retired plus newbie

[2stroke (Jay)]

Originally Posted by rolls05

Thanks Brent.some good info. I understand about the refractor. So I wont go there.But you peak my interest with mention of your "newt". Since I will be getting a mount I should stretch the funds a little more and get something I can use for general viewing as well as photography. Are you saying ,I can buy a 6 inch newt ota which I see on one of the scope retail sites for a little over $300 and it will be fine for some deep sky photography. If thats the case my budget could stretch to that. and that lot would do me for a while. Thanks again.

If its a low f ratio you will need a coma corrector, also it has to have enough back focus to get focus. Then your going to need a mount with tracking other wise its star trails

If i was in your shoes i would try and get a used ED80 and a eq5 mount, but even then its funny how things add up, its just one big money pit You should goto a local club and have a go using there gear first before jumping into things, this is one hobby where cheaply doesn't apply and before long your selling your car to get to pay back those credit cards Strange enough its the small odds and ends that add up the most I would first get into learning the sky though, because without knowing your way around life is going to be hell even with a goto mount. Best of luck to you and your new found hobby and welcoe to IIS

[ZeroID (Brent)]

As Jay said, astrophotog is a money pit and easy to go in the wrong direction. My 4.5" is an f8, about 900 mm long. I have used it with a webcam to get avi's of the moon and planets but would have to make major mods to the focusser to fit a 2" focusser for a DSLR adapter. But it would not need a coma corrector although tracking would be critical. So the problems mount and change depending on how you approach the situation.
Although the webcam system is now a bit old hat for good pix it is worth having a go because it is relatively cheap and most modern webcams are pretty good. Also as you run it as an AVI movie then you get to play with Registax to make better pictures from the accumulated frames and tracking is not super critical especially on the moon.

[rolls05 (Roland)]

Thanks fellas. A bit to mull over. I'll amuse myself shooting some wide fields for now. Already doing the odd multi shots and stacking. Good fun. I noticed after processing a Crux image there was a patch of red just along from the bottom star(acrux?) I had read a tutorial on using photoshop to process an image. Histograms and how to stretch an image and suchlike. So I had a go with my image and hello, there's this big red thing there looking quite lovely. Have since found it to be eta carena. I never new that was there. Got me quite exited I can tell you. Think I'm getting hooked. Thanks for your help and patience.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

Originally Posted by rolls05

Thanks fellas. A bit to mull over. I'll amuse myself shooting some wide fields for now. Already doing the odd multi shots and stacking. Good fun. I noticed after processing a Crux image there was a patch of red just along from the bottom star(acrux?) I had read a tutorial on using photoshop to process an image. Histograms and how to stretch an image and suchlike. So I had a go with my image and hello, there's this big red thing there looking quite lovely. Have since found it to be eta carena. I never new that was there. Got me quite exited I can tell you. Think I'm getting hooked. Thanks for your help and patience.

Cool !! you're getting the hang of it. Nice when you start to 'find' things you didn't even know existed. Whets your appetite to start really hunting round.
Stick with the wide field while you suss out your options. I rolled for about 18 months before I settled on a path and that is still flexible.
Just posted a moon shot in the imaging section. Full pic at http://www.astrobin.com/16065/ if you want to see it.

[rolls05 (Roland)]

Man, nice depth. just enough sharpen as well. I see too many people go overboard. So you are saying you tossed in pictures of different shutter speeds . Interesting. I cant get that sort of mag. as yet but I might have to drag out the old panasonic 24x point and shoot. lol. Very nice.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

Thanks, there is a fine balance between detail and exposure with the moon, sometimes I come close. The assortment of shutter speeds captures different areas of contrast. I actually should have been at about 200 ISO but rain clouds were coming ( arrived about 30 minutes later ) and I just wanted some images to play with while the weather turned to custard and I forgot to check everything. DOH !!

I am looking to go with a modified webcam for moon pix, more frames faster to beat the seeing. Hopefully get more detail that way.

[rolls05 (Roland)]

Would there be anything stopping me using the canon video? A scope would be needed I guess, although the 300mm lens might do, do you think? No, cancel that. I found an old panasonic point and shoot pic I took of the moon one morning at 24x. The 35mm equivalent zoom is about 600mm so obviously 300mm wont cut the mustard. Still I'll put the pic up so I can say I've posted something. Cheers.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

Roland, give anything a go, that's my advice. Sometimes the simple solutions or attempts can yeild surprising results and often will highlight techniques or points to watch out for in future tries. I am just buying another better Web Cam that theoretically is now a bit old hat but will let me experiment with another option. Will it do better ? I don't know but I will learn some more from the exercise.
If it's cheap and easy (and fun) then have a go I say.

EDIT: Not a bad moon shot either I have to say. Try afocal through the lens of the scope.