Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_2.thumb.jpg.72789c04780d7659f5b63ea05534a956.jpg

Recommended Posts

I just got into observing and would love to be able to take a picture of what I'm seeing. I got an old Nikon D60 from 2012? laying here still working perfectly with multiple lenses. I did some research and found I should buy some kind of T-ring as an adapter between the telescope and camera. Is this the only thing I need to take an image ? 

Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unlikely that the heritage will be able to focus with the camera, so it's common to use a Barlow lens in-between the camera the scope. Barlow's often come with a t thread as I guess this is  a common usage.

 

For various reasons that I'll let someone else explain, using a Barlow isn't idea for serious astrophotography of deep space objects, but for £30 I found it was a decent way to get started!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, rnobleeddy said:

It's unlikely that the heritage will be able to focus with the camera, so it's common to use a Barlow lens in-between the camera the scope. Barlow's often come with a t thread as I guess this is  a common usage.

 

For various reasons that I'll let someone else explain, using a Barlow isn't idea for serious astrophotography of deep space objects, but for £30 I found it was a decent way to get started!

So a Barlow would help focussing, but then a barlow isn't for astrophotography ? Couldn't I just manually focus with the camera ?

Edit: so the barlow has the T ring adapter built in?

Edited by Blackware
Link to post
Share on other sites

The heritage 130p will reach focus but you will need to drop the trusses about 1 inch. You do not need a barlow with this particular flavour of 130p.

Personally I prefer a t ring used with a t mount as this suits the focuser as you can manually manipulate the depth the camera is into the focuser as you play with identifying where focus is to fine tune the truss height as ideally you want the camera fairly well in the focoser.

The OTA will need to be moved deeper into the mount so as to then balance with the camera. I don't know what your camera weighs but when I tried it the canon 1100d at 495 grams was coped with but it's subject to potential slight droopping on the focuser arm so collimation may not stay absolutely perfect.

The Moon is great to image and video is good as it's not easy to get perfect image as the Moon dips in and out of great seeing.

With the mount being static your exposures will need to be very short like 1 second and less with means DSO are tough, really bright globular clusters might be worth trying but you really want lots of images to then stack so keeping the target centre to the field of view will be tough.

Imaging something is not impossible but you'll need to be patient and experiment to tease what you can achieve.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

The heritage 130p will reach focus but you will need to drop the trusses about 1 inch. You do not need a barlow with this particular flavour of 130p.

Personally I prefer a t ring used with a t mount as this suits the focuser as you can manually manipulate the depth the camera is into the focuser as you play with identifying where focus is to fine tune the truss height as ideally you want the camera fairly well in the focoser.

The OTA will need to be moved deeper into the mount so as to then balance with the camera. I don't know what your camera weighs but when I tried it the canon 1100d at 495 grams was coped with but it's subject to potential slight droopping on the focuser arm so collimation may not stay absolutely perfect.

The Moon is great to image and video is good as it's not easy to get perfect image as the Moon dips in and out of great seeing.

With the mount being static your exposures will need to be very short like 1 second and less with means DSO are tough, really bright globular clusters might be worth trying but you really want lots of images to then stack so keeping the target centre to the field of view will be tough.

Imaging something is not impossible but you'll need to be patient and experiment to tease what you can achieve.

Thanks for explaining!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding a barlow will only make your exposure length potential half as long.

Imaging towards the east or west below 60° gives you the least field rotation so works in your favour using a static mount.

For looking at what one member is doing with a static mount look in this album.

Link here

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackware said:

So a Barlow would help focussing, but then a barlow isn't for astrophotography ? Couldn't I just manually focus with the camera ?

Edit: so the barlow has the T ring adapter built in?

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. The barlow magnifies the image (a 2x barlow by 2 times, etc) which has the effect of shifting the focal point such a reflector that can't reach focus, can with the barlow. It's generally suggested for scopes where you can't reach focus, but it looks like yours can, so you won't need one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By endless-sky
      After a 20 year long hiatus - my last astrophoto was captured with a film camera in 1997 - at the beginning of 2020 I decided it was time to start again.
      So, January 25th 2020 I brought home my used Sky-Watcher NEQ6 Pro and I immediately started taking photos. Obviously, my first target was M42 in Orion.
      This was my first digital astrophotography. 31 subframes, 30s each, taken at ISO800 with my unmodified Nikon D90, Nikkor 70-300mm at 300mm f/6.3 - January 28th, 2020, home front yard, Bortle 5/6 sky, no guiding, no filters. A grand total of 15.5 minutes...

      A couple of weeks later, me and my wife went to spend Valentine's weekend in the mountains. Of course I couldn't avoid taking advantage of the Bortle 4 sky and I took all my gear with me. Same target, 52 subframes, 45s each, taken at ISO800 with my unmodified Nikon D90, Nikkor 70-300mm at 300m f/5.6 - February 14th, 2020, Tonadico, Bortle 4 sky, no guiding, no filters. 39 minutes total integration.

      After I finished post-processing the second photograph, I was so happy with the result. It felt amazing that I was able to capture so many details and more nebulosity compared to the photo taken from home.
      Months passed, gear was changed. First one being the camera: at the end of February I bought a Nikon D5300 and a couple of months later I astromodified it on my own, adding a UV/IR cut filter in front of the sensor, after cutting it to size.
      In October the rest of the setup finally arrived: Tecnosky 80/480 APO FPL53 Triplet OWL Series imaging telescope, Artesky UltraGuide 60mm f/4 guide scope and ZWO ASI 224MC guide camera. Also, an Optolong L-Pro 2" light pollution filter.
      After months of imaging and getting more experienced with PixInsight, it was just a matter of waiting before I could have another go at one of my favorite targets. And maybe give it a little more justice.
      This project took me more than a month, due to the rare clear nights opportunities I have had here lately.
      I started acquiring in January and finished a couple of weeks ago.
      M42 taken over 8 nights, under my Bortle 5/6 sky.
      Total integration time: 18h 04m 00s for the nebula. 714s (14s subs) + 2065s (35s subs) for the Trapezium and the core.
      Here are the acquisition details:
      Mount: Sky-Watcher NEQ6 Pro
      Telescope: Tecnosky 80/480 APO FPL53 Triplet OWL Series
      Camera: D5300 astromodified
      Reducer/flattener: Tecnosky 4 elements, 0.8x
      Guide-scope: Artesky UltraGuide 60mm f/4
      Guide-camera: ZWO ASI 224MC
      2021/01/12: Number of subs/Exposure time: 33@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/13: Number of subs/Exposure time: 33@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/15: Number of subs/Exposure time: 38@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 8% illuminated
      2021/01/18: Number of subs/Exposure time: 36@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 30% illuminated
      2021/02/13: Number of subs/Exposure time: 30@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 4% illuminated
      2021/02/14: Number of subs/Exposure time: 23@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 9% illuminated
      2021/02/15: Number of subs/Exposure time: 51@14s + 48@35s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 15% illuminated
      2021/02/17: Number of subs/Exposure time: 11@35s + 38@180s + 1@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 30% illuminated
      Total exposure time (main integration): 65040s = 18h 04m 00s.
      Total exposure time (35s integration): 2065s.
      Total exposure time (14s integration): 714s.
      Pre and post-processing: PixInsight 1.8.8-7.
      Full HDR Version:

      Masked Stretch Version:

      Blended Version (50% HDR + 50% Masked Stretch):

      To my personal taste, I like the blended version the most. I think it brings out the best of both worlds (HDR and soft, less contrasty but more colorful look).
      I must say, I am very pleased and happy with the result. Not to boast, but I think I have come a long way since I started.
      Obviously the better gear and the much, much longer integration time helped.
      I think I actually spent more time post-processing it than acquiring it. Especially since I had to do the work almost twice: I post-processed the HDR and the Masked Stretch images separately, making sure I used the same processes and with the same strenght in both, so that I could combine them effectively, if I decided I didn’t like the look of the HDR alone. I also think I managed to tame the stars a lot more, compared to my previous post-processing attempts.
      As usual, here’s a link to the full resolution image(s): Orion Nebula (M42), De Mairan’s Nebula (M43) and Running Man (NGC 1977)
      Thanks for looking!
      C&C welcome!
       
    • By UkSpacenut
      Hey everyone. Have previously stumbled across this forum when searching for answers to questions, have finally made an account. 
      Last night I shot the moon for a couple of hours. I took around 10x3 minute videos and captured a little over 80,000 frames. My aim was to then create a lunar mosaic image but I have never done this before, and my technical ability seems to be adding to the confusion. 
      So to give some context, I used an ASI120MCS planetary camera through an 8" Skywatcher Skyliner 200p dobsonian. 
      I have read that ideally you would use a tracking mount to record sections of the moon at a time, however I sadly don't have that luxury. 
      I instead let the moon drift across the field of view and I'm pretty confident that among the 80,000 frames I have all the pieces of the moon as a whole. 
       
      What I'm now having issues with is how to break down these Avi files into frames which then can be used to create a mosaic. I need a "for dummies" guide ae thats what I'm feeling like currently. 
       
      Thank you in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide. :)
    • By Pincs
      Hi I've got an 8" dobsonian and I just got a dslr to connect to it. Obviously there's no tracking so what kind of things can I capture. Will I be able to do dso and planets?
      Thanks
    • By SpaceDave
      Hello all. I’ve tried a few times in the last month to image Mars but have had very little success. Although a decent size, Mars is very blurry and wobbly. I am fairly new to the hobby, but I would say it appears to be poor seeing conditions. 
      I am using a Celestron 6SE and Canon 600D. I have tried 2x and 3x Barlow. I focus using a bahtinov mask (on stars). I used movie crop mode on various ISOs and exposures, stacking at least 3000 frames (keeping the best 1%, 2%, 5%, etc).
      Is Mars too far away now? Or am I underestimating how rarely you get a night of good seeing? How do you find out when the best seeing will be?
    • By endless-sky
      I would like to share my fourth image.
      With my "lucky week" of imaging, along with M33, I managed to finish also this project. This is my longest integration to date.
      These are IC 405 and IC 410, also known as the Flaming Star Nebula and the Tadpole Nebula, respectively, taken over 7 nights, under my Bortle 5/6 home sky.
      Total integration time: 18h 29m 00s.
      Here are the acquisition details:
      Mount: Sky-Watcher NEQ6 Pro
      Telescope: Tecnosky 80/480 APO FPL53 Triplet OWL Series
      Camera: D5300 astromodified
      Reducer/flattener: Tecnosky 4 elements, 0.8x
      Guide-scope: Artesky UltraGuide 60mm f/4
      Guide-camera: ZWO ASI 224MC
      2020/11/18: Number of subs/Exposure time: 41@240s + 1@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2020/11/21: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 46% illuminated
      2020/11/24: Number of subs/Exposure time: 48@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, Moon 75% illuminated
      2020/12/07: Number of subs/Exposure time: 15@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2020/12/13: Number of subs/Exposure time: 22@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/10: Number of subs/Exposure time: 37@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      2021/01/11: Number of subs/Exposure time: 18@300s. Notes: L-Pro filter, no Moon
      Total exposure time: 66540s = 18h 29m 00s.
      Pre and post-processing: PixInsight 1.8.8-7.

      This image was particularly hard to process, since there are many bright stars and stretching the nebulosity while taming the stars was quite difficult. I am sure I didn't manage it as well as I would have liked.
      Here's a link to the full resolution image: Flaming Star Nebula (IC 405) and Tadpole Nebula (IC 410)
      Thanks for looking!
      C&C welcome!
×
×
  • 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.