a tripod or a pier, the mount is just a head with computerized motor for goto and tracking if EQ, it is not just tripod alone, even in photography there are tripods that you need a head over it to place/mount the camera, same here too.

Martin is more experience than me, he will answer you, i just keep learning and i tell what i learnt so far even little, i want to see more people getting into it, because the more people getting into it, the more images i will see and enjoy i hope.

Canonuser123 wrote in post #18638694
That is my telescope, I use a surveyor tripod, I got a cheap tracking mount for for about $75. The tripod I got weighs a ton but it is very stable, they are pretty cheap on Amazon.

Would you please give me a link to the surveyor tripod you use and the tracking mount? Maybe I could adapt the tracking mount to my iKan tripod....

Neither of my tripods weighs a ton, Manfrotto at 7lbs, iKan at 10lbs.

Tareq wrote in post #18638696
Yes it can, but i doubt if the mount underneath and tripod will hold more weight, if that DSLR is lightweight then it won't harm much, that is why i use an astro camera that is super light and doing better job if you know how to operate them, and that will cut down the total weight as well.

Sounds like you are saying I may need to buy a new lighter weight camera body. What astro camera do you have? (link please!) I just found an astro camera at Adorama, but the price doubles the cost of getting the scope, plus the resolution is not that good at 1280 X 960

Tareq wrote in post #18638696
All mounts need something down to support, either a tripod or a pier, the mount is just a head with computerized motor for goto and tracking if EQ, it is not just tripod alone, even in photography there are tripods that you need a head over it to place/mount the camera, same here too.

Martin is more experience than me, he will answer you, i just keep learning and i tell what i learnt so far even little, i want to see more people getting into it, because the more people getting into it, the more images i will see and enjoy i hope.