Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Lunar/Planetary visual/astrophotography scope recommendations?

astrophotography moon planet
  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#26 flyboy9990

flyboy9990

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2018

Posted 30 March 2019 - 02:19 PM

Back in my old school film imaging days we useto do something called ejyepiece projection imaging for planets and lunar. Is that still a thing?? Or is it generally stick the camera into a 2x powermate?


  • Jaimo! likes this

#27 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3046
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 30 March 2019 - 11:31 PM

Back in my old school film imaging days we useto do something called ejyepiece projection imaging for planets and lunar. Is that still a thing?? Or is it generally stick the camera into a 2x powermate?

There is not much eyepiece projection anymore, unless you want to count people sticking their smart phones up to the eyepiece.  Most are using a dedicated CCD camera, expanded from the old web cam imaging.  Then record a movie, pick the best frames, and stack them in Autostakkert! or Registax.

 

Jaimo!


  • Scott Beith likes this

#28 DMach

DMach

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 478
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2017
  • Loc: The most light-polluted country in the world :(

Posted 31 March 2019 - 09:52 AM

Maybe I'm a little slow...  but what would be the benefit of and Edge over a SCT for planetary?  When imaging planets, you not imaging the entire field buut concentrating on such a small area with f/ ratios well over 20.  A flat field is nice, but I do not see the advantage in strictly planetary.

 

I will also echo the need for a finer focusing mechanism, a little shift in the mirror and the entire planet can become lost...  It is rather frustrating.

 

Jaimo!

Hear hear.

 

I went with the C11 over the Edge for exactly this reason: the difference in price was $1,900 versus $3,500. For DSO work I get it, but for planetary work (which is done at the extreme centre of FOV) I don't see that extra value, plus I don't like the thought of passing the signal through all of that extra glass.

 

(The company I work for makes instruments for detecting very low levels of light, sampling at multiple points across the spectrum ... and our modern instruments take great pains in maximising reflected rather than transmitted light in the optical design.)

 

I'd rather (and will) spend the extra money on a good electronic focuser.

 

As for the MCT vs. SCT question: I pondered the same ... but at the end of the day, I see a lot more high-quality images produced by SCTs.

 

So my recommendation would be a standard (non-Edge) C9.25, given your short list.  smile.gif


Edited by DMach, 31 March 2019 - 09:56 AM.

  • Jaimo! likes this

#29 carolinaskies

carolinaskies

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1327
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2014
  • Loc: Greenville SC

Posted 31 March 2019 - 05:14 PM

There is not much eyepiece projection anymore, unless you want to count people sticking their smart phones up to the eyepiece.  Most are using a dedicated CCD camera, expanded from the old web cam imaging.  Then record a movie, pick the best frames, and stack them in Autostakkert! or Registax.

 

Jaimo!

Eyepiece projection is still as workable as a barlow whether using a dedicated camera, dslr, or cellphone


  • Jaimo! likes this

#30 flyboy9990

flyboy9990

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2018

Posted 31 March 2019 - 05:47 PM

The C9.25 seems to be about the sweet spot for us. I'de like an 11 but it's just not in the budget atm and the 9.25 non-Edge is certainly priced reasonably. Thanks to all those who responded and provided much knowledge!



#31 Phil Cowell

Phil Cowell

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5635
  • Joined: 24 May 2007
  • Loc: Southern Tier NY

Posted 31 March 2019 - 07:16 PM

Would it be crazy to use a barlow or powermate with RASA for casual imaging of the moon and the larger planets when you don't want to deal with dismounting the huge RASA ? You could get a fairly decent focal length with a 4x or 5x but I don't know at what point you would lose resolution compared to a native long focal length planetary scope.

 

Gale

You can’t on a RASA. It has no eyepiece ability. It’s purely for imaging.



#32 gdd

gdd

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2533
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Lynnwood, WA (N/O Seattle)

Posted 31 March 2019 - 09:08 PM

You can’t on a RASA. It has no eyepiece ability. It’s purely for imaging.

Yes, I know. No adapter would work with a powermate or with a camera teleconverter?

 

 

Gale


  • gnowellsct likes this

#33 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14811
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted 31 March 2019 - 09:50 PM

There is not much eyepiece projection anymore, unless you want to count people sticking their smart phones up to the eyepiece.  Most are using a dedicated CCD camera, expanded from the old web cam imaging.  Then record a movie, pick the best frames, and stack them in Autostakkert! or Registax.

 

Jaimo!

Well yes, but the *program* picks the best frames.



#34 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3046
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 31 March 2019 - 09:53 PM

Well yes, but the *program* picks the best frames.

But of course, and it usually does a pretty good job.

 

Jaimo!



#35 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14811
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted 31 March 2019 - 09:55 PM

Yes, I know. No adapter would work with a powermate or with a camera teleconverter?

 

 

Gale

That's an interesting question.  There is however a bit of oddity to it.  The RASA has no rear port for imaging so its focal length is intrinsically fast, something like f/2.   To get it up to imaging standards you'd need to stack a couple of power mates such as the 5x and 2.5x.  Stacking powermates implies long leverage on that corrector plate.  I'm not sure it's a good idea.  

 

By contrast, when you image with a standard SCT, you are taking something with an intrinsically pretty long focal ratio (f/10 or f/11) and then making it longer with a Barlow or powermate.  Using a RASA for planet imaging is pretty much forcing the Ferrari to haul bricks to the construction site.  It can be done but maybe not the best tool for the job.  

 

Greg N


  • Scott Beith, BKBrown and dakinemaui like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: astrophotography, moon, planet



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics