Best option for photography on my Newtonian

Hello folks,

I'm very new to all this and am keen to take a few photos to show friends
and family what the views through my telescope are like. I'm confused as to
which way to go because I have three camera options! Scope is a 8" Bresser
Messier Newtonian.

Cameras a
Pentax MZ5n film SLR Pentax KA bayonet
Pentax ME Super film SLR circa 1980 Pentax K bayonet manual focus
Fuji Finepix 4900 3 Megapixel digital seee
http://www.steves-digicams.com/fuji4900.html
Trust webcam

I'm guessing that I'd get best quality with the film cameras but it would be
slower to learn with them because I'd have to wait a couple of days to get
the imjages back. The Fuji seemed the best bet but it has an annoying lens
which isn't removable and doesn't have a filter thread. The lens also
sticks out a long way and it's worryingly heavy for suspending off the back
of a telescope eyepiece so I'm unsure how best to mount it.

The webcam seems the way many of you work, but I don't want to end up
spending hours and hours messing with software (I spend all day sitting in
front of a PC so I'm not sure it's something I really want to do at night
too) although if one of you can convince me that it's really worth it I
might try. I'm also slightly concerned about taking the laptop outside
where condensation etc could be a problem. The attraction of webcam imaging
would be enhanced if I eventually went 'roboscope' and could sit in the
warmth sometimes!

I have dreamt of buying a Pentax Ist D digital SLR for a couple of years but
don't want to buy the current model as it's about to be superseded by a new
model. I like the idea of a point and click solution though.

So which is the best approach to take? How would you mount it?

Thanks,

Jonathan

"Jon G" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hello folks,
... Scope is a 8" Bresser Messier Newtonian.

Cameras a
Pentax MZ5n film SLR Pentax KA bayonet
Pentax ME Super film SLR circa 1980 Pentax K bayonet manual focus
Fuji Finepix 4900 3 Megapixel digital seee
http://www.steves-digicams.com/fuji4900.html
Trust webcam

For afocal imaging by digital camera you'd need an adapter. Have a look here
and related pages.
http://www.astromeccanica.it/camera_adapters.htm

Have fun,

--
---
Beta Persei
45° 35' N
08° 51' E

remove "_nospam" to reply

Nothing that you have, except maybe the fuji for some quick and dirty
lunar shots is really useful for anything but fustration. The number
one item you need to have for doing astrophotography is a robust and
precise mount, something that doesn't come standard with a bresser
telescope. Plus you need guiding which means that on top of the
telescope you need an additional smaller scope so that you can correct
for the errors the inevitably will creep in for any exposure worth
doing, that is at least 30min. And you need to provide for a mounting
arrangement that is stiff enough to support both of them without the
tiniest of deflections. Additionally, most if not all of the cheaper
newtonians have very short backfocus and when you apply a camera to it
most of the times you cannot reach focus (not enough travel). This
limitation can be worked around by modifying the telescope or the
focuser (or both) but it is not for the faint of hearts. In summary:
don't do it unless you're keen on spending money and loads of time
learning how to do it. There is another option, however: get a decent
webcam (Philips Toucam III), an adapter and a decent barlow lens
(ideally 4x or 5x but the good ones are expensive) and with your setup
you can image the planets, the moon and with a suitable filter even the
sun. As for the laptop suffering from condensation this has never ever
happened to me in over 6 years, so you need not to worry. As for
sitting in the warmth and doing webcamming you can forget it.

Andrea T.

Thank-you for your reply. It sounds as though the webcam is the easiest way
to go except for photographing the moon. I'm surprised that you regard
Bresser as so poor because in fairness the mount on my scope is a copy of
the highly regarded Vixen GP-D2 which is regarded as quite capable. Whilst
it isn't a Losmandy it seem quite well made and stable and the drives have
kept Jupiter in the frame at 200x mag for around 20-30 minutes without any
intervention at all which I thought was good going.

Anyway, thanks for the advice - I think I will try the webcam route then.

Brg,

Jon


wrote in message
oups.com...
Nothing that you have, except maybe the fuji for some quick and dirty
lunar shots is really useful for anything but fustration. The number
one item you need to have for doing astrophotography is a robust and
precise mount, something that doesn't come standard with a bresser
telescope. Plus you need guiding which means that on top of the
telescope you need an additional smaller scope so that you can correct
for the errors the inevitably will creep in for any exposure worth
doing, that is at least 30min. And you need to provide for a mounting
arrangement that is stiff enough to support both of them without the
tiniest of deflections. Additionally, most if not all of the cheaper
newtonians have very short backfocus and when you apply a camera to it
most of the times you cannot reach focus (not enough travel). This
limitation can be worked around by modifying the telescope or the
focuser (or both) but it is not for the faint of hearts. In summary:
don't do it unless you're keen on spending money and loads of time
learning how to do it. There is another option, however: get a decent
webcam (Philips Toucam III), an adapter and a decent barlow lens
(ideally 4x or 5x but the good ones are expensive) and with your setup
you can image the planets, the moon and with a suitable filter even the
sun. As for the laptop suffering from condensation this has never ever
happened to me in over 6 years, so you need not to worry. As for
sitting in the warmth and doing webcamming you can forget it.

Andrea T.

Jon,
webcam is the way to go - there are a lot of PHILIPS ToUcam PRO II
(PCVC840K) users out there. It can
even be modified for long exposure work, if you are handy with a
soldering iron. Take a peek on
ebay, they go for anything around £20 upwards.

Texy

Jon G wrote:
Thank-you for your reply. It sounds as though the webcam is the easiest way
to go except for photographing the moon. I'm surprised that you regard
Bresser as so poor because in fairness the mount on my scope is a copy of
the highly regarded Vixen GP-D2 which is regarded as quite capable. Whilst
it isn't a Losmandy it seem quite well made and stable and the drives have
kept Jupiter in the frame at 200x mag for around 20-30 minutes without any
intervention at all which I thought was good going.

It's a CG-5 look- alike. Although it might look similar to a GP-DX it
is no GP-DX I can assure you. The GP-DX is a highly regarded mount
(better than a G-11) but still you would need to guide it for 30 min
exposure with your telescope.

The webcam is they way to go, reasonably inexpensive and gets you
fairly decent results with limited investment in time.

Andrea T.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Jon G wrote:
Thank-you for your reply. It sounds as though the webcam is the
easiest way
to go except for photographing the moon. I'm surprised that you regard
Bresser as so poor because in fairness the mount on my scope is a copy
of
the highly regarded Vixen GP-D2 which is regarded as quite capable.
Whilst
it isn't a Losmandy it seem quite well made and stable and the drives
have
kept Jupiter in the frame at 200x mag for around 20-30 minutes without
any
intervention at all which I thought was good going.

It's a CG-5 look- alike. Although it might look similar to a GP-DX it
is no GP-DX I can assure you. The GP-DX is a highly regarded mount
(better than a G-11) but still you would need to guide it for 30 min
exposure with your telescope.
Not 'better than a G-11'. The GP-DX, is often quoted as being better than
the GM8 (the smaller Losmandy mount), having better periodic
error(especially when compared to the older versions of the latter), but
is a far smaller/lighter mount than the G11, and the newer version, of the
G11, have managed to beat the PE of the GP-DX.
These two mounts (the GP-DX, and the G11), each represent about the best
'price/performance' compromise in their respective parts of the market.
The CG5, exists in a number of versions (Celestron for instance, have the
original clone, then have the version with ball races in RA, then the
version with ball races on the worm gears as well, with a number of 'sub
versions' between). A good example, can be quite a useable mount, for a
light scope, but the general quality of machining on the gears, assembly,
and 'variability' of the versions, brings the perceived quality down.
Generally, there can be a tendency to quite quick 'small' movements, which
do not matter through the eyepiece (moving Jupiter in the example, by a
small amount), but will spoil an image.

The webcam is they way to go, reasonably inexpensive and gets you
fairly decent results with limited investment in time.
Absolutely.
The poster might like to look at the 'qcuiag' group on Yahoo, or the
website of the same name. This tends to be involved in the technicalities
of the cameras, but has a lot of information about webcam imaging in
various forms.

Best Wishes

"Roger Hamlett" wrote in message
...


The poster might like to look at the 'qcuiag' group on Yahoo, or the
website of the same name. This tends to be involved in the technicalities
of the cameras, but has a lot of information about webcam imaging in
various forms.


Also the UK Astro imaging forum is very active in all areas of imaging and
supportive of beginners
http://www.ukastroimaging.co.uk/forums/index.php

Robin

Roger Hamlett wrote:
wrote in message
....


It's a CG-5 look- alike. Although it might look similar to a GP-DX it
is no GP-DX I can assure you. The GP-DX is a highly regarded mount
(better than a G-11) but still you would need to guide it for 30 min
exposure with your telescope.

Not 'better than a G-11'. The GP-DX, is often quoted as being better than
the GM8 (the smaller Losmandy mount), having better periodic
error(especially when compared to the older versions of the latter), but
is a far smaller/lighter mount than the G11, and the newer version, of the
G11, have managed to beat the PE of the GP-DX.

AFAIK, although "some" G-11 have a better PE than the "average" GP-DX
the "average" G-11 has a worse (less smooth) PE profile, a shorter
period and more often than not, a worse PE. My GP-DX (5 years old) has
an average PE of +/- 6". BTW, I've field-tested some G-11s and I always
found that their PE was worse than my sample of GP-DX. That is not to
say that the G-11 is a bad mount, not at all. Yet my GP-DX (I had a GP
before than this) holds a 13.5kg, 10" newton about 6' long with no much
fuss, something which is well above its stated peak performance.

These two mounts (the GP-DX, and the G11), each represent about the best
'price/performance' compromise in their respective parts of the market.

Agreed 100%.

Reg's

Andrea T.

Originally Posted by Jon G

Hello folks,

I'm very new to all this and am keen to take a few photos to show friends
and family what the views through my telescope are like. I'm confused as to
which way to go because I have three camera options! Scope is a 8" Bresser
Messier Newtonian.

Cameras a
Pentax MZ5n film SLR Pentax KA bayonet
Pentax ME Super film SLR circa 1980 Pentax K bayonet manual focus
Fuji Finepix 4900 3 Megapixel digital seee
Trust webcam

Jonathan

Andrea T has probably quoted the brutal truth - the fact that a planet holds its position within the eyepiece for hours visually is no clue to how accurate the drive is when hoping to record pointpoint star images.

There is a way around this if your happy with wideangle views of the sky - piggyback one of your cameras. With a modest focal length lens [say 135mm] tracking is not so critical and a 35mm wideangle will cover a huge area of sky to fainter than can be seen in moderate binoculars.

Although I have a Meade LX200 I'm currently enjoying a renaissance with my Canon Rebel on simple clockdrive on my patio reaching mag 11.5 in 30s exposure from light polluted SW London. Most of the Messier objects from M42 to feeble M1 can be recorded - my asteroid sampler here http://www.astroman.fsnet.co.uk/asteroid.htm

Good luck
Nytecam 51N 0.1W