Observing in shorts

Still quite warm so I was able to observe in shorts and a sweatshirt
last night. Had to get a coat at 2am because it did start getting
chilly though.

The serious side of this is the fact that because it's still
relatively warm my camera never really got cold enough to keep the
noise under control. Still it was a beautiful evening...

Here's a processed shot of the Pleiades from last night...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/2004-09/M45-20040919.jpg

Bring on the frost ;-)

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project

Pete,

Now there is a sobering thought, Pete in shorts and a jacket
Flashers anonymous???

I actually got a konus motormax 90 on an EQ1 the other weekend
(instead of the bc&f camera mount). I took an entire roll of film on
Saturday night at varying FL's mostly of milkyway constellations.

Although the so called "motordrive" did work i found it more reliable
to turn the RA wheel of the mount by hand. Put the film in this morning
and will pick it up at lunch???

Hope to see some nice pics, surely must get 1 decent one out of 25??

Rob


"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
Still quite warm so I was able to observe in shorts and a sweatshirt
last night. Had to get a coat at 2am because it did start getting
chilly though.

The serious side of this is the fact that because it's still
relatively warm my camera never really got cold enough to keep the
noise under control. Still it was a beautiful evening...

Here's a processed shot of the Pleiades from last night...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/2004-09/M45-20040919.jpg

Bring on the frost ;-)

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:12:35 +0100, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Still quite warm so I was able to observe in shorts and a sweatshirt
last night.
Here's a processed shot of the Pleiades from last night...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/2004-09/M45-20040919.jpg

Pete

Nice one Pete - I had to get my calculator to make that a 45m
exposure. Do you know whether the D10 has a similar response to fast
film?

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 09:20:55 GMT, (Maurice Gavin)
wrote:

Still quite warm so I was able to observe in shorts and a sweatshirt
last night.
Here's a processed shot of the Pleiades from last night...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/2004-09/M45-20040919.jpg

Nice one Pete - I had to get my calculator to make that a 45m
exposure. Do you know whether the D10 has a similar response to fast
film?

Thanks Maurice.

To be honest I don't have a clue as to the equivalence of digital
'film' vs analogue film. I was always useless at analogue
astrophotography and didn't really have the patience for the
development cycle.

I would think that it's quite a hard equivalence to determine as the
digital side goes through quite a lot of processing steps. I enjoy
playing with the process and a lot of my day hours can easily be
absorbed experimenting.

My longest expsoure in the build was 8mins. That's 8mins unguided as
well (well done trusty old GP-DX mount!). The stars are not perfect
but it's also sobering to remember that (as usual) Selsey was being
wind-blasted at the time ;-) Anyway, back to the 8mins (apologies if
I'm rambling - I've just pulled a non-astro all-nighter for work and
feel a bit spaced!), it would be interesting to compare like for like
if anyone has an ISO1600 8mins film shot of the Pleiades. Or, for
that matter one that matches one of the other exposure times.

If someone has a shot that's 480s, 300s, 120s or 90s and can scan it
and put a small version up on the web, I'll gladly put up my
unprocessed equivalent frames.

BTW be careful - it's the 10D not the D10. You'll have the Canonites
fighting with the Nikonites before you know it ;-)

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:16:33 +0100, "Robert Geake"
wrote:

Now there is a sobering thought, Pete in shorts and a jacket
Flashers anonymous???

Be thankful I was wearing shorts ;-)

I actually got a konus motormax 90 on an EQ1 the other weekend
(instead of the bc&f camera mount). I took an entire roll of film on
Saturday night at varying FL's mostly of milkyway constellations.

Although the so called "motordrive" did work i found it more reliable
to turn the RA wheel of the mount by hand. Put the film in this morning
and will pick it up at lunch???

Hope to see some nice pics, surely must get 1 decent one out of 25??

Keep us posted Rob.

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Home of the Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project

Pete Lawrence wrote:

BTW be careful - it's the 10D not the D10. You'll have the Canonites
fighting with the Nikonites before you know it ;-)

As I have a Nikon film camera with AF lenses the Nikon digital SLR
seems a more attractive option. Is it better/worse? I'm only dreaming
but I like my dreams to be real...

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:19:29 +0100, Martin Frey
wrote:

Pete Lawrence wrote:

BTW be careful - it's the 10D not the D10. You'll have the Canonites
fighting with the Nikonites before you know it ;-)

As I have a Nikon film camera with AF lenses the Nikon digital SLR
seems a more attractive option. Is it better/worse? I'm only dreaming
but I like my dreams to be real...

I think you'd be aiming at the Nikon D70 Martin. As far as I'm aware
(and I'm no expert here) I believe it's functionality and capability
is very similar to the Canons.

--
Pete Lawrence
http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Most recent images http://www.pbl33.fast24.co.uk/recent_images.html

Pete Lawrence wrote in message . ..

Here's a processed shot of the Pleiades from last night...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/2004-09/M45-20040919.jpg

Magical! Pete, you're an artist. :-)

Interesting "lightbeam" effects from the star (bottom right) that I
haven't seen before.

Chris.B

Pete Lawrence wrote:

I think you'd be aiming at the Nikon D70 Martin. As far as I'm aware
(and I'm no expert here) I believe it's functionality and capability
is very similar to the Canons.

Thanks Pete - the specs look very similar. The Canon a bit cheaper but
I'd have to add a lens.

The Nikon a bit dearer - and I bet I'd have to add a lens because even
the wide angle will be a telephoto when stuck on a ccd rather than
35mm film. Certainly is on the Mintron: my 55mm Pentax lens equates to
about a 200mm equivalent on a film camera.

"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
Still quite warm so I was able to observe in shorts and a sweatshirt
last night. Had to get a coat at 2am because it did start getting
chilly though.


I've been doing that for the last 2 weeks in Menorca with my binoculars..
8-)

Only problem is that I've been seeing stuff with them, that I cant with the
14" in my back garden!

Kev