| written by Mcwgogs on Nov 21, 2005 19:08 |
 | |  | | Today i finaly got my new SkyQuest XT6 telescope. 
It was clowdy and snowing when i asembled it, but a half a hour ago i took a look outside and i saw a clear sky ^_^
I carefully took teh telescope out side, and aimed it at Vega for the First Light.
It was very very bright, and i've seen a lot of smaller stars around.
Then i aimed at Pleyades - a very clear and bright view, and alot of stars. ^_^
Next was M 31, very bright and i've seen M32 and M 110 too.
Mars was very nice too, i've seen brighter and darker surface features,
but it was a bit fuzzy, but that was probably due to the fact that i just took the telescope from a warm room to cold outside.
The telescope itself is very stable and stays right where i point it, it's very good and i'm very happy with it.
too bad i'm a bit sic and cant stay outside in the cold too long.
| |  | |  |
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 17, 2005 23:58 |
| | | | And here's a photo of it
<link cd/jpgs/mcwgogs/mytelescope>
and a best photo of venus i could get
<cd/jpgs/mcwgogs/venusphoto>
the exposure is too long and all the movement got caught on the photo, i'll try again next starry night | | | | |
|
└> last changed by Mcwgogs on December 18, 2005 at 01:20
|
 | |  | | ![]() This makes me want to have a telescope  | |  | |  |
|
| written by Relayer on Dec 18, 2005 01:15 |
 | |  | | It makes me want to have a better telescope.  | |  | |  |
|
| written by Dumbum on Dec 18, 2005 09:43 |
 | |  | | ![]()  | Mcwgogs said: | | <link cd/jpgs/mcwgogs/mytelescope> |
Do you need to lie down to see through it? | |  | |  |
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 18, 2005 11:20 |
| | | | heh no, it's a reflector, the eyepiece is one the top of it on the side, above the white "6" and there's a mirror on the bottom | | | | |
|
 | |  | | ![]() Nice piece of scrap metal you have there. I wonder if you could post from time to time some nice pictures of galaxies and stuff, for those of all who still hesitate about havng a telescope or not. | |  | |  |
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 18, 2005 14:25 |
| | | | i can photograph only bright things, faint objects like galaxies need a long exposure,
and i would need to follow the object,
the telescope is mean only for eye use, not for astro photography.
still, i can take pictures of bright objects.
I need some practice with it...
Edit:
here's mars.
<cd/jpgs/mcwgogs/marsphoto1>
the right picture is from Celestia | | | | |
|
└> last changed by Mcwgogs on December 18, 2005 at 18:50
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 19, 2005 21:20 |
| | | | And here's today's mars:
<cd/jpgs/mcwgogs/mars20051219>
you can see the ice cap on the bottom
looks a lot better through my telescope, the camera can't catch focus | | | | |
|
| | | | ![]() Neat photos, and a nice telescope!
What camera are you using, and how long are these exposures? Does it allow for manually setting the focus? Also, are you mounting the camera to the telescope, just holding it by hand, or using some other method while taking the photo? Any little amount of camera movement can blur a long exposure, so it's also best to use the camera's self-timer to avoid shake while triggering the photo. To prevent excessive noise, make sure you use a low ISO sensitivity. There's a fair amount of information on astrophotography and night photography on the net, so you should be able to find a lot more info by searching around. Here's one example of a site providing amateur astrophotography tips that looks as though it could be useful.
I look forward to seeing more. : ) Have you tried any photos of the moon yet? | | | | |
|
| written by Dumbum on Dec 20, 2005 10:48 |
| | | | ![]() My cheap $99 digital camera ( Mercury's CyberPix S-330: http://www.digicamreview.co.uk/mercury_slimcam_II_and_cyberpix_s-330_review.htm ) Could focus perfectly through my microscope, in fact, on the photo, even more was revealed than when looking through the microscope's eyepieces itself! As seen here: http://nielz.myphotoalbum.com/view_album.php?set_albumName=Micropics
The camera was set on Macro-mode (for objects far away) because something seen through a microscope will appear as far away to the eye or to a camera.
So, my point is that this would mean that something seen through a telescope will appear as very nearby to the lens. This means that, to be able to take a sharp photo through the telescope, you would need to have a camera that is specialized on focussing at distances of let's say 5-15 centimeters and set that camera on Micro-mode (for objects nearby).
I am not 100% sure of this, but it is a theory that I consider possible... | | | | |
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 20, 2005 12:51 |
| | | | | Cryoburner said: | | What camera are you using, and how long are these exposures? Does it allow for manually setting the focus? |
I'm using a Olympus FE-100 digital camera and it sucks for astrophotography, if i turn off the flash, it automaticly sets the exposure for 3 seconds, so i need to duc tape the flash lamp i also can't manually set the focus.
i'm thinking about bringing it back to the store and finding a more suitable one. | | | | |
|
| | | | ![]() If you're looking for a different camera, I suggest checking out the camera review site Steve's Digicams. They have extensive reviews for cameras in every price range and style, and include sample photographs at their full resolution. Also, they maintain a Best Cameras List containing what they deem to currently be the top cameras in each category. I would recommend one with access to manual controls and an optical zoom lens. | | | | |
|
| written by Megagun on Dec 20, 2005 14:29 |
| | | | ![]() | Mcwgogs said: | | ...seconds, so i need to duc tape the flash lamp ... |
That might not be a great idea, since you can damage the flasher with that (can't give away heat, etc..)
A mirror will be a better option, I think (to deflect the light...) | | | | |
|
| written by Mcwgogs on Dec 20, 2005 14:38 |
| | | | yes, i just tested that and it indeed gets warm, anyway, i've made those photos with the flash, since i got those rubber thingies around the eyepieces, but it kills my night vision. | | | | |
|
| 
