Jump to content

30sec_exposures_2021.jpg.48851b1871a4bf9500ebd53c3e790d81.jpg

 

 

sza85

New Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sza85

  1. I attached the camera and the counterweight and it turns around pretty fine, it's possible to balance it. but without it, it's still not like it was before.
  2. I will go out tonight hopefully and if it occurs, I will post one. BTW, I didn't use the mount in the last 3 months and now it's much harder to rotate the RA axis. Why could that be?
  3. I will try mine with more weight as well then even tho I can balance the setup with one counterweight. I tried to weight down the tripod all the time btw, maybe that also introduced some vibrations as well and it's worse to do it that way.
  4. I'm also using a Nikon D5500 so body weight is the same I guess, but my tele lens is a 200mm SMC Takumar which is metal, so that's heavier. It's just strange because telescopes are generally heavier then a lens and still some people say they are able to take 3 minute subs with these combos. Do you only use the one counterweight that comes with the mount?
  5. Thanks for the reply! It's the non mini version, yes. With a 50mm lens it's possible to take 3 minute exposures, maybe even more but I only tried 3 minute subs. I don't always use a ball head, but it's a pretty good one I have, but ofc adding it to the setup adds more instability as well. The whole setup with the ball head / laser pointer / camera / lens is around 1,5 - 2kgs, so it's well under the maximum payload. As far as balancing goes I guess that's fine, but ofc there is a chance that my PA is not that good because with lowered legs it's nearly impossible to do the PA without touching the mount accidentally, and my wedge is also a bit loose, it's even possible to set the altitude with the screw screwed in (fixed). I'm in the process of making a heavy steel tripod for it to see if it will be any better, because I'm pretty sure that the weak point is the aluminium tripod that comes with the SA. Anyway it's very good for milky way shots with my 16mm lens, and up to 50mm, so travelling with it is fine. I only have issues when it comes to the tele lens.
  6. Hi! I'm curious about other's experience with this little mount, that I own. I have it for a year, and the weather was so bad around here in general that I couldn't really use it much, but when I did (with a 200mm lens, which is 300mm on an APS-C sensor), I was a bit disappointed. I read some posts where people claim that they did even 3 minute exposures with it, with light telescopes. But how? I can do 1 minute with that 200mm lens, and if I try 1m20 sec for instance, the stars start to trail (to be more specific it's not like trailing but it's like some kind of a random zig-zag like pattern they draw). I don't know if it's due to the fact that it's aluminium tripod can only handle 1 minute subs without vibration, or my polar alignment is bad, or... is this simply what I can achieve with it? I wanted to look for a used lightweight telescope to have a step further but I don't dare, even tho I see from other's posts that it can handle telescopes as well. What do you think? Thanks in advance!
  7. As I saw backyardNikon can dither without guiding, if the mount is ASCOM compatible(? - don’t know anything about guiding yet). I will dig into finding out as soon as I will have some free time.
  8. The other thing caught my attention in the video above is this dithering thing. I heard about similar with landscape photography called as "super resolution". As far as I can see this thing works with guiding, but unfortunately I don't have guiding yet. Is it possible to do it somehow without guiding (I read that backyardeos can do it - don't know how though, but if backyardnikon can do it aswell I may invest in it)?
  9. Thanks for the replies guys! Every little piece of info helps a newbie
  10. Thanks for the video! I will def try these stuff the next time when I will do a widefield shoot.
  11. Thanks for the reply Droogie! Well then I will take some typical ISO and exposure time darks.
  12. So with darks ISO and exposure time should match, and it's ok if it's taken on different temperatures (best in cold I assume). It's still pretty specifc. Maybe if I take the lights from the same location, with the same lens, and same ISO, and I can achieve the same exposure times with tracking, it can work with multiple targets. With the same lens, location, and ISO aren't a problem because if I shoot deep-sky objects in general, the ISO can be the same, but tracking time depends on polar alignment, and that's not always the same (still figuring the perfect one out with my Star Adventurer). I'm pretty sad seeing that this could possibly only work with a well experienced routine, which I don't have yet.
  13. Hi! Yesterday I was reading about dark frames vs in camera long exposure noise reduction, and something caught my attention. As far as my (so far little but growing) knowledge goes, the best you can do is to take the calibration frames right after the imaging session. This can be a pain in the A, and as I read yesterday, many takes these frames separately, when there is nothing better to do, like on a cloudy afternoon. This is allright, it's a good idea, you can create different master darks and other master calibration frames on different temperatures (room temp, cold, hot etc), and use these when stacking images from your light sessions according to the temperatures the lights frames were capured at. But. As far as I know, my darks should have the exact same settings and focus that my lights have. If I know I use for an example a prime wide angle lens at F2.8 all the time, with ISO 1600 to capture the milky way, that's okay. But what if something changes? What if I use ISO 3200 for some reason? What about the focus (okay, inifinity, but not exactly the same all the time when manual focusing)? What if I use a zoom lens on different focal lenghts? What about the other calibration frames? It's definitely not impossible to be prepared for every scenario, but when you use lenses instead of telescopes, there are more variations. Extra info, if that matters: I'm using a Nikon D5500, which is "ISO invariant". I'm really curious about your replies, as this could greatly improve my image's quality, if It's possible to take calibration frames this way. Thanks in advance! Árpád
  14. Thanks for the advices Steve! I'm really a beginner, and on top of that we just moved to a new house so all the things like a laptop cover, a solid base for the tripod, controlling from inside etc are things that I have to plan, but all will be worked out sooner or later. In the meantime I just need clear skies and practising. Best regards, Árpád
  15. I will look for something similar, thanks! As far as precise pointing goes, I ordered a small $8 5x24 finder scope (only because of the magnification - it looks really light) and a hot shoe adapter, and I will fabricate a small wood piece between the two, so I will be able to attach the scope. Moving the ball head is a bit problematic, it would be better to use only the declination unit, but it's not that easy to point to the right location using only that (and it's easier to align - for now at least - if the reticle is in the default location, with 6 at the bottom). Next time I will try to point to the right direction first, then align, and then correct the lens direction I guess. I was considering BYNikon too, but I don't know about that yet. For really precise focusing I used DigiCamControl before, it's a pretty good free software, and it has an "astronomy module". I just don't want to take the laptop out but I shouldn't be lazy I know My concern is that there are more and more vapor / dew etc every day. Best regards, Árpád
  16. Yes, that's another solution, maybe I shouldn't be lazy
  17. I don't know about it but I'll look into this, thanks!
  18. Yeah I found that but unfortunately I don't know anyone who has a 3D printer :/
  19. I've checked that out, and it would be good if I would decide that the red dot finder is good for me. I just don't know if it's enough or it would be better to use a small finder scope which has some magnification.
  20. I'm looking for it, but can't find one. I can see a 6x24 finder scope, I guess that would be enough, but no adapter for hot shoe. The only way I would be able to mount it on my camera is to get the scope and a hot shoe 1/4" adapter, and make a piece of wood in between that fits for all the screws.
  21. I have the declination unit attached, and on top of that a ball head, yes.
×
×
  • 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.