Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Telescope adapter


Recommended Posts

Hi,

This is probably a really stupid question but I am a newbie to all this! I bought an adapter for my Canon EOS 400D to attach it to my telescope through a x2 Barlow lens. I tried taking some images last night, just pointing and shooting for 15 secs to see if anything came out but I didn't capture anything. My question is have I wasted my money or can I actually get decent images via my telescope (like close ups of say Andromeda or other galaxies) as opposed to using the camera lenses and if so, what was I doing wrong to not get an image appear? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like it could be a number of things, we need more info.  Where you targeting anything in particular? Or perhaps it wasn't focused? You would use the liveview function to do this normally. 

Try it in the daytime with something distant, then move on the the moon for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, scitmon said:

Sounds like it could be a number of things, we need more info.  Where you targeting anything in particular? Or perhaps it wasn't focused? You would use the liveview function to do this normally. 

Try it in the daytime with something distant, then move on the the moon for example.

Good idea. I tried Saturn and it looked like an orange blob...my camera doesn't have a live view function, only a tiny view finder, which is why I'm wondering whether to send the adapter back as I'm always going to struggle. I wasn't aiming at anything specific, just up at the Lyra area in the hope that it might capture something using different focussing. What is the potential of using a telescope like mine to take photos in this way? Would it better than using a 70-300mm lens for example? If not, then I will send the adapter back.

This looks like my telescope: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130m.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people use that telescope for astro-photography. I'm sure you can get it to work for bright obects (Moon, planets), but for long-exposure DSO's, you'll need a mount that can track objects in the nighttime sky. And this is where the money comes into 'focus.' :p

There's a book that constantly get excellent reviews and is written by a member here: 'Make Every Photon Count' by Steve Richards. Link -

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

Hope this helps, and I'd hang onto that adapter.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

Many people use that telescope for astro-photography. I'm sure you can get it to work for bright obects (Moon, planets), but for long-exposure DSO's, you'll need a mount that can track objects in the nighttime sky. And this is where the money comes into 'focus.' :p

There's a book that constantly get excellent reviews and is written by a member here: 'Make Every Photon Count' by Steve Richards. Link -

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

Hope this helps, and I'd hang onto that adapter.

Dave

Thanks, I'll have a look for the book! Just out of interest, how much would the cheapest tracking mount cost roughly and do I need to look for specific mounts for my telescope e.g. is there a weight limit etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If pointing a telescope up at a random spot in the sky resulted in images, than there would be no challenge to astroimaging. You'll find that it's a little more complex than that. Firstly I'd say, don't use the 2X barlow yet, start with less mag, wider images using the native focal length, and start with brighter objects like the moon and the planets.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Handily the Moon is up and about from mid morning at the moment, (Northern Hemi') so you could easily have a stab at that, at a sensible hour when you can see what you are doing., whilst enjoying a brew in the sunlight and listening to the birds singing away. (me this morning :) )

Use ISO 100, F11, 1/100 as a manual setting starting point and work from there to get a hang on things. or F16 if nice n bright.

Start W/O the barlow, then the Barlow with the Barlow lens removed, then the whole shebang.

Rich

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have just bought the same telescope, but mine came with a "R.A. Motor Drive (D.C.) with Multi-Speed Handset".

I believe you can buy the motor and attach it later.

However, as a newbie myself, I am sure someone more knowledgeable than I will be along shortly to either confirm or contradict that last statement.

Good luck 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For kicks, try putting your widest lens on your camera, mount it on a tripod, set your ISO to its maximum value.  In manual mode, set your lens to its maximum aperture, point it along the Milky Way somewhere between Sagittarius and Cygnus and take some 15 to 30 second exposures.  You'll be surprised what nebula will show up as red patches in your images.  From there, you'll at least know where interesting objects are located on the sky and you'll have something to show for very little outlay.  From there, you can start using stacking software to merge the various images together to improve them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For most lenses, one stop down from the maximum aperture will give you a sharper image.  Remember to turn off automatic focussing, and any built in noise-reduction.  If you leave this on, the camera may misinterpret some of the fainter stars as noise, and eliminate them.  Sharpest manual focussing is not actually at infinity, but just the tiniest bit before that on the focussing ring.

Make sure that you have Exif data turned on with your camera.  Later when viweing photos, if there are any that show promise, you can look at the Exif data to see what settings you used.

Good luck.  Experiment and see what you get.  The nice thing about digital is it costs nothing to take lots of photos and see what you get.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BeeJay55 said:

Sharpest manual focussing is not actually at infinity

I recommend a bit of masking tape to hold the manual focusing ring in place once best focus is reached.  I kept losing "infinity" focus on my Canon 55-250mm telephoto lens during the eclipse because the focus ring is so loose in manual mode.  The slightest touch will move it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

I've been having a go with the adapter on my telescope and I tried taking some shots of Arcturus. After attempting to take a number of them to stack (which didn't work very well) I got this shot...just the one, no stacking and edited it in GIMP and then bizarrely the Windows photo editor and got this. I was quite impressed it actually appeared an orange colour as all the others I took for stacking came out white with a spectrum around them! Any opinions most welcome! There don't seem to be many photos of Arcturus on Google images that have been taken through a telescope to compare. Is this quality to be expected from a telescope on a manual mount, just pointed at the star through a x2 Barlow and an 1.5 sec image taken? The editing has enhanced it!

Arcturus red edited.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think you need to use a barlow with the 900mm 130 mirror telescope with a DSLR to achieve focus.

Just looking up the constellation it is in, thought might give a search for images to look at. Bootes try that in your search.

Well done for getting an image using your static mount with a barlow on a telescope. Your telescope with or without the Barlow should be great on the Moon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

I didn't think you need to use a barlow with the 900mm 130 mirror telescope with a DSLR to achieve focus.

Just looking up the constellation it is in, thought might give a search for images to look at. Bootes try that in your search.

Well done for getting an image using your static mount with a barlow on a telescope. Your telescope with or without the Barlow should be great on the Moon.

I'll try without the Barlow. I was getting frustrated with just using the camera and lenses last night because all the images were coming out blurry despite me using the same set up and getting pictures of the Milky Way before and I couldn't work out why so I tried using the telescope and my camera again. 

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.