Bedroom astronomy

[malc-c]

There have been a lot of suggestions and comments on your proposal to start imaging from a bedroom skylight.  You don't mention why you want to stay in the room and image rather than set the scope up in your garden which would remove a lot of the restrictions and disadvantages using it in the room has.

Here's my 2p worth

• Regardless of how old the house is and how well insulated it is you will still have thermal issues as the roof calls down, or warmer air than outside escapes through the skylight.  You will never be able to stabilize the air as there could still be a 12-18c difference between the room temp and the outside air.  You may not notice this if you used the scope for visual use, but imaging, it would be very obvious
• Alignment of the mount.  Whist it has been mentioned, the lack of finding Polaris could make guiding / tracking difficult, but also most goto mounts will need two or three alignment stars that you will not be able to find as they will be obscured by the roof.
• Movement / Vibration. Your bedroom floor will flex when you move around.  In imaging even a small amount of movement will ruin the results.  This is why when constructing an observatory people use a 1cu mtr block of concrete separated from the floor to support the pier.  I know some people image from downstairs rooms, but most houses have a solid concrete floor so vibrations are less of a problem.
• Canon DSLRs are  a good starting point for imaging.  The 450D has live view which would be useful.  I still image with and old 400D (fully modified) and quite happy with the results I get, even from a town location.
• EQ3 mount - For imaging the mount is more important than the scope IMO.  A 150PDS, with a guidescope, and camera will be pushing the EQ3 to its limit for imaging.  An EQ5 with the 150PDS would be more suitable in my opinion, as the combined weight of cameras, scope etc would be within the load capacity of the EQ5.  IF you can afford an HEQ5 you would benefit from better precision, and it would cope with additional equipment added to the rig if you needed to.
• Remote operation - One thing to consider is setting the scope up in your garden, and then using a means of controlling it from your bedroom.  This could be through a small laptop running EQMOD, imaging software and guiding software at the mount which you then remote desktop into from a PC in your bedroom.  Or if the scope is within 5 metres of the house, run long powered USB cables between the scope and the PC.

Anyway, that's my take on things.... at the end of the day we can all makes suggestions, but it's down to you what you do, what budget you have etc

[Jiggy 67]

I have to say that I’m not an imager, just a visual observer, but I wouldn’t even observe from an upstairs bedroom window let alone image for all the reasons above. 
Plus, part of the reason for this hobby for me is getting out in the peace, quiet and dark of the garden away from tv’s , partners, dogs and other distractions. Provides time for self reflection and relaxation as well as astronomy

However I get that some people in flats etc may not have much choice 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Jiggy 67

[Erling G-P]

Can only agree with what has already been said about the limitations of trying to image through a window.  Apart from the convenience of not having to haul the equipment outside, I fail to see what the benefits are:

- You won't be nice and warm during the cold seasons, since you have to cool the room as much as possible anyway.

- You won't be imaging if it's raining, so don't need to be covered against the weather (apart from wind possibly)

- If you set up outdoors, you can go inside once you have telescope & camera going, just checking on the equipment occasionally - that's what I do.

- You won't be able to image targets high in the sky, and the higher towards zenith an object is, the less atmosphere you will be looking through, potentially getting the best conditions for imaging.

Unless you can't bring your equipment outside and leave it unattended without overhanging risk of someone making off with it, I definitely would set up outside, especially it that's what you eventually plan to do - might as well get the routine down from the get go!

Would recommend the 130PDS myself - should be manageable as a beginner scope and can't beat its bang-for-the-buck value.  Would think it probably needs an EQ5 or better HEQ5 for best results, but only have experience with it on the latter myself (have imaged in a half gale without problems, so on a HEQ5 it has to be very windy to spoil your fun and thus little need to be indoors)

You mentioned the need or not for goto in your post.  I can only say that without it, I probably wouldn't be imaging.  Nearly all DSO objects are invisible to the naked eye (and the live view on a DSLR), so without goto, you will probably spend a lot of time trying to find your target, detracting from the precious and all too short imaging time (on most targets, you will want as much time as humanly possible).

[Moonshed]

Hang on a mo, have to Google photomicrography to find out what the hell it is! Hope it’s not catching whatever it is.

Louise, I lived in Scotland for almost 20 years, in Glasgow initially then out to Ayrshire, and it was the most frustrating period of my life regarding astronomy, it hardly ever stopped raining! You have my sympathy.

[Thalestris24]

4 minutes ago, Moonshed said:

Hang on a mo, have to Google photomicrography to find out what the hell it is! Hope it’s not catching whatever it is.

Louise, I lived in Scotland for almost 20 years, in Glasgow initially then out to Ayrshire, and it was the most frustrating period of my life regarding astronomy, it hardly ever stopped raining! You have my sympathy.

Thanks! I don't know - what was I thinking!?!

So I also take photos through microscopes plus some macrophotography

Louise

[ShaunyC]

Wowser so many responses..... 

Thank you all for your input... 

I can see how many if not all of you agree this is a bad idea of a base station... 

My main reasons for going about this

I live on my own at present in a 3 bed house no pets and minimal distractions... 

My house is a corner plot with 2 great stonking street light which is sure to spoil any sort of a view where as out said window the bee to the left is quite dark over some fields.. 

The fact things are pretty much set up each time i get the urge makes it not such a drama to get up and running for even a short period of observation/imagine and will help me to keep the ball rolling and increase the interest... 

Then having a small flield of view will eventually lead me to wanting to see more of the sky and improve my images due to all the issues mentioned... 

That is where if I get the right gear now to build from I will have the right gear to move outside and further this hobby and improve the images on the images already gotten...

I hope that makes sense to people that the idea of the window is to wet my appetite... 

Thank you for all your comments I really do appreciate them all

[Moonshed]

36 minutes ago, Thalestris24 said:

Thanks! I don't know - what was I thinking!?!

So I also take photos through microscopes plus some macrophotography

Louise

Will you please stop throwing all those long words about, it sends me rushing to Google all in a tither! 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Moonshed

[ecuador]

1 minute ago, ShaunyC said:

My house is a corner plot with 2 great stonking street light which is sure to spoil any sort of a view where as out said window the bee to the left is quite dark over some fields.. 

I wrote a complaint to my local council and explained what I do and that the street light at the corner of the backyard is such a problem and they replaced it with one that limits the light angle to not disturb me as much. It depends on the council, so YMMV.

[Thalestris24]

2 minutes ago, Moonshed said:

Will you please stop throwing all those long words about, it sends me to Google all in a tither! 

Well, I like to help educate!

Louise

[M40]

Hang on, something is not right here...... my son lives in Glasgow, do you think he and the grandson are winding me up saying they have clear night skies whilst its raining down here?  

Can I suggest Shaun that when you buy the book, making every proton count, you also get a planisphere, just so you can see what exactly would be in your field of view which may help decide which way to turn.

Enjoy

[Tomatobro]

If its an upstairs room which has wooden joists then as you move about in the room the floor will flex and the object on the sensor will be lost.

I know as I have tried it. Its a nightmare. You stand next to the mount, centre the object, walk to the laptop and is gone

[Thalestris24]

21 minutes ago, Tomatobro said:

If its an upstairs room which has wooden joists then as you move about in the room the floor will flex and the object on the sensor will be lost.

I know as I have tried it. Its a nightmare. You stand next to the mount, centre the object, walk to the laptop and is gone

Or - you can centre it using platesolving and not need to go anywhere near the mount

Louise

[Thalestris24]

30 minutes ago, M40 said:

Hang on, something is not right here...... my son lives in Glasgow, do you think he and the grandson are winding me up saying they have clear night skies whilst its raining down here?  

Can I suggest Shaun that when you buy the book, making every proton count, you also get a planisphere, just so you can see what exactly would be in your field of view which may help decide which way to turn.

Enjoy

Probably is winding you up! Although, to be fair, there sometimes are clear skies but that doesn't necessarily mean clear enough for imaging. The transparency here is often poor. Also, Glasgow is a biggish place. I can imagine there are parts of Glasgow that maybe has clearer skies more often than I do. 
Planisphere? Stellarium is the best thing since sliced bread!

Louise

[Moonshed]

Shaun

It is clear from your replies that you are determined, for whatever personal reasons, to start observing from your house through a window regardless of the many problems that will create and you have been advised of. We live in a free country so you can do whatever you like as long as it is within the law.

Don’t say we didn’t warn you though!

Good luck and I really hope it works out for you.

[ShaunyC]

I do really apreciate all the comments and yes I will prob go ahead with this idea.... I imagine I will realise all what you all have said before long and will quite happily take "the told you so's" 🙄

I use stallerium quite alot on my phone, not heard of plainsphere.. But can't say I've sussed out how to use it to see field of views? Will have a play... 

Platesolving sounds like the mount is going to cost alot more?

After watching this video..

I've had a change of heart what equipment to buy 1st.. 

And I believe it was mentioned earlier, sorry for knocking the idea M40.. 

As I need everything... I'm going to concentrate on dlsr/lens and laptop 1st...  Which I will need anyway and it will give me some experience at stacking and processing.. Also will give me some time to see what I can fabricate to get the rig out the window and off the floor.. 

[Thalestris24]

Hi Shaun

Yeah, you can take astro photos with just a camera and a short lens on a tripod but, in my opinion, it's a bit meh. If I were to try and do it here in Glasgow I'd get nothing! I have too much LP/skyglow to pick up anything but bright stars and planets with a few seconds exposure. You may be luckier! If you think about it, if you do 200 exposures of 2s each, that's 400s = 6min 40s total. That's not very much for all that shutter clacking! Anyway, you should download the proper Stellarium to a laptop/pc. Platesolving software is free but you do need a goto mount with a computer interface to make use of it.

Have fun with the camera and tripod

Louise

 

 

[malc-c]

16 minutes ago, ShaunyC said:

I do really apreciate all the comments and yes I will prob go ahead with this idea.... I imagine I will realise all what you all have said before long and will quite happily take "the told you so's" 🙄

 

Well that's your prerogative.  You don't have to take people's advice, and often it's a case of trying things for yourself and then learn from your own experience.  If it works, and you don't mind being restricted to the limitations discussed here then that's fine.  Personally I would find having to stay up until 4am because that is when a target passes the window, and then only being able to get a couple of hours worth of data before it's no longer in view, or waiting until February to image at more social hours  would frustrate me.

[malc-c]

29 minutes ago, ShaunyC said:

I do really apreciate all the comments and yes I will prob go ahead with this idea.... I imagine I will realise all what you all have said before long and will quite happily take "the told you so's" 🙄

I use stallerium quite alot on my phone, not heard of plainsphere.. But can't say I've sussed out how to use it to see field of views? Will have a play... 

Platesolving sounds like the mount is going to cost alot more?

 

The problem is that people often see images like this one of Mars, taken by a fellow Letchworth and District AS member, Simon Kidd and then want to get the same but then get shocked at the cost of the equipment needed

 

Look back through similar posts where people want to get into imaging and you will see that most recommended setups are four figures minimum... It's normally something like a 200P or 4" apro on an HEQ5 or EQ6, guide scopes with dedicated guide cameras, and fully computer controlled to automate the process, and that's before adding the cost of a camera.  Granted people have managed to get acceptable results form lower spec equipment, but often its after a lot of fuffing around.  More often the results are disappointing because of the limitations of the equipment used.  The reason an HEQ5 costs almost a grand is due to the greater precision over the EQ5, the greater load capacity and the fact that it's designed for imaging use.

The bottom line is that if you want to get decent results without the hassle then you have to invest in decent capable equipment.  And yes I'm speaking from experience.  I purchased a 200P on a goto EQ5, with a view to bolting on a DSLR camera to do some imaging.  It soon became clear that  its tracking was not precise enough even with good polar alignment, and a guide scope would be  needed.  But the mount was already on its weight limit....so I purchased an HEQ5 with an ST80 and GHY5... even second hand I still lost money compared to buying the HEQ5 / 200P  in the first place, even after selling the EQ5.  Inspired by the images Simon gets with his 14" scope I tried stacking barlows to get the high magnification, and even on Jupiter which is a lot larger than Mars, the results were very disappointing... it proved that my rig wasn't set up to get seriously details planetary images.  It does however get me nice images of DSO's

 

 

A decent camera lens fitted to one of the new £350 tracking heads such as the Star Adventure (provided the combined weight doesn't exceed the payload capacity will also give you some nice wide field views of constellations and bright DSO's.  You won't get much in the way of planetary images other than the moon and the sun (with decent solar filters).

  

 

Anyway... Not really sure why I've just spent another 30 minutes typing up this post.... considering you've made your mind up....and most of what I've suggested is probably not what you were hoping to pay.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do, but as the Dragons say " I'm out !" 

 

[M40]

8 hours ago, ShaunyC said:

And I believe it was mentioned earlier, sorry for knocking the idea M40.. 

Definitely not a worry Shaun, it's all about idea's and options and let's face it, if it doesn't work, you have a camera and a laptop 👍

Most things for me are a massive learning curve also, so I am stalking these guy's as they started with a basic setup, have a look through this topic ...

 

13 hours ago, Thalestris24 said:

Planisphere? Stellarium is the best thing since sliced bread!

Louise

Talking about learning curves..... I used the planisphere because I didn't realise that stallerium could go fast forward...... until this morning when I actually looked at the thing properly 🤦‍♂️😎, so Shaun, when you get your laptop...download Stallerium 🤣

Edited December 4, 2020 by M40
spelling

[Starwatcher2001]

I've been a visual observer for over 20 years and am now working my way through "Making Every Photon Count". I'm only half way through, but this superb book has already saved me thousands of pounds and countless hours.

I've realised that the learning curve and patience required is much, much bigger than I'm willing to undertake. Although getting into astro-photography is big lure, but I'll be sticking to visual where I can be up and running in 15 minutes, enjoying the skies (on the odd occasion it's not cloudy).

I'm even more in awe of those who develop such skills and can't imagine the additional frustration of all the extra hurdles you'll have to overcome to do it successfully from your bedroom. I sincerely wish you good luck.

 

[gilesco]

3 minutes ago, Starwatcher2001 said:

I've realised that the learning curve and patience required is much, much bigger than I'm willing to undertake. Although getting into astro-photography is big lure, but I'll be sticking to visual where I can be up and running in 15 minutes, enjoying the skies (on the odd occasion it's not cloudy).

I'm even more in awe of those who develop such skills and can't imagine the additional frustration of all the extra hurdles you'll have to overcome to do it successfully from your bedroom. I sincerely wish you good luck.

Hmm... you really don't have to take imaging up as something ultra-serious. Sure you can get extremely complicated set ups and they deliver really good results, but even I started by holding up my smartphone's camera up to an eyepiece to get a picture of the moon, I even managed a star cluster with that method, and pictures of some smudges, which might be galaxies.

Then, yes, I admit I started to  get a bit more complicated, and I started on a slow journey (still on it now), but I don't have to go at any fast pace, can always switch the camera train for an eyepiece and vice-versa in 5 minutes or so.

[Starwatcher2001]

Yeah, I do the camera/phone thing, but I know that if I started on the AP route I'd want to go all the way and that would certainly suck up more time and patience than I have.

[Tiny Clanger]

11 hours ago, malc-c said:

The problem is that people often see images like this one of Mars, taken by a fellow Letchworth and District AS member, Simon Kidd and then want to get the same but then get shocked at the cost of the equipment needed

 

Look back through similar posts where people want to get into imaging and you will see that most recommended setups are four figures minimum... It's normally something like a 200P or 4" apro on an HEQ5 or EQ6, guide scopes with dedicated guide cameras, and fully computer controlled to automate the process, and that's before adding the cost of a camera.  Granted people have managed to get acceptable results form lower spec equipment, but often its after a lot of fuffing around.  More often the results are disappointing because of the limitations of the equipment used.  The reason an HEQ5 costs almost a grand is due to the greater precision over the EQ5, the greater load capacity and the fact that it's designed for imaging use.

The bottom line is that if you want to get decent results without the hassle then you have to invest in decent capable equipment.  And yes I'm speaking from experience.  I purchased a 200P on a goto EQ5, with a view to bolting on a DSLR camera to do some imaging.  It soon became clear that  its tracking was not precise enough even with good polar alignment, and a guide scope would be  needed.  But the mount was already on its weight limit....so I purchased an HEQ5 with an ST80 and GHY5... even second hand I still lost money compared to buying the HEQ5 / 200P  in the first place, even after selling the EQ5.  Inspired by the images Simon gets with his 14" scope I tried stacking barlows to get the high magnification, and even on Jupiter which is a lot larger than Mars, the results were very disappointing... it proved that my rig wasn't set up to get seriously details planetary images.  It does however get me nice images of DSO's

 

 

A decent camera lens fitted to one of the new £350 tracking heads such as the Star Adventure (provided the combined weight doesn't exceed the payload capacity will also give you some nice wide field views of constellations and bright DSO's.  You won't get much in the way of planetary images other than the moon and the sun (with decent solar filters).

  

 

Anyway... Not really sure why I've just spent another 30 minutes typing up this post.... considering you've made your mind up....and most of what I've suggested is probably not what you were hoping to pay.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do, but as the Dragons say " I'm out !" 

 

I mentally went through a very similar course to malc-c. when considering astronomical photography.  I may be a relative beginner (have owned my first proper scope for only 6 months) but have the starting position that astronomy was part of my degree course (long ago), and been a serious photographer for over 30 years, worked as a full time professional photographer for a decade too. So I'm familiar with optics, cameras, lenses, photo software etc. as well as the basics of astronomy. I already have DSLRs , hefty tripods, an intervalometer and a laptop which I reserve solely for imaging use. But ...many hours of investigation showed me that to get, set up,  and maintain the extra kit I'd need for a rig to do astro photo properly I'd have to sell my house to afford it. I read up on other folk's attempts and learned from them, so I didn't need to repeat their missteps and frustrations.

I got hooked on visual astronomy for an initial cost of just £200 though, and that's enough of an obsession for now. I can stick a Nikon awkwardly on a telescope and take a souvenir snap of the moon when I feel like it, or do some landscape pics of a comet with a camera lens and stack them to get a vaguely acceptable image ,and that's enough for now. I might buy a star adventurer at some point in the future to park a DSLR on top of, but that is as far as I expect to go .

Yes, I'm out too !

Edited December 4, 2020 by Tiny Clanger

[GlenM]

Hi Shaun,

 

Thinking about something similar myself. I think the main thing is to enjoy what you're doing. I do agree about the the difficulties that have been mentioned. Just enjoy what you're doing.

 

Stay safe,

Glen.

 

[Thalestris24]

 

Shaun: Well, from getting on for 6 years experience at imaging from my flat I can say I've mostly enjoyed it even though the limited view of the sky is frustrating. But, there again, perhaps not as frustrating as the lack of clear skies, the poor forecasts and the changeability of the weather here! I think if I were starting again but was still confined to the flat, then I wouldn't have bought all the scopes that I now have. Instead I'd maybe just get an EQ5 Pro goto (need a PC interface cable) and image with a dslr (or mirrorless) and lens - a 200mm one is quite good. Ok, it's not that much more for an HEQ5 Pro which is the much better mount but isn't necessary for short focal length setups - it would be overkill for a camera and lens. At the moment I have a Pentax67 format 300mm lens mounted on an eq3 pro and with a qhy miniguider. The lens does produce unwanted reflections so is probably not the best lens for astro but I got it cheap off Ebay! Anyway, the whole business of imaging is much more forgiving at short focal lengths! An astro modified dslr is best, or one that has a good response to Ha in the red (if you want to pick up the red nebulas). Some dslrs do, others not so much. It's a good idea to do research and due diligence before parting with any money on astro-related equipment! It adds to the cost but nowadays you can get dual band narrowband filters designed to pick up Ha (red) and Oiii (green) when using a colour camera. Disclaimer: I've not tried one myself but I've read some favourable reports   - there are a number of brands - Optolong, ZWO, Baader, IDAS etc.

Even with only a 200mm lens you may still benefit from guiding. A mini-guide scope, and guide camera add a fair bit to costs but, on the plus side, you could do without for as long as you can get away with it. You can certainly do without if you can keep to short exposures e.g. 30s - 1min, or so. I've improved my ability to point higher in the sky by either fitting shorter legs to a tripod or by using a shortish pedestal mount.

Here's an image I took some years ago with a dslr and a 200mm F4 vintage Pentax Takumar lens (It was a 'monofied' and cooled Canon 550d). I think I must have had a Ha narrowband filter on the front of the lens. I would have used platesolving to centre on a selected star so as to get all 3 main components (M35, Monkey Head and Jellyfish nebula) of interest in frame. This image is probably cropped, and also resized to make it smaller  

It's just to show that you don't need an actual telescope in order to take ok/interesting astro images. You just need a good tracking mount and a reasonable quality camera - and those elusive clear skies, of course!

Louise