The bestest telescope for lunar photography

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by bkm2304

I am wondering if I need to get the mirror looked at although I am told that it was made as one of the last mirrors by Galaxy that was significantly hand - finished or figured(?).

The exploration of alternatives was a result of thinking that the short reflector was "too big" for planetary work as some have said over the years. But I think not.

Your biggest issue with that rig would probably be the 2" thick mirror which would make it unlikely that you are keeping the core down to 1 degree or so delta to ambient during the night unless you has some pretty slick thermal management . You'd be better suited with a smaller aperture and thinner glass . It also depends on the absolute seeing at the site you are using and this gets a bit lost these days amongst the wonders of digital processing .

When i used to work at CSIRO Applied Physics they had an interferometer setup for testing sky conditions by Sydney Uni as a precurser to the SUZI stellar interferometer and they found the average nightly seeing on the hill aligning with a 150mm aperture at the Lindfield site, so you can't assume you have great seeing where your observatory is located . Having a smaller portable telescope will allow you to more easily find a site with good seeing .

I have a pretty sound testing here and you are not too far away - if you ever want some thorough bench testing of your mirror just PM me .

[Wavytone]

Lo and behold here's the scope for you http://www.astromart.com/classifieds...fied_id=920864

[PeterAnderson (Peter)]

Having a lot of experience and grey hairs means two things, continuing to make a lot of mistakes and having grey hairs!
Having said that I will weigh in. The top lunar/planetary imagers often use C14's, the regular model. I won't rave on, but just give one example, Damien Peach.(Check out his website.) This is where they often operate in collaboration with professionals. So you don't need a gazillion dollars and really special equipment. What you do need are very steady conditions that are hard to come by, and video imaging technique where you grab and stack the best frames.

As a Neanderthal, I have attached a camera to the C14 with 2 X televerter and got some 'happy snaps' but as single images, they still have that 'softness' to them. Now Damien Peach has a lovely image of the central crack running down the Alpine Valley....wow! To see it alone is an achievement, but to image it as well.... Okay he does take his scope to Barbados annually for imaging in the wonderfully steady conditions.

And so it is not only the size of your scope, but what you do with it. Damien was using a C9.25 some years ago and got remarkable results also.

[bkm2304 (Richard Brown)]

Originally Posted by PeterAnderson

Having a lot of experience and grey hairs means two things, continuing to make a lot of mistakes and having grey hairs!
Having said that I will weigh in. The top lunar/planetary imagers often use C14's, the regular model. I won't rave on, but just give one example, Damien Peach.(Check out his website.) This is where they often operate in collaboration with professionals. So you don't need a gazillion dollars and really special equipment. What you do need are very steady conditions that are hard to come by, and video imaging technique where you grab and stack the best frames.

As a Neanderthal, I have attached a camera to the C14 with 2 X televerter and got some 'happy snaps' but as single images, they still have that 'softness' to them. Now Damien Peach has a lovely image of the central crack running down the Alpine Valley....wow! To see it alone is an achievement, but to image it as well.... Okay he does take his scope to Barbados annually for imaging in the wonderfully steady conditions.

And so it is not only the size of your scope, but what you do with it. Damien was using a C9.25 some years ago and got remarkable results also.

Hi Peter,

All very true comments! I do indeed use stacking techniques, collecting up to 6,000 frames and selecting a precious few for stacking and processing. My real interest is to attempt to get in as close as possible. This of course relates to resolution which in turn, of course relates to optical diameter, be it reflecting surface or glass lens. Satchmo has pointed out that well - tuned, fast reflectors with excellent thermal control are the instrument of choice for imagers such as Anthony "Bird Strike" Wesley and our own fearless leader, Mike "Iceman" Salway, whose lunar images rival anyone including Mr Peach.

My goal in all this is actually to get in even closer and cleaner than imagers with C14's and the like can do. Theoretically this is possible and so I should, using a 22" Newtonian under the right conditions of technical prep and seeing, be able to get high quality images. However this is a great effort to achieve and my results thus far over the years have been "OKish" only.

The next "Giant Leap" will be to start a project that will squeeze the very best out of my equipment and work under the conditions that I have here in Clarence Town - great dark sky but only rare times of very good seeing - although there have been nights here when the seeing has been superb and steady and limiting mags of close to 6 have been seen.

So, this is the project! Thanks to all who have contributed to help me understand what it is, exactly, that I am trying to do!

Richard