Mikel56

1

Date 16th May 24 Celestron 9.25 iPhone SE Celestron Universal Adapter (Holder) Software Used - IPhone SE (single frame) Eyepiece - 8.6mm

Thanks Kon, That helps me understand what I need to be thinking about bearing in mind my basic knowledge, Regard

Thanks Peter. I’m waiting for a clear night ! Next time, hopefully by midweek, I plan to use an iPhone with a better camera. Should make a difference, I think. I’d like to take same photograph, same time and with same equipment of the moon using the Celestron and Swift in order to compare. I think it would be fair to aim for 100x so that design parameters not compromised for either. Thereafter enlarge to same viewing/display size for both. I’m not sure if there’s much to be gained however if the Celestron is my benchmark I would like to see a like for like Swift “effort”. From what my layman’s eye tells me it appears my old Swift performs, Regards

That’s an impressive photograph, much better than my recent efforts. I’m new to photographing the moon, anything in fact. Is the photograph a single shot or created from several photographs ? Is the view that which is seen in the eyepiece or enlarged in the subsequent processing? I enjoyed the detail of your photograph, Regards

Thanks Peter. I should have read your post before the four photographs above ! Regards

Hello, For the four attached I used the same single frame setup as above attached to a Swift 831 with a 6mm lens. Again I think that would be the limit for the telescope, Regards

Forgot to add the difficult part for me was focussing. A slight touch on telescope focus control and the “picture” jumped about. I think I need a hands free focus unit, something like that, Regards

Hello Neil, The holder isn’t of the best engineering quality however far superior to the cheap ones you can buy online. The holder in the photograph operates in three dimensions with three separate controls. Only took a minute or so to get the moon centred on the iPhone with a previously focussed telescope . The clamp fits around the knurled part of the eyepiece and accommodates different eyepiece external diameters. There’s still a slight movement to the setup but once working there’s no need to touch anything so the unit remains steady. I used the iPhone timer however without the timer, pressing the button gently, the photos turned out with no noticeable difference to my eye. There’s an app. called AstroShader. Apparently this app allows you to take several photographs and “stacks” them automatically. It’s a free download so I’ll give that a try weather permitting. Bottomline the holder was a good buy for my basic skills/knowledge. I noticed there are two similar holders. Mine is the Celestron. I noticed the other is cheaper but I suspect it’s a Chinese copy. Might be ok though, The attached photograph was taken with a 6mm eyepiece. I think that is at the telescope limit or my focus was rubbish ! Regards

The photograph showing the setup was taken at the same time as the photograph of the telescope (with the moon shown in the iPhone). The setup then included a 19 mm eyepiece, 2x Barlow and a fine focus all on to a right angle thingy. The “gap” was a consequence of the 3d holder and was in that position whilst moon in focus. The actual moon photographs were with an 8.6 m eyepiece, Regards

Hello, I haven’t been in contact for sometime but still read ! Many thanks for your help last year. Tonight was a good night here so for the first time I’ve managed to take a couple of moon photographs. Apart from the telescope (Celestron9.25) my equipment and skills are basic. The attached photographs were taken using an iPhone SE with a Celestron “holder” for positioning the iPhone over the eyepiece. The photographs are only “single shot” as I haven’t much of a clue about stacking frames. The eyepiece was 8.6mm and a mount with no goto. I’ve learned the moon travels fastish and my focussing needs practice ! Regards

Thanks Steve. It’s good to know I’m using something for which it was designed !

Attached is a photograph with an eyepiece to the left and a “unit” to the right. I have been looking for something to help me with fine focus and avoid a lot of image vibration, particularly on the Celestron 9.25. In a box I found the unit shown on the right of the photograph. It is graduated in mm from 0 to 10. When the knurled section is turned fully from 0 to 10 the unit extends by a measured 1 cm. I added the unit to the Swift 831. I can focus the Swift roughly by using the drawtube and indeed if I get that initial focus more or less correct for my eye I can fine focus with the unit however there’s not a lot of room for error. Is the unit designed for this purpose or something else ? If not would it be better to source a unit specifically to aid focus, particularly for the Celestron ? Thanks, M

Tonight with the projection fully extended and 32mm eyepiece. My focus needs attention z!

I’ll try tonight on the moon, thanks for that.

Along with the Celestron 9.25 I also had a box of “extras”. The first attached photo shows one of the units along with camera with 1.25” fitting at other end. I opened the unit and out popped a 32mm lens. The 32mm direct to the telescope produces a perfectly good image at about 80x. When I attach the unit with the lense fitted internally to the camera the image displayed on the camera has a narrower view and very close up. Focus is not too bad but not much use. Do I really need such a unit for taking photos ? Am I doing something wrong ?

I don’t have a tracking mount hence slight elongation or maybe bad focus. The iso was set at 800 and at 1/3 second. Maybe the iso was set too high.

Thanks Geoff, it helps to understand that certain attachments are considered in the design. I also managed to find the adapter you mentioned. Tonight’s project is to use the 9.25 Celestron on Jupiter and hopefully “snap a photo”. thanks again

At some point in time my sixty year old telescope focus drive shaft has received a fairly significant knock as in the photograph. Other than trying to straighten the shaft would it be possible to buy a replacement / similar unit ? I also took my first photograph using a camera attached to the telescope. The moon was too bright I think. Tree problem too. My focus is out however it’s not that easy to focus by looking at the camera screen ! Another thing is that as I added an elbow and Barlow I had to adjust the focus. I understand that but there came a point in time when the focus control, wheel adjustment and draw tube adjustment, “bottomed out” mechanically. Removing the Barlow or elbow gave me more “room” when focusing on distant objects. Is this a function of older units, namely a Swift 831.

I’m new to this and only had the Swift and Celestron for a couple of weeks. Due to the overcast weather the most I have seen is the odd pigeon sitting on rooftops - but I’ve done a lot of reading but not up to speed on the jargon ! I’m new to this and only had the Swift and Celestron for a couple of weeks. Due to the overcast weather the most I have seen is the odd pigeon sitting on rooftops - but I’ve done a lot of reading but not up to speed on the jargon ! Clear sky last night and much aided by Stellarium Jupiter appeared low on the horizon. I wasn’t prepared. I fitted the Swift 831 with no cool down. First eyepiece I used was the 32 mm. which is about 30x magnification. The view was sharp with four moons clearly visible but Jupiter a bit fuzzy. I then used a 19mm. eyepiece with similar results, still sharp. Next up was a 3x Barlow with the 19mm. This results in about 150x and from what I’ve read would be at the maximum theoretical of a 77mm diameter lens. The view was still sharp and I could see two faint lines running the length of the planet about 20 degrees from the horizontal. The colours associated with Jupiter were slightly noticeable. For all three conditions I focussed on the moons until they were dots which I think put Jupiter in best possible focus. With the 19mm and the Barlow I could see four moons. To my untrained eye the Swift is a good telescope and I believe I could have pushed it more. All levels of magnification were impressive. The low level of Jupiter meant I was having to navigate “volumes of atmosphere” which I think indicates the Swift has more in reserve. I learned the mount/stand is more important than the telescope. I need a goto. Next up was the Celestron 9.25. With the 32mm (about80x) the view was crisp with two lines and colour present, four moons as well on a near horizontal plane as for the Swift. I next used the 19mm and the 3x Barlow (350ish x). The view field was by Jupiter and four moons to the edge of the circumference. There was also a fifth moon towards the bottom of the view but intermittent as I had a lot of knob twirling. The two Jupiter lines were more pronounced as was the colour and I convinced myself I could see the “eye” storm shape on one of the lines (interfaces) towards the centre right. The view of Jupiter was not so clear as in the numerous photos on the Internet. Maybe those photos have been processed ? I checked the collimation at the high magnification and had, to my untrained eye, a perfect black hole in the centre of an out of focus disc. Bearing this in mind I noticed at the high magnification an extremely thin blue crescent shape at the top left quadrant on the circumference of Jupiter. Correspondingly I had a similar thin orangeish crescent shape at the bottom right quadrant circumference. Is there something wrong ? Cool down was only about 15 to 30 minutes (set up and viewing time ) for the Swift and Celestron. Enthusiasm was the problem ! This was my first time however I conclude the Swift is very good, the 9.25 is also very good but I need more practice. I also need a goto mount. Clear sky last night and much aided by Stellarium Jupiter appeared low on the horizon. I wasn’t prepared. I fitted the Swift 831 with no cool down. First eyepiece I used was the 32 mm. which is about 30x magnification. The view was sharp with four moons clearly visible but Jupiter a bit fuzzy. I then used a 19mm. eyepiece with similar results, still sharp. Next up was a 3x Barlow with the 19mm. This results in about 150x and from what I’ve read would be at the maximum theoretical of a 77mm diameter lens. The view was still sharp and I could see two faint lines running the length of the planet about 20 degrees from the horizontal. The colours associated with Jupiter were slightly noticeable. For all three conditions I focussed on the moons until they were dots which I think put Jupiter in best possible focus. With the 19mm and the Barlow I could see four moons. To my untrained eye the Swift is a good telescope and I believe I could have pushed it more. All levels of magnification were impressive. The low level of Jupiter meant I was having to navigate “volumes of atmosphere” which I think indicates the Swift has more in reserve. I learned the mount/stand is more important than the telescope. I need a goto. Next up was the Celestron 9.25. With the 32mm (about80x) the view was crisp with two lines and colour present, four moons as well on a near horizontal plane as for the Swift. I next used the 19mm and the 3x Barlow (350ish x). The view field was by Jupiter and four moons to the edge of the circumference. There was also a fifth moon towards the bottom of the view but intermittent as I had a lot of knob twirling. The two Jupiter lines were more pronounced as was the colour and I convinced myself I could see the “eye” storm shape on one of the lines (interfaces) towards the centre right. The view of Jupiter was not so clear as in the numerous photos on the Internet. Maybe those photos have been processed ? I checked the collimation at the high magnification and had, to my untrained eye, a perfect black hole in the centre of an out of focus disc. Bearing this in mind I noticed at the high magnification an extremely thin blue crescent shape at the top left quadrant on the circumference of Jupiter. Correspondingly I had a similar thin orangeish crescent shape at the bottom right quadrant circumference. Is there something wrong ? Cool down was only about 15 to 30 minutes (set up and viewing time ) for the Swift and Celestron. Enthusiasm was the problem ! This was my first time however I conclude the Swift is very good, the 9.25 is also very good but I need more practice. I also need a goto mount.

Thanks Geoff. Is this the EOS to T2 for existing Celestron scope adapter ? If it fits the Swift that would be a bonus. Thanks again for your help.

I’ve got an old Canon 450 d and read that it’s not too bad for Astrophotography. I’m trying to figure out how I attach the camera to the telescope. The first two photographs are of the Celestron 9.25. The first photograph shows the existing 11/4 “visual back” screwed to the Celestron body thread. I unscrewed that unit and fitted the T-Adapter SC to the thread on the body as in next photograph. On the left side of the photograph is an internal threaded coupling which I unscrewed leaving an external thread on the T-Adapter SC as shown in the same photograph. The removed coupling to the left (sitting on the box) has what appears to be a bayonet fitting. Is it this coupling I need to source to fit the Canon EIS 450 D ? The last photo shows the Swift with the various reducers to fit 1/14 eyepieces. The first attached unit to the Swift drawtube end thread is a 2” T2 Adapter. The (Celestron T-Adapter SC thread diameter is oversized for that thread therefore of no use). Maybe I have to get a fitting for the Swift that attaches to the Canon and inserts to the 11/4 hole as would a 11/4 eyepiece ?

The photograph below has the diagonal I was using as above. I think it’s a mirror. I just found the one on the right in a box. It looks like a 45 and according to your link that might be a prism? When looking inside the diagonal on the right there are multiple angled flat surfaces appearing on the circumference. Probably a prism ? Mike

It looks to me very much like a mirror. The back has “Celestron Star Diagonal 94115 - A. I take your point on the adapter. Mike

Thanks Mandy and Peter. I was concerned but not now ! Maybe I need a smaller diagonal.