Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Skywatcher 150p - can I use my camera?


Recommended Posts

Well since xmas I have brought a pair of celestron 20x80 bino's then also a celestron travelscope 70 and these really got my into the astronomy mood again - so!!!

I have just ordered a skywatcher 150p with eq 2/3 mount ( was going to get the celestron 130 but pushed the boat out - Jessops only cost me £233 with coucher code and free next day delivery).

Also I am a keen photographer anyway - I have a few canon dslrs plus a lot of lenses so I have also ordered a compatible T2 adapter as the barlow on the skywatcher will accept it. My question is (sorry for rambling) could I use this for basic photography with a motor on it?

I have seen two kinds of motor for sale ranging from £30 to £100 or would it just be a waste of time. Im interested in general imaging - planets etc?

Thanks for any advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't be good for planets as the focal length isn't long enough but with a motor drive it is quite okay to get you started with DSO imaging. With a good polar alignment you should be able to get 1-2min exposures. If you stack up enough of those you can get something respectable.

It won't be easy though. If you have a look at my deep sky gallery a lot of the images were taken with exactly that equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be able to achieve focus with the Barlow, it is not always possible to focus a DSLR on a scope that isn't designed for it. People often manage it that way, it probably won't achieve focus without the Barlow.

The motors will allow you to take relatively short exposures before you start to get star trails. With that mount, scope and Barlow I would expect a few seconds.

This won't be great for faint object like galaxies but won't be a problem for planets or the moon as they are so bright you only need a very short exposure.

The RA motor isn't essential for planetary but it will help a lot.

If one of your cameras has a video mode that will be best for lunar or planetary imaging. Use free software like registax or Autostakkert to turn the video into a single image.

Jupiter and Venus are well placed in the evening for you to have a go at.

Good luck ;)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies - I see its not an easy task but then again getting a decent photograph is always the case - portraits of kids should make star images seem easy lol.

Unfortunately I can't change the order now but if I can get the odd image I would be happy as its main use is just to be a telescope and the photo bit is just a small extra for me. I will be using one of three bodies but all pretty similiar (canon eos 700D, 70D or EOS M2).

I wasnt sure whuch drive to use but this answers it as I have seen two - one is a basic one but they do a more expensive model as well that looks more fandangled!!! - does the motor replace any of the existing controls ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be able to achieve focus with the Barlow, it is not always possible to focus a DSLR on a scope that isn't designed for it. People often manage it that way, it probably won't achieve focus without the Barlow.

The motors will allow you to take relatively short exposures before you start to get star trails. With that mount, scope and Barlow I would expect a few seconds.

This won't be great for faint object like galaxies but won't be a problem for planets or the moon as they are so bright you only need a very short exposure.

The RA motor isn't essential for planetary but it will help a lot.

If one of your cameras has a video mode that will be best for lunar or planetary imaging. Use free software like registax or Autostakkert to turn the video into a single image.

Jupiter and Venus are well placed in the evening for you to have a go at.

Good luck ;)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you can change your order to the other 150P-DS this scope has the mirror slightly closer to the focuser to enable a DSLR to focus with out the need to move the mirror up the tube a bit....

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-ds-ota.html

The standard 150P does reach focus perfectly fine with Canon DSLRs as long as you use a low profile T adaptor or connect via a Coma corrector. It is more than 5 years since SkyWatcher changed the focusser on the single speeds to the 2" Crayford to enable DSLRs to be used without issue. The very old 1.25" rack and pinion blue tube models were the ones that had the focus problems. Not the black/white ones sold since at least 2010. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just use one of these http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/flo-2-inch-t-mount-camera-adapter.html and you'll be fine. just re-reading your opening post. Try the barlow for planetary imaging but it still won't give you enough focal length. Planets are tiny. You need 2,500mm or more of focal length before planets get interesting.

The motors you want for basic DSO imaging are these ones http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/enhanced-dual-axis-dc-motor-drive-for-eq3-2.html 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just use one of these http://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/flo-2-inch-t-mount-camera-adapter.html and you'll be fine. just re-reading your opening post. Try the barlow for planetary imaging but it still won't give you enough focal length. Planets are tiny. You need 2,500mm or more of focal length before planets get interesting.

The motors you want for basic DSO imaging are these ones http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/enhanced-dual-axis-dc-motor-drive-for-eq3-2.html

 Well thanks for the links - I will order these in the morning then - just gotta pray for clear skies now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

portraits of kids should make star images seem easy lol.

Stars and DSO images mean tracking a moving target for say 60 seconds with the tracking accurate enough such that the image on the sensor does not move by a single pixel. :eek: :eek:

Unless you do that with a kid I would rethink which is easier. :confused: :confused:

With photography you are looking at an exposures of 1/100 or even as slow as 1/50 second.

With astrophotography you are looking at exposures of 120 to 300 seconds and as said the object is moving.

No only do you need exposures of 120-300 seconds but you need say 10 to 20 of them because everything is so dim.

You then effectively add these multiple dim exposures to one another via stacking software.

Also between exposures you need to let the sensor cool down as they get hot, cooling is usually the same as the exposure length, or more.

So which is easier:

A single shot that is 1/200sec, or, 10 to 20 shots of a moving object so dim that each exposure has to be 120 seconds long? :grin: :grin: :grin:

The reality of astrophotography is a long way from general photography.

Get into narrow band imaging and you could end up getting 40 hours of exposures at different wavelengths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stars and DSO images mean tracking a moving target for say 60 seconds with the tracking accurate enough such that the image on the sensor does not move by a single pixel. :eek: :eek:

Unless you do that with a kid I would rethink which is easier. :confused: :confused:

With photography you are looking at an exposures of 1/100 or even as slow as 1/50 second.

With astrophotography you are looking at exposures of 120 to 300 seconds and as said the object is moving.

No only do you need exposures of 120-300 seconds but you need say 10 to 20 of them because everything is so dim.

You then effectively add these multiple dim exposures to one another via stacking software.

Also between exposures you need to let the sensor cool down as they get hot, cooling is usually the same as the exposure length, or more.

So which is easier:

A single shot that is 1/200sec, or, 10 to 20 shots of a moving object so dim that each exposure has to be 120 seconds long? :grin: :grin: :grin:

The reality of astrophotography is a long way from general photography.

Get into narrow band imaging and you could end up getting 40 hours of exposures at different wavelengths.

 I agree - but Id still prefer the technicality of undertaking a star image than my job as an event photographer and trying to get kids to not only look at a camera but also smile lol.

I look at the pictures on here and it never ceases to amaze me what some of you do - to get an image that the eye cannot see is awesome. I do not for one minute think I can achieve such striking photo's but it will be nice trying - nothing else to do when the wife is in bed!!!!!!!!!!!! :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I agree - but Id still prefer the technicality of undertaking a star image than my job as an event photographer and trying to get kids to not only look at a camera but also smile lol.

maybe you should borrow an astrophotography technique - take loads of pictures of said kid and stack them together to average out the movements between frames.

That's bound to work surely ???

Well maybe not, but I'm quite intrigued now to see how weird it would look !  Not sure the proud mum/dad would pay for it though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe you should borrow an astrophotography technique - take loads of pictures of said kid and stack them together to average out the movements between frames.

That's bound to work surely ???

Well maybe not, but I'm quite intrigued now to see how weird it would look !  Not sure the proud mum/dad would pay for it though...

I do almost exactly that for 'in motion' gymnastics shots :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe you should borrow an astrophotography technique - take loads of pictures of said kid and stack them together to average out the movements between frames.

That's bound to work surely ???

Well maybe not, but I'm quite intrigued now to see how weird it would look !  Not sure the proud mum/dad would pay for it though...

 That is one class comment - I literally did pee myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the skywatcher 130, I found when attaching my DSLR there was no where near enough inward travel to achieve focus.

I went the bodge job route and cut a hell of a lot off the focuser but have yet to test if it works, I have the simple RA motor drive and can get about 1 min before. My skywatcher HAD the old style focuser but I took that much off that its bow a manual push in and out focuser aha hopefully it will do till I upgrade to something that will work for deep sky stuff. Even with the cheap basic RA motor I could get about 1 min before real trail started to show (on unfocussed stars) I hope you get it all sorted so you can get some nice pics. Might have to look into the 150p maybe on a GOTO mount of some kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Despot67, I've done the exact same thing as you - started with the Celestron Travel 70 and then got a Skywatcher Explorer 150P with a view to doing astrophotography with it!

I haven't used a DSLR yet. I've been capturing images with an old webcam and then going for the stacking approach that has been mentioned. I've found that the zoom is relatively high and focus is quite easy to achieve, though without a fine focus it can be difficult to get things really sharp. I'll be interested to see how you get on with your efforts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.