A newbie needing some help and advice please

[moggy]

Hello from Oxford, Uk

I am pretty sure that this must have been asked on here before, but as I am a newcomer on here, then please forgive me if this is a re-post.

I have a Fuji Finepix S6500fd camera and want to take some great pictures of as much as the sky as I can get (i don't mean size wise, I am talking content here) - stars, planets, galaxies etc.

My knowledge of photography is virtually non existant - more of a point and click man, which I have a sneaky feeling is not going to help me in my quest.

Also, spare cash is at a minimum, so can't afford expensive equipment at the moment.

Therefore, my question to you, if you would be so kind to answer is this...

..."Can I take some great shots of stars, planets etc, and how do I go about doing this"

Any help would be much appreciated

Cheers

[JamesM]

One simple answer to your question and that is to get a hold of Steve Richards "Making Every Photon Count" (FLO £19.95) It will tell you all you need to know from what kit to buy, why you need it, to get the kind of results you're after. It is important to have an overview of the whole subject to see where you can fit in, especially on a limited budget. It would be easy to buy the wrong kit at the start so for the price of a very good book you might even save some money.

Take your time, read the book, breath in and then decide where you want to start in this area. The images that imagers can obtain is truly fantastic, but their modesty hides a lot of very hard work in both collecting the data and then later processing it - they can make it look very easy to do.

Hope that helps

James

[rowan46]

There's a couple of problems with that camera for deep space work. first is that the front lens doesn't come off so you will have to use an afocal method, ( you might get some moon shots this way) The second is the length of exposure I can't remember if that model has a bulb setting. But even with a bulb setting Fuji bridge cameras only have a 30 sec exposure. You might get a couple of widefield shots by piggybacking it on a mount. which would be nice and maybe some afocal moonsots but that seems to be the limits of their astro usefulness. I have a fuji s9600 by the way similar camera but no fd. If you want to take planetary pics the best way is to use a webcam. Unfortunately those lovely pics we see on the net are not taken by point and clickers like us. They are taken by very skilled Astrophotographers who have invested a lot of time skill and money into those images. Like the op I would recommend that book .It has been a real education for me I think you would find it useful. Get the book before you buy ANY equipment you intend to use for astrophotography. It may save you having to buy twice, thus saving you some of your hard earned.

And by the way welcome to sgl

[Foton Finder]

If the camera is capable of making long exposures -- say 10 - 45 seconds, and you have a sturdy tripod, you can at least get some pretty nice images of large areas of the sky. If not, then buying a very basic 35mm film camera (have you ever used film?) and some Ektachrome 400 slide film can be a lot of fun!

A 35 mm camera mounted on a tripod with a very simple "cable release" to fire the shutter, can create very nice images of constellations. With a standard 50mm f/2 lens, used wide open, and a 30-second exposure, you can record more stars than you can see from most places. Aiming the camera toward the north, and making a 10-, 20-, or even 30-minute exposure will record the earth's rotation as beautiful star trails, circular paths centered on the north celestial pole (very near the north star).

If your digital camera won't make longer exposures (or you have trouble fixing the focus at infinity) you can probably pick up a simple 35mm camera for very little money at all -- probably $25 - $50 American, or the equivalent in Pounds or Euro's.

Best of luck,

[JohnnyD333]

Hey Moggy,

I'm not sure what equipment you may have besides the camera. I started off with a Nikon P90 point and shoot which took nice shots of the moon and wide field star shots. However, anything more than that will require quite a bit of investment and time (as others have already mentioned).

Do some research on the internet and get the books listed on this site. Going for detailed planets will require a telescope and a webcam (or afocal recording through an eyepiece). Galaxies/DSO is an awesome yet expensive and time consuming hobby. I caught the photo bug a few months back, and I have spent over $2000 on a DSLR and EQ mount just to get some results. I love astrophotography but if you are serious about getting those awe inspiring images you have to be in it for the long haul and open you wallet (sadly). Start off slow with a moderate scope and eq mount and do some planetary and piggybacking photos. If you are itching for more after a few months, get a nice Canon EOS (I actually use Nikon but Canon is popular) and start the long road of Prime Focus astrophotography (connecting your camera straight to your telescope). Many will tell you there is a steep learning curve and expensive (which it is) but I love it and havent regreted any of my nights shooting the stars. Also, the guys on this site are living books and are great at answering any individual questions you have. Don't let this venture deter you, just dont jump in too deep until you know if it really is your cup of tea.

[ronin]

To get shots of anything reasonable you will need a mount that tracks at sideral rate, which means a motorised EQ mount.

Even the bottom end option for this is in the £250 area. Add in the cost of a dovetail bar to attach camera to mount and you are looking at £300.

If the camera cannot be set to an exposure of up to 5 minutes then I suspect that it is not suitable.

Point and shoot during daylight is utterly different to astro photography, in some respects the camera body is the only common item.

[NickK]

It's possible to take a photo by placing the camera on the ground (although dew will be a problem) then using a piece of dark paper over the lens when you press the shutter. Next slide the paper away and leave the camera still until the exposure is over.

You'll not get the zoomed images of galaxies you're probably wanting. Astrophotography is all about the mount first, then optics train, because of earth's rotation and the effect it has on images (star trails, blurring etc).

If you place a 10 pence piece (about 24mm) three miles away - that's an arcsecond. The mount has to track the stars to within a few arcseconds without wobble. Now mounts like the EQ6 will get within 30-45 arc seconds unassisted and then with PEC+tuning you'll get as low as 5 arcseconds. Mounts such as the Paramount MT will get to sub-arcsecond accuracy.

Focal length plays a part - it defines how accurate you'll need to be. With 50mm you'll not need much accuracy as a 500mm which in turn needs less accuracy than a 2000mm ad infinium.

The length of time the exposure is open for also requires accuracy. During the exposure the earth will rotate and so the image present to the sensor has to be pixel perfect in it's tracking or you'll see motion blurring. With a low focal length (50mm) and a fast f2 you could probably get away with 10-30 second exposures as the rotation causes the image to move across the camera sensor but the movement is so small it stays within the same pixel (hence no blur).

Next up is to take lots of exposures and then stack then using a program. The alignment of the images causes the signal strength to build things like stars etc are constant whereas the noise differs between the frames so will not build as fast.