conus
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 10/12/03
Posts: 2977
Loc: OC, Calif
|
|
Around here you will hear a lot of people suggesting that to do long exposure DSO imaging, a heavy and accurately tracking mount is a necessity. An entry level high-end mount starts at around $3100.00 for a Losmandy G-11 with Gemini go-to. While it is true that such a mount is necesary to do easy, headache free imaging, it is not at all necessary. In fact, with Celestron's CG5 mount, an Orion ED80, a Digital Rebel, a guidescope, a guide camera, a steeper learning curve and a lot of work, it is possible to get great images. The equipment I just mentioned can all be purchased new for less than the Losmandy mount.
Check out Jim Solomon's website . Believe it or not, everything you see was done with a CG5. Look at the images, then go to the articles section. He's written something called Cookbook 2.0 that tells you how he does it.
--------------------
Steve R.
12" Orion XTi
Fujinon 10x42
Oberwerk 12x60
My toUcam Images
|
stefsaber
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/24/06
Posts: 4459
Loc: Rainy Florida
|
|
Great idea, my thoughts were for a G-11 initially, however without the Gemini system...
Now I've purchased a Vixen 80 for my main imaging tube, and I am planning on getting a LXD75 mount, for a total cost of less than half the Losmandy mount alone.
And if you really want some affordable imaging, grab an etx and a ccd camera, granted its not top-quality, but its a way to get started!
--------------------
-Stefan
"It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end." -Douglas Adams
Current Scopes: "Gator" William Optics 66SD---Black Swan William Optics Megrez 80 II ED Triplet---Zhumell 10" Dob
-Sirius Mount---Canon Rebel XT-
Past Scopes: ETX 90---Vixen ED80Sf
Fort Myers, FL
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
And I can go one step further, and suggest that you do not even need an expensive digital camera. This image was done with an LXD75 SN8 and a 26 year old film camera that can be found on eBay for $50. Total cost of the complete setup was less than $1500.
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
Nor do you need a computer. These shots are all 100% straight from the developer. No post processing of any kind was done, except to crop them to fit these tiny squares! No color correction, flats, darks, etc.. No stacking either, as they are all SINGLE exposures.
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
|
stefsaber
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/24/06
Posts: 4459
Loc: Rainy Florida
|
|
Clownfish is the master of film photography around here, just browse his sight if you want to get into astrophotography! Amazing collage you have there!!!
--------------------
-Stefan
"It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end." -Douglas Adams
Current Scopes: "Gator" William Optics 66SD---Black Swan William Optics Megrez 80 II ED Triplet---Zhumell 10" Dob
-Sirius Mount---Canon Rebel XT-
Past Scopes: ETX 90---Vixen ED80Sf
Fort Myers, FL
|
dgs©
Postmaster
Reged: 03/29/04
Posts: 13899
Loc: West Monroe, Louisiana
|
|
Geeze Peter, get out of here with that stuff!
How are we going to convince these guys to spend a bazillion bucks on high-zoot, fancypants, robotic mounts and such if you're going to show them what kind of magic can be wrought with a plain old film camera and a bit of effort at tracking. 
Lord knows there's no way I can afford that kind of equipment. So, if I can't tric... convince these guys to buy the goods, I can't even enjoy it vicariously. 
Yes, the secret is out now. Excellent results can be obtained by the ClownFish method. If you think about it, there are a lot of pretty good astrophotos around, in books and magazines, that predate digital cameras and even the Hubble Space Telescope.
Of course, Peter didn't get those kind of results the first night under the stars. It takes some effort and trial & error, but Peter doesn't mind lending a hand to minimize some of the pain.
Sometimes, spending a boatload of money can make it easier, but there's no guarantee.
--------------------
- david
8"Ø Newtonian on SVP, Moonlite CR2, Telrad
PST Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Orion Ultraview 10×50
Hand-me-down Sears Refractor (Discoverer) 60mm×900mm
"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world, remains and is immortal." --Albert Pike
|
stefsaber
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/24/06
Posts: 4459
Loc: Rainy Florida
|
|
Quote:
Sometimes, spending a boatload of money can make it easier, but there's no guarantee.
For instance, a Ferrari will make it easier to get from Point A to Point B, but there's no guarantee that you won't be arrested for going 100 mph over the speed limited...
Whereas that Chevy Silverado will get you there everytime
Money doesn't have to be an issue with astrophotography, if you are handy with tools amazing results can be imaged using a barn-door tracker...amazing stuff...
--------------------
-Stefan
"It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end." -Douglas Adams
Current Scopes: "Gator" William Optics 66SD---Black Swan William Optics Megrez 80 II ED Triplet---Zhumell 10" Dob
-Sirius Mount---Canon Rebel XT-
Past Scopes: ETX 90---Vixen ED80Sf
Fort Myers, FL
|
conus
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 10/12/03
Posts: 2977
Loc: OC, Calif
|
|
There's only one reason I've never considered film photography, but it's a big one. Having to do everything without at least some immediate feedback is enough to put me off. I can't imagine not even being 100% certain that my focus was right, or having to wait until the film was developed to see if I had made any major errors. I would rather spend a little more and be able to see the results the same night.
--------------------
Steve R.
12" Orion XTi
Fujinon 10x42
Oberwerk 12x60
My toUcam Images
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
While I was certainly experienced in astrophotography, I must tell you that the above film collage was done with my very first 3 rolls of film and they were the first shots I had taken in over 10 years - owing to several back-to-back military assignments that were not good for deep sky astrophotography. In fact, when I bought the LXD75 it was after being without a scope since 1994. I was completely amazed at how well it performed, but even more amazed at how well Kodak E200 and Fujichrome 400F Provia film performed without the technical gas hypering that had to be done just 10 years earlier. In 1994, I could not have easily achieved this level of astrophotography with the films that were available at that time.
As far as the immediate feedback thing.. yeah, when I was starting out there was a very LONG learning curve, owing to the wait of development. But now that I have learned the rules, I rarely have a problem with that. Attention to detail and manual guiding is key for me.
The point I want to make is NOT that film astrophotography is easy. It's that it's CHEAP and it WORKS. Also.. if you want a really HUGE field of view, a medium format film camera can't be beat unless you are able and willing to pay many tens of thousands of dollars on a digital setup with an equivalent FOV. Just take a quick look at what a Medium Format film camera can do by looking at THIS website by veteran film astrophotographer Wei-Hao Wang. His SHOT of the whole sky will end any doubt that we are indeed in a galaxy!
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
Edited by ClownFish (11/08/06 12:38 AM)
|
conus
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 10/12/03
Posts: 2977
Loc: OC, Calif
|
|
Quote:
The point I want to make is NOT that film astrophotography is easy. It's that it's CHEAP
Right. That was my point about the CG5. I know it has problems, but what many people claim about it is simply untrue. You hear people claiming that it is not at all capable of use for serious imaging, which is impossible unless one spends 8k on a Tak NJP. I've seen work done with an NJP and plenty of work with a G-11 that didn't equal images taken by Jim Solomon and Jim Thommes, both of whom use the CG5. A CG5 with go-to is only $699.00.
If you're willing to go through a steeper learning curve and do a little more work, you can do digital imaging a LOT more cheaply than you would be led to believe by some internet advice.
--------------------
Steve R.
12" Orion XTi
Fujinon 10x42
Oberwerk 12x60
My toUcam Images
|
Rev2010
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/25/06
Posts: 1122
Loc: NYC & Bayonne, NJ
|
|
Right on to Conus and also right on to ClownFish! I agree that so many people tend to make it sound like if you don't have a hyper expensive mount or wedge, do manual or autoguiding, and have absolutely the best skies you won't be able to procure decent images. I'd been looking to get a wedge for my LX90 and so far I've heard things on par with, "Oh you can't use that low cost Meade wedge... you need a $500 Milburn" and even, "LX90's motors are no good for imaging... you need an LX200 at the least". While some of this stuff obviously has merit it simply does not mean it can't be done without all the bells and whistles and with quite good results. We're not trying to match Hubble here  Eventually I found photos done by people using the lowest of gear and boy I was impressed. Granted a number of these people probably went through much trial and error but that's fine by me.
I picked up an Olympus OM-1 from EBay for $47 total and I'm dying to use it but I'm waiting to drop the cash for the wedge, focuser, reducer, etc. I decided to try film first cause of the lower cost and looking at having to stack hundreds of images and do all that processing with CCD imaging kinda put me off to start with.
*EDIT - ClownFish, your first link for Wei-Hao Wang doesn't work cause there's a / at the end of .html. It just needs to be removed.
Rev.
--------------------
Meade 10" LX90 LNT
TeleVue Panoptic 22mm
Baader Hyperion 17mm
Televue Nagler 12T4 & 9T6
WO 40mm SWAN
WO 2" Dielectric Diagonal
DGM Optics NPB filter
Lumicon OIII filter
Baader Moon & Skyglow filter
Celestron 15x70 Binocs
|
stefsaber
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/24/06
Posts: 4459
Loc: Rainy Florida
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The point I want to make is NOT that film astrophotography is easy. It's that it's CHEAP
Right. That was my point about the CG5. I know it has problems, but what many people claim about it is simply untrue. You hear people claiming that it is not at all capable of use for serious imaging, which is impossible unless one spends 8k on a Tak NJP. I've seen work done with an NJP and plenty of work with a G-11 that didn't equal images taken by Jim Solomon and Jim Thommes, both of whom use the CG5. A CG5 with go-to is only $699.00.
If you're willing to go through a steeper learning curve and do a little more work, you can do digital imaging a LOT more cheaply than you would be led to believe by some internet advice.
It all depends on the amount of load you put on a mount too...If you load up a CG5 with a 10" Optical tube+accessories, the images will not be as good as a 10" on a Losmandy G-11...However, go the small route, via a 80ED refractor and you'll be fine!
--------------------
-Stefan
"It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end." -Douglas Adams
Current Scopes: "Gator" William Optics 66SD---Black Swan William Optics Megrez 80 II ED Triplet---Zhumell 10" Dob
-Sirius Mount---Canon Rebel XT-
Past Scopes: ETX 90---Vixen ED80Sf
Fort Myers, FL
|
skydog
member
Reged: 08/24/06
Posts: 36
|
|
Thanks everyone, you have given me hope that I will be able to get the pics I want and still send both kids to college! It's like everything else... takes time and patience to do it right and money to make it easier...
--------------------
15X80 Orion Binoculars
114mm Celestron NexStar
One of the last 12" Certified DBA dobs
Omni XLT120 on CG4
|
stefsaber
Post Laureate
Reged: 06/24/06
Posts: 4459
Loc: Rainy Florida
|
|
Quote:
Thanks everyone, you have given me hope that I will be able to get the pics I want and still send both kids to college! It's like everything else... takes time and patience to do it right and money to make it easier...
Its completely feasible, I'm heading off to college next year and through the insights of numerous CN members, I have a reasonably priced astrophotography setup within reach...By Christmas at any rate
A Small refractor of the Orion 80ED type
A Stable mount, LXD75 or CGE5...nothing fancy
Focal Reducer
And Clear Skies
For about $900-1300...depending on whether the stuff was new/used...
No need for a $2000 mount and $2000 refractor, this setup should work out fine...
Just set aside $1000 as the total goal and you can easily accomplish that!
--------------------
-Stefan
"It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end." -Douglas Adams
Current Scopes: "Gator" William Optics 66SD---Black Swan William Optics Megrez 80 II ED Triplet---Zhumell 10" Dob
-Sirius Mount---Canon Rebel XT-
Past Scopes: ETX 90---Vixen ED80Sf
Fort Myers, FL
|
Snaproll
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/20/04
Posts: 3491
Loc: Wisconsin
|
|
Well, I think the key to good imaging is lessening "error". There are two ways to do this, either by gaining more experience or with more expensive and high end equipment.
Low end equipment has more potential to introduce error. A low end mount like the CG-5 doesn't have periodic error correction, horrible declination response and backlash (at least mine did), and a polar scope that is basically junk.
All of these things can be 'corrected' to some extent with experience. A more accurate polar alignment eliminates much of the tracking problems. Using a fast scope like an f5 80ED also minimizes these problems by having shorter exposure times and a wider field.
The problem I see is that often people just starting the astrophotography learning curve compound this with more difficult to work with equipment.
--------------------
-Jim-
Happiness is a clear sky and a Denk II
old AP images and some new C14 Hyperstar images
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
Spending a lot of money on hi-tech equipment also makes it much easier to screw up. My philosophy for learning astrophotography is to keep it simple. Start with an ordinary lens on a camera and learn accurate Polar Alignment and guiding. Skill makes you astrophotographer, not tools. While the commercial ads tell you otherwise, there is no such thing as point and shoot astrophotography.
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
|
dgs©
Postmaster
Reged: 03/29/04
Posts: 13899
Loc: West Monroe, Louisiana
|
|
Like everything else in life, it pays to learn the fundamentals.
--------------------
- david
8"Ø Newtonian on SVP, Moonlite CR2, Telrad
PST Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Orion Ultraview 10×50
Hand-me-down Sears Refractor (Discoverer) 60mm×900mm
"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world, remains and is immortal." --Albert Pike
|
ZachK
professor emeritus
Reged: 08/21/05
Posts: 667
Loc: Israel
|
|
Quote:
Geeze Peter, get out of here with that stuff!
Of course, Peter didn't get those kind of results the first night under the stars. It takes some effort and trial & error, but Peter doesn't mind lending a hand to minimize some of the pain.
Sometimes, spending a boatload of money can make it easier, but there's no guarantee.
I should point out that in my first few rolls I had some definite keepers. I got some pretty nice wide field shots of Taurus with my Rolli in the first roll I had ever shot with it. I had also never used anything even at all like it. I have become totally hooked on Medium format since that first roll. There is nothing like 120 format film for wide field work! (Well except maybe 4x5) but I haven't tried that yet.
--------------------
Zach Kessin
Yesha Israel
Meade ETX 127 Mak-Cass
15x70 Celestron Skymaster Binoculars
Sinar F 4x5 view camera
Rolliflex Camera 80mm F2.8
Pentax K-1000 Camera 35,50 and 60--300mm zoom
3 kids, Large cat, small dog
|
s58y
Post Laureate
Reged: 12/12/04
Posts: 4850
Loc: Eastern NY
|
|
If you want cheap, try a barndoor tracker, an unmodded SLR (preferably one that you already have), and an old camera lenses.
The problem with ultra-cheap equipment like the barndoor is poor yield of good subexposures. I've shot DSOs with a barndoor and also the G-11 + autoguider. The barndoor offers simplicity of setup, but certainly not peace of mind while shooting. Most nights, various minor problems would arise that would spoil a good fraction of the subexposures. Perhaps 30% were lost to barndoor problems.
The initial setup for the G-11 + autoguider is certainly more complex (even without messing with the GOTO setup). However, with aggressive autoguiding, you get close to 100% yield rate on good subexposures, despite the G-11's well-known lack of smooth tracking. I just keep a constant eye on the autoguider error graph (looking for problems, like dragging cables, small high clouds, etc.), and examine each subexposure as it gets uploaded. The G-11 + autoguiding imaging experience is a lot more pleasant.
--------------------
Hutech 30D, SBIG ST-402 autoguider
SV80S, SV66 guidescope
AP900, G-11, Barndoor tracker
http://www.pbase.com/s58y
|
skyglow1
member
Reged: 06/22/06
Posts: 43
Loc: Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
Quote:
Nor do you need a computer. These shots are all 100% straight from the developer. No post processing of any kind was done, except to crop them to fit these tiny squares! No color correction, flats, darks, etc.. No stacking either, as they are all SINGLE exposures.
CF
Well I'd think that if people are reading this on CN then they already have a computer or at least acces to one? 
--------------------
4" Sky Watcher 1025AZ3 achromatic refractor
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
True. But reading a post on a website and post processing with photoshop are two different animals.
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
|
Schmendr1ck
professor emeritus
Reged: 08/03/06
Posts: 581
Loc: Orlando, FL
|
|
Nice timing on this thread - I've started to look at my first AP setup as well, and I've spent some time lately lurking the AP forums. The folks there seem to fall squarely into two camps. Some say, "Get what you can afford and start taking pictures now," while many others seem to say, "Save your money until you can afford the best, otherwise don't bother." I don't mean that to sound too harsh, it's just the impression I've gotten.
Anyway, I fall somewhere in the middle. I'd like a setup that I will grow into as I learn AP, and that I can eventually use to produce decent photos, but also something that I can get for (substantially) less than $2000.
I've been looking at much the same setup as Stef for beginning AP: an Orion 80ED on a CG-5A mount with - sorry Clownfish - a DSI Pro or (yikes!) Pro II.
All told, about $1700-2000 new, depending on my choice of CCD, but I should be able to get this stuff used for a good bit less. I'm also hoping that the CG-5A can pull double-duty as a visual goto mount for my 10" newt.
--------------------
Chris
Home: 
Dark sky site: 
Zhumell 10" Dobsonian
Nexstar 8SE
Vixen R130Sf and ED80Sf
Sirius EQ-G, Vixen Porta Mount
SBIG ST-2000XM w/CFW8A
|
Schmendr1ck
professor emeritus
Reged: 08/03/06
Posts: 581
Loc: Orlando, FL
|
|
On the OTA, I was also looking at the Meade 80ED triplet apo. It's $100 more than the Orion but also f/6 rather than f/7.5. Anybody know how these two compare to each other for AP?
--------------------
Chris
Home:
Dark sky site:
Zhumell 10" Dobsonian
Nexstar 8SE
Vixen R130Sf and ED80Sf
Sirius EQ-G, Vixen Porta Mount
SBIG ST-2000XM w/CFW8A
|
ZachK
professor emeritus
Reged: 08/21/05
Posts: 667
Loc: Israel
|
|
Quote:
Nice timing on this thread - I've started to look at my first AP setup as well, and I've spent some time lately lurking the AP forums. The folks there seem to fall squarely into two camps. Some say, "Get what you can afford and start taking pictures now," while many others seem to say, "Save your money until you can afford the best, otherwise don't bother." I don't mean that to sound too harsh, it's just the impression I've gotten.
Anyway, I fall somewhere in the middle. I'd like a setup that I will grow into as I learn AP, and that I can eventually use to produce decent photos, but also something that I can get for (substantially) less than $2000.
I fall squarly in the Get something that works and get it cheep and learn as best you can, then upgrade camp. Scopes etc cost a lot more in Israel than in the US, and I make less, so I have to make do. Now that being said I lucked out in that someone gave me a Rolliflex, which is just a great camera. I plan to play with film and low tech stuff as much as I can for as long as I can. At some point I am going to get a good equitorial mount and put a 4x5 large format camera on it and take wide field shots of the milky way. I'm looking forward to that!
--------------------
Zach Kessin
Yesha Israel
Meade ETX 127 Mak-Cass
15x70 Celestron Skymaster Binoculars
Sinar F 4x5 view camera
Rolliflex Camera 80mm F2.8
Pentax K-1000 Camera 35,50 and 60--300mm zoom
3 kids, Large cat, small dog
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 6788
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Quote:
I've seen work done with an NJP and plenty of work with a G-11 that didn't equal images taken by Jim Solomon and Jim Thommes, both of whom use the CG5. A CG5 with go-to is only $699.00.
If you're willing to go through a steeper learning curve and do a little more work, you can do digital imaging a LOT more cheaply than you would be led to believe by some internet advice.
Just some random thoughts.
I've read thru Jim Solomans articles and I've come to the conclusion that the mount is only a small part of the process of doing astrophotography. More of the work is centered around the entire setup, the cameras and guidescopes, focusing, guiding, etc. I agree with you, Steve, that more can be done with less expensive gear, but if you start adding up the cost of all that gear, it's still pretty expensive. HERE is Jim's list of gear (scroll down). It does make film look attractive.
Nevertheless, like you, I don't think I'd ever use film unless I was in an area that allowed me to image on a regular basis. Where I'm at now if I get to image once every two weeks I'm fortunate, more like once a month. The problem with film is that is has a high learning curve. At that rate I'll learn how to image in about 5 years. So, bottom line is that digital for me is a no-brainer. But it does have it's problems too, just different ones.
Right now I'm trying to decide if I want to spend more time with the DSLR or get a Meade DSI Pro II CCD camera. As I mentioned above, it seems to me that a great deal of the work and expense of digital astrophotography comes from the 'accessories' rather from just the mount. And it seems like the DSI II may simplify the process a little, but I don't know if I'd save any money and I don't know if it would be any better.
Patrick
--------------------
Discovery 10" f/6 Split Tube Dob
Celestron C6 SCT
Denk Binoviewers
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Oberwerk 9x60 Binocular
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon 30D DSLR
Mini EQ1
My Astronomy Pages
|
ClownFish
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/26/05
Posts: 5600
Loc: Islamabad, Pakistan
|
|
Actually, Patrick, I disagree that film imaging has a STEEPER learning curve. It certainly has a LONGER one.
There's a LOT more things to worry about in digital imaging, and thus a HIGHER curve than film. But because digital has instant feedback, the curve is steep but short. In film, you have less to worry about, but since feedback can take days between trials, you have a longer learning curve.
Just my opinion
CF
--------------------
Learn all about POLAR ALIGNMENT with my Drift Method Tutorial and simulator!! Or visit my Foreign Service Blog!
|
Rev2010
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/25/06
Posts: 1122
Loc: NYC & Bayonne, NJ
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: