Best camera *platform* for moon pictures?

"Mark" wrote

Dave -

A perfectly workable solution, but when you want to do things like
photograph the very old or very new moon or capture earthshine, you
need longer exposures. I really like the direct connection between the
lens and eyepiece using an appropriatelysized tube. The very thick
(maybe 1/4" cardboard) tube I found is ideal because it flexes slightly
under the pressure of the hose clamps to secure everything tightly but
still holds it all in perfect alignment.

Mark, your cardboard tube arrangement also helps keep out any stray light
coming in from the sides.

http://www.lumicon.com/digicam.htm

After further review, it looks like Lumicon's adapter attaches to the
eyepiece, not the focuser! At first, it sure looked like it attaches to the
focuser. What is the little plate, with an apparent screw hole, at the
mount's bottom for? Good grief.

Maybe, especially if you're having mechanical problems as you described, but I
never had those problems, probably because the small size of most digital camera
lenses protects them from the eyepiece.

My problem was focusing. I found it harder to achieve sharp focuses when I had
to focus the eyepiece, remove it, screw on the camera through an adapter after
focusing the camera at infinity, and then putting the entire assemble back onto
to telescope. At least with the old fashioned method, I knew the eyepiece and
camera were both in focus, and nothing was removed from the optical train and
returned in place. Strange, but true.
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Howard Lester" wrote in message
...
"David Nakamoto" wrote

The best working cheapest mount is you, if the object is simply the Moon
or Sun.
Simply hold the camera right up to the eyepiece, taking care not to
scratch the
camera lens against the latter. I had used an attachment fixing my
digital
camera to selected eyepieces directly, but I found the old hold it up
there and
shoot technique to be the best. And it didn't cost a cent to implement.
With
exposure times of one thousandth of a second or so, there's no problem
using
this technique.

Hi Dave,

I did successfully use this method, but I had trouble being sure the plane
of the camera was perfectly parallel to the plane of the eyepiece. Also, it
wasn't easy finding the moon's image on the LCD screen. Any movement side to
side vignetted the image, even when the moon was centered in the eyepiece.
(I shot at 56x through a Panoptic 22 and got a very nice image -- one out of
about eight.) This is why I thought a more 'permanent' solution would give
more consistent results. ?

Howard

Judging by the photo's Norbert posted a few hours after you asked this
question ("Some new pictures" at 12:21 PM), I think I'd have to say that
the best camera platform for moon pictures is to mount a Toucam Pro to
a C8 and stack the images in registax. I don't know if I've ever seen
better results taken by a standard digital camera unless the aperture
was much, much bigger.

Just my .02.

Chris

Howard Lester wrote:
ScopeTronix, Orion, and Lumicon offer devices that clamp to the telescope
and have a little platform onto which the camera is mounted. The first two
clamp to the eyepiece, but eyepieces vary considerably in height and
diameter, possibly limiting their clamping ability... The Lumicon one clamps
to the focusing tube. Does anyone have an opinion on which would work best?
My little Nikon 3200 weighs about 9 ounces with the batteries.

Howard Lester

"starburst" wrote

Judging by the photo's Norbert posted a few hours after you asked this
question ("Some new pictures" at 12:21 PM), I think I'd have to say that
the best camera platform for moon pictures is to mount a Toucam Pro to
a C8 and stack the images in registax. I don't know if I've ever seen
better results taken by a standard digital camera unless the aperture
was much, much bigger.

Thanks for the tips. Please send $1995.00 in check or money order to my
address below so that I may obtain the above referenced equipment. For your
advice, I'll send you a free 8x10 color glossy photo, complete with pictures
and arrows on the back, describing what each feature is.

Nahhh... I'll stick to a basic platform behind the eyepiece.

Howard Lester
Anytown, USA

Thanks for the tips. Please send $1995.00 in check or money order to my
address below so that I may obtain the above referenced equipment. For your
advice, I'll send you a free 8x10 color glossy photo, complete with pictures
and arrows on the back, describing what each feature is.

Nahhh... I'll stick to a basic platform behind the eyepiece.


GIGGLE!

My point, sonny... oh jeez I'm laughing as I type this... my point,
ahem, is that the Toucam is pretty cheap, maybe as cheap as a
commercially made camera coupling. The adapter costs about 20 bucks. And
the images you get are awfully nice. Just something to think about
before moving ahead.

And for some reason I thought you had a C8...

Thanks for the chuckle - Chris

"starburst" wrote

Thanks for the tips. Please send $1995.00 in check or money order to my
address below so that I may obtain the above referenced equipment. For
your
advice, I'll send you a free 8x10 color glossy photo, complete with
pictures
and arrows on the back, describing what each feature is.

Nahhh... I'll stick to a basic platform behind the eyepiece.


GIGGLE!

My point, sonny... oh jeez I'm laughing as I type this... my point,
ahem, is that the Toucam is pretty cheap, maybe as cheap as a
commercially made camera coupling. The adapter costs about 20 bucks. And
the images you get are awfully nice. Just something to think about
before moving ahead.

And for some reason I thought you had a C8...

Thanks for the chuckle - Chris

Yer welcome! No, I don't have a C8. I have an 8" Spoonerscope dob and an
Orion ED80. That'll do me fine for now. As for Toucam, do I need a large
cage for it? What do I feed it? Is it noisy? Oh, wait -- that's a Toucan....
Never mind!

Howard

Howard, I was in the same boat for a while, doing the handheld, which
worked okay (heck, I even used a PalmPix, the old Kodak attachment to a
Palm, and got some decent shots).

Everything I read from users suggested staying away from any device or
"platform" that required you to manually line it up with the
eyepiece--just doesn't work that well (same problem as trying
handheld--getting it lined up right and focal plane set well).

I settled on the Scopetronix attachment, which mates the camera directly
to the eyepiece. Works incredibly well, costs up to $90 or so depending
on camera. I did discover that the first one I got (for a Kodak DX3900)
included the standard Kodak adapter for lenses, so one could save some
money by assembling things (adapter from camera company, Digi-T ring
from Scopetronix). Note also that the Digi-T system works with only
certain eyepieces... e.g., generic Plossls, and not with such "beasts"
as Pentaxes and Panoptics.

Nikons are special... or at least many are, having 28mm lens screw and
thereby taking some cheaper Scopetronix solutions.

With the Scopetronix and an 8" dob, I got some wonderful Mars pics at
the last opposition. Now, focusing is still a bear, so there is still a
large % of throwaways. If you have other questions ask away. The
yahoo digital astro group is also very helpful.

Larry Stedman
Vestal

Bill, as to your NexStar, is it the original kind, not the 5i?

I found that the 5i out of the box did 8-12 seconds no problems, even
longer once one realign on the object in question.

My NexStar 80 also is capable of up 16 second star cluster shots, just
takes making sure that the altitude bolt is tight, alignment is done
carefully, and one gets lucky with tracking in certain parts of the sky.

So, I'm guessing that you could get longer tracking out of your
Celestron 5, and hence go after DSOs even with a digicam, but maybe
that's just idle speculation! (Or does your web cam get you DSOs?)

The nexstar group on yahoo could provide you with some help. Of course,
if you tried all the standard tips on improving tracking (see e.g., the
nexstarsite), then as Gilda used to say, "Never mind!"

Larry Stedman
Vestal

"Larry Stedman" wrote

I settled on the Scopetronix attachment, which mates the camera directly
to the eyepiece. Works incredibly well, costs up to $90 or so depending
on camera. I did discover that the first one I got (for a Kodak DX3900)
included the standard Kodak adapter for lenses,

Thanks, Larry, but my Nikon 3200 lens is not threaded, so as far as I can
tell there are no real adapters for it. Even if there was some adapter that
screwed onto the outside of the camera lens barrel, the lens retracts after
about 60 seconds of non-use, and... ouch!