Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Walky

  1. I ordered mine... bit the bullet. I ordered manfrotto: 055 tripod 410 a 498RC2 heads. Hope it will be able to hold Samyang for 6.3 500mm mirror lens. I also have a Canon 55-250mm, 50mm,18-55 which will not pose a problem. Probably Rockinon 8mm might? Will wait for better skies in Florida to use, its been rainy and full of clouds lately. Wish me luck, and waiting to see more photos with Polarie/AT. I suppose AT is the top of the line on this matter, but one has to make choices. Portability and lack ackwardness are very important for me. I will be looking for a shorter, sturdy tripod later to use it on top of car hood. I like the idea of it been very, very portable. Any ideas on a short table top sturdy tripod?
  2. Impressing time lapse. You could detect Polaris very well as the center of the whirlpool. Beautiful and well executed, I can only think about how many pictures/time it took to shoot. Thanks for posting.
  3. Of course, I am very appreciative of pictures, cannot wait to see them, but do it at your pace and leisure. I can understand better with them and I am sure others will benefit too. I also hear most people agree with you and say t is easy to align even without the scope. I will hold that piece until I test it without. One expense at a time will make it easier on my wallet. Happy seeing!
  4. Now I am looking at the Polarie. Sure beats the price of ASTROTRAC and it is much, much lighter! I am not sure it can track as long...
  5. This is interesting! I forgot about the Vixen Polarie as I was researching the astrotac...That was one of the first things I looked at, but discarded it too soon thinking cheap and inexpensive was the way. Wrong! You area pioneer here. I see this is a good alternative to what I want and less expensive, though not much less than the astrotrac. The astrotrac seems "louder" and the Polarie at least has a small size and is easy to carry. I was wondering about the small size of the Polarie but also at the little window to search for Polaris(?). Does that work well? Hope you can post more photos soon, though I know it is difficult to have good seeing nights all the time.
  6. Marvelous! The photos are outstanding and sharp. They give me hope. I have seen the astrotack here on "eBay USA" at $600 and $800 (with polarscope). Wonder is these prices are similar to what you have there, but as I see, they are sold from UK. Would it be better to buy from Astrotrac directly? And what to buy? The question remains if I can use my current tripod with the astrotrac plus 410 geared head and if that would be my only expenses. I also have a CG4 mount but I don't know if the base (without the head) can be used with the astrotrac. That would be ideal for me. I dont use the CG4, original bought to use with a small MAK because it is heavy (my age also shows) and I am not fond of the lengthy process of alignment that I never have done. Suffice to say, I am willing to make the investment and sacrifice ($$$) of the astrotrac due to the marvelous photos I have seen here and in other places. But always trying to minimize those expenses. My main goal is astrophotography and not seeing. Good info! So many thanks!!! Waiing for more details, enough to see how I cna attach astrotrac to my photography tripod. I am also leaning on buying the 055 Manfrotto mentioned every place I go... but is it really necessary?
  7. Do I really need a manfrotto? OK, I have a tripod for my cameras and after a long search and some wasted money on a mount and motors, I have decided I don't want to image with telescopes. I also decided that what I really need is an astrotrac. My main issue here, not ever seeing one, nor a Manfrotto ball head, is how to set it up with my camera tripod, ball head and all. The recommended equipment I saw on YouTube was: Astrotrac: ($$$$$) , of course 1-410 hear ball head a- will it sit well on my tripod (1/4")? b- do I need an adapter? 2- 0055 Probi Manfrotto tripod (if I decide to buy another tripod) Is that all? NOTE: The Astrotrac is expensive so I have to think this up an understand the interconnectivity (*) among these parts, so I don't buy the wrong parts. If anyoene have photos of (*) , please do post! I am eager to try the astrotrac and willing to spend the cash it it solves the weight and tracking problems I am trying to avoid.
  8. where do you guys with a C90, mount it? I mean, if you are not planning to upgrade to a better scope what type of mount do you use? I need it to be light and grab and shoot, goto and tracking capable. A lot to ask. Not interested in heavy mounts that I would think twice to move or a future possible scope additions.
  9. Wonderful! I can imagine passing by this wonder on a spaceship of the abduction kind. Next time I will ask for a ride up there.
  10. Thank you, though I know it does not deserve your praise, it shows that the technique works, which was my intention. We don't have many clear nights in Florida, USA which is a shame. I am enjoying all the beautiful shots of the many good astrophotographers you have here. I learn a little every day but don't practice much.
  11. It worked very well, given the original I was working with. #1: Original with trails #2: Modified with PS (to the right of #1) #3: Refining with LR You saved my work, not that is is anything that can override a photo well taken, but at least I can say it is viewable and gives me an idea of what was happening last night. I went for so many seconds because I could not see the Pleiades with the naked eye. there were clouds and the moon was shining bright. I just aimed at Venus and shot away, probably 15 photos. GREAT TIP!T hank You Do you have anything for stacking with PS? I have never used PS for this.
  12. I will try that tonight.Many thanks! BTW , Venus does not show as a Sphere, more like a Huge star . It must be either the ISO and aperture combination or the lens. What is it? Will post both to check results.
  13. I used a 250 mm zoom and made the mistake of 20 secs, 15 secs, 10 secs and got the dreaded trails. By the time i was at 10 secs I was tired and did not think that 1,2,3 secs could be feasible. Urrrg!
  14. This is one example where I could get almost everything worth seeing in one pic in that area of the sky with this lens. It was a bit darker, but I lightened it up with Photoshop LightRoom so some stars woudl show brighter, There was a light post at the right which makes the area lighter.
  15. Good and fair, I will try that. Thanks Can someone delete it, please?
  16. Since the section for selling and buying was discontinued, I don't know if its proper to place the ad in a post like this. I have a new CG4, motors and scope (see signature) that I want to sell after 2 weeks of struggling with the enormity and heaviness that arrived. I did not know it was going to be so heavy and bulky, since most people opined it was "flimsy". Not so. Anyway, if interested send me a PM. The complete set is only 2 weeks new and I prefer someone to pick it up, that is local, close by. I have warranty, manuals, original boxes, etc. If admin thinks this is incorrect, be my guest and delete the post, will not be offended. Offers, please. Thank you.
  17. Got my CG4, motors and scope and I am selling everything. This hobby is not for me. Anyone from Orlando, Florida? Http://orlando.craigslist.org/pho/2917380434.html
  18. Yes, I know that much about Canon lenses so I pull back a little, but sometimes I miss the mark. I like the Rokinon optics, a little to the extreme of a wide angle but produces an interesting effect and allows me to get more "in". It is only 3.5 , fixed, Manual, but I can take a picture in a second and any experience amanteur should, setting ISO, distance .... Back to the old days which gives me a feeling of being a real "pro", ja,ja... It is heavy, though, heavier than any of my lenses or the camera itself. I usually set it at infinity unless I am taking pictures at close range, say 5-3 feet and everyhthing comes into focus perfectly. I will place some on a new album for your evaluation of the lens tonight. It was a good investment or $270, but in the other hand is not the kind of lens you use everyday unless you are on the mood for this kind of photography. But, if you don't have it, there are times you really need it. I researched wide angles for a while, specially in Adorama and Amazon or any place they have user reviews, and for the price and the use (20% 10%) it is a must have. I don't know the other one you mention, but I would search user reviews and keep a log. Good luck! I was not disappointed.
  19. Fantastic image of yours. So many stars. I think I had to expose more or that I over processed to make the sky darker, so I lost something there. Any explanation why some stars look blue? Btw, I made you a contact on Flickr. Nice photos of planets.
  20. Excuse me, 55-70 mm I can only show photos with my DSLR since I lack a telescope. I enjoy photography and I think I will stay like this, no telescope. This area was photographed with 55-70mm , then with an 8mm and later with a 50mm. Currently checking what lenses to use and how apropriate for different subjects. It is difficult to focus (infinity yes, but never sure it is perfectly at infinity) or determine what the camera is focused at. The data is included on the photo. Also an owner of a new CG4 which I will have to sell because I find it too heavy to transport. Need something for my camera only that can track.
  21. This was one of my first tests with a newly acquired Rokinon 8mm f/3.5 super wide angle lens a couple of weeks ago. I could not believe the picture would be so sharp. In the second photo I got lots of stars included due to the wide angle and by shooting just in the general direction.
  22. There should be a thread or sticky just for this: dso without telescopes. That could be a great learning experience for us starting out!
  • 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.