A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 24th 19, 05:43 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Paul Schlyter[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,343
Default All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI cameras to produce this:

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:26:17 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 January 2019 06:03:47 UTC-5, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:40:13 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
I've never been a huge fan of wide-field shots, I prefer shots

of
individual
objects.


Do you consider the Milky Way an individual
object? If not, then what about M31?


Big swath Milky Way shots have never interested me. M31 is an

exception to the deepsky rule, they can trace it to over 5 degrees,
but not many other objects approach that size.

The Milky Way does. But that means you're not
Interested in details in your objects. If M31 was,
say, four times closer you'd lose interest in it too.
Ads
  #12  
Old January 24th 19, 10:08 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,462
Default All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI

On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 12:43:38 AM UTC-5, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:26:17 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 January 2019 06:03:47 UTC-5, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:40:13 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
I've never been a huge fan of wide-field shots, I prefer shots

of
individual
objects.

Do you consider the Milky Way an individual
object? If not, then what about M31?


Big swath Milky Way shots have never interested me. M31 is an

exception to the deepsky rule, they can trace it to over 5 degrees,
but not many other objects approach that size.

The Milky Way does. But that means you're not
Interested in details in your objects.


It would seem that individual objects would call for longer focal lengths and therefore more detail.

If M31 was,
say, four times closer you'd lose interest in it too.


You seem to have amazing mind-reading abilities there, dude.

I'll not speculate on how Rich might react to a 4x closer M31, but I'd say that (for me) the M31 globs would be a must-see.
  #13  
Old February 16th 19, 09:35 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
corvastro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI

On Wednesday, January 23, 2019 at 9:43:38 PM UTC-8, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:26:17 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 January 2019 06:03:47 UTC-5, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:40:13 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
I've never been a huge fan of wide-field shots, I prefer shots

of
individual
objects.

Do you consider the Milky Way an individual
object? If not, then what about M31?


Big swath Milky Way shots have never interested me. M31 is an

exception to the deepsky rule, they can trace it to over 5 degrees,
but not many other objects approach that size.

The Milky Way does. But that means you're not
Interested in details in your objects. If M31 was,
say, four times closer you'd lose interest in it too.


If M31 were 4 times closer, it would be a spectacular view in a moderate aperture telescope at about 75x and an eyepiece with about a 1/2 degree field of view.
  #14  
Old February 18th 19, 01:24 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Paul Schlyter[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,343
Default All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI cameras to produce this:

On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 01:35:00 -0800 (PST), corvastro
wrote:
If M31 were 4 times closer, it would be a spectacular view in a

moderate aperture telescope at about 75x and an eyepiece with about a
1/2 degree field of view.

FYI: the apparent length of M31 in our sky is some 3 degrees. If it
was 4 times closer it would appear 12 degrees across. A field of view
of just 1/2 degree would then only show a small part of it.
  #15  
Old February 18th 19, 01:49 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,462
Default All you need is $100,000 worth of Astro-Physics gear and SBIG/FLI

On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 8:24:36 AM UTC-5, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 01:35:00 -0800 (PST), corvastro
wrote:
If M31 were 4 times closer, it would be a spectacular view in a

moderate aperture telescope at about 75x and an eyepiece with about a
1/2 degree field of view.

FYI: the apparent length of M31 in our sky is some 3 degrees. If it
was 4 times closer it would appear 12 degrees across. A field of view
of just 1/2 degree would then only show a small part of it.


So? The details in M31 would be more apparent in any given telescope, binocular or camera.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ASTRO: A note for those using SBIG STL series cameras Rick Johnson[_2_] Astro Pictures 5 September 18th 07 03:25 PM
ASTRO: news from SBIG Richard Crisp[_1_] Astro Pictures 6 July 4th 07 05:51 PM
SBIG 2000XCM -> SBIG 2000XM is this possible? Pete Milligan CCD Imaging 2 May 5th 05 08:08 AM
Astro gear pricing Doink Amateur Astronomy 12 April 25th 05 01:40 PM
Lens Cloths on Astro Gear? Fleemo Amateur Astronomy 6 August 25th 04 07:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.