Ok so when I go back home for thanksgiving this upcoming Wednesday and Thursday I was thinking of seeing if my brother's camera he has would work for some simple photos. It is  35mm film camera and that is all I know. So are there any questions I could ask him to figure out if it could work. I know it is a decent camera and so I was thinking that I might be able to take some cool pictures to just mess around with.

I'm gonna go hit up the Ritz Camera store in the mall near me to see about some film.

If it is a 35mm Single Lens Reflex(SLR) with Bulb exposure setting it can be used for long exposure DSO Photography.  You will need a T-ring and T-adapter that takes place of the camera lens so that you can adapt it to the telescope. You will also need a locking shutter control cable.
If it is a Camera like my Pentax that requires batteries to operate the shutter you will need plenty of batteries also, especially when it gets cold outside. Long exposure photography will eat batteries. 
The Olympus OM-1 camera is one of the best for DSO photography. Easier to focus and doesn't require batteries.  

Read this thread for more information about getting started in astrophotography.
http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/t/19319.aspx

It getting very hard to find good 35mm film suitable for long exposure astrophotography anymore. It's even harder finding any place that know how to develop it.  These new machines used for developing pictures can ruin a good image.

Using film you will definitely need some way to guide your mount and telescope throughout the exposure. Unlike Digital photography where you can take multiple short exposure and stack them, you cannot do that with film.  What you get on film in one shot is what you get, and, you won't know if you actually got anything until after the film has been developed. Be prepared to spend lots of money on film and developing that will most often be waisted.  Film is harder to work with and manipulate in image processing software also.   

Good luck

I was thinking of just taking some pics of constellations with the lens he has for his cameras. I won't have time to get a T adapter in time so I have to work with it. Plus if I like this than I was thinking of saving up for a DSLR after I get a new telescope. I've got my grandfather's old Tasco 80mm (I think it is 80, not positive). I got some film, a 4 pack of fujifilm Superia Xtra 800 after doing some research on what I would need.

chaoticgeek:

I was thinking of just taking some pics of constellations with the lens he has for his cameras. I won't have time to get a T adapter in time so I have to work with it. Plus if I like this than I was thinking of saving up for a DSLR after I get a new telescope. I've got my grandfather's old Tasco 80mm (I think it is 80, not positive). I got some film, a 4 pack of fujifilm Superia Xtra 800 after doing some research on what I would need.

If you only want to take pictures of the stars and constellations you will still need the shutter cable. And, unless you only want to shot star trail images you will still need some way of tracking the nightsky.  There are a couple ways you can do this. 1. if you have a telescope on a mount that has tracking motors you can mount the camera Piggy back.  But you don't have that so your other option is a Scotch Mount / Barn Door Tracker.  That is something you can build if you have a little mechanical skills and time.
http://www.astronomyboy.com/barndoor/links.html

If you don't do that you will be limited to star trail images.  Even stars and constellation still need a little exposure time. 

 

 Ya my brother has the shutter cable thingy. I've been looking at the scotch mount thing too. So I'm gonna see what I can do. Otherwise I'll just go with short exposere times, like around 20 seconds or so just to play with. I'm not really looking for anything cool, just figured that while I'm out in the cold I can point a camera where ever I'm looking too and see what happens.

chaoticgeek:

 Ya my brother has the shutter cable thingy. I've been looking at the scotch mount thing too. So I'm gonna see what I can do. Otherwise I'll just go with short exposere times, like around 20 seconds or so just to play with. I'm not really looking for anything cool, just figured that while I'm out in the cold I can point a camera where ever I'm looking too and see what happens.

Depending on the conditions of the skies at the time and place you're taking short exposure like 20 seconds with film you might only end up with black or brown frames that most often won't even get developed by a developer.

I've used that Fuji film you plan on using, not the best film for night sky astrophotography, but if there is any sky glow you will get a brown underexposed picture of nothing.  If the sky is free of sky glow/light pollution you might see only the brightest star(s), otherwise only black unexposed film. Depending much on the lens aperture and f/stop that you use, you will probably need more than 20 seconds, If your skies are very dark and you aim it at a constellation with bright stars like the Orion Constellation I wouldn't start with anything less than 30 seconds with the lowest f/stop you've got with the lens you're using. You might see a little trailing in the stars, but you should capture the brightest stars in the constellation.

Set the camera up on a tripod and aim it at the Celestial pole. lock the shutter open for about 20 to 30 minutes, provided you have darks skies you should get some nice star trail images doing that.  If you have too much sky glow however, you might exceed reach reciprocity failure (Sky-Glow limit) of the film and get a washed out looking picture. 
These are things you can experiment with. The problem is that you won't know what worked and what didn't until you get the film developed and see the results.  Keep notes on what you do with each shot so when you get the film back you have a record of what works and what doesn't.

Film Photography can be fun, then on the other hand it can be really frustrating, and expensive after a while.  

 

Ya thanks for the info. I was looking into star trails photos too. I figure I'll just wing it once I get out there. I'm gonna be out in the middle of no where so I should have fairly dark skies. I'll make sure I take notes on all the pics I end up taking so I can see what worked and what did not. But I don't plan on staying on film for too long. If I like it I was thinking of heading towards a DSLR camera.

To add to what Tim said, also be sure that when you take the film to be developed you MUST tell the processor "Don't cut the negatives" and explain to the attendant that the photos are of the night sky and therefore the negatives will appear to be clear.

Almost everyone uses automated film processors/printers today that "read" the gaps between frames ONCE to determine every place after that where it will AUTOMATICALLY cut the negatives into short strips. So, if they get the first frame wrong, they'll get them ALL wrong.

Don't forget a tripod. When you use a tripod, spread the legs as far apart as it will allow ... that will make it steadier. Another way to help it is to hang a weight from the bottom of the center post, or the leg spreader it has one (most consumer-grade ones do).

If you have the chance to photograph on several different nights, use most of the roll the first night for exposure tests. Aim the camera at Polaris and make test exposures, doubling the exposure between frames, until you've reached about six minutes. So, start with 15 seconds, then 30, then 1 minute, then 2 ... Be consistent so that when you get the prints back you can tell for sure the exposure length of the one that looks best to you.

Once you know you're shooting real exposures, have those rolls processed and scanned to a CD. This will allow you to manipulate them using a photo editor program. That will really help.

I encourage you to make one of your subjects the whole of the constellation Cassiopeia. It will be hard to frame the image through the camera viewfinder because it will be dim, but if you can take in part of Perseu and the region between Cass. and Pegaus where Andromeda attaches, you'll probably also get the Double Cluster and the Andromeda Galaxy in the image.

Once you decide to move to a DSLR, there is only one way to go: Canon. From the Digital Rebels on up, the Canons have the edge on astrophotography over everyone else. Nikon is the only other brand that comes close, and it's still a distant second.

chaoticgeek:

If I like it I was thinking of heading towards a DSLR camera.

Don't let film determine whether you like astrophotography or not. The difference between film and digital is like apples and oranges.  Film can be very frustrating and discouraging.  Digital might have frustrating time too, but is a lot more encouraging when you can see the results almost immediately. 

A digital camera might cost more up front, however, in the long run you will be saving money where you not spending it on film and film developing.  If you don't like what you see with digital you simply delete and try again, no money waisted waiting on results.

Before you get your digital camera, you're going to want to start learning about image capture, dark frames, bias/offset frames, and flat frames, stacking, post processing data ,manipulation and image enhancing techniques. Most of which you can discuss and learn more about here at astronomy.com forums.

  

 

Ya I was reading about the negitives. Plus I read somewhere that it is nice to take a picture of something on the first frame so the developers know where it starts. I'm not sure if that is right or not. When I stopped at the Ritz Camera Store they told me that they could cut the negatives manually for me.

 I don't think that this will determin if I like astrophotography or not just a little side project here. I just thought that on short notice I could do this fairly easily while I'm already out. I doubt that I'll hate it so much that I'll never want to try it again. Just using film mostly because I have a lack of money to get the DSLR at the moment and I know I have access to a SLR. Oddly enough they were my grandfather's cameras too as is the telescope I've got now...

A long time ago I developed the habit of making a photo of my business card as the first frame on a roll. All the processor needs is a white-ish first frame to be able to sense the edges of the frame and set the cutter spacing, so even exposing an out-of-focus street light, or a white flashlight, etc. will work.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting with what you have at the moment! You'll still learn a lot that way ... Good luck on your trip and experiment!

chipdatajeffB:

A long time ago I developed the habit of making a photo of my business card as the first frame on a roll. All the processor needs is a white-ish first frame to be able to sense the edges of the frame and set the cutter spacing, so even exposing an out-of-focus street light, or a white flashlight, etc. will work.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting with what you have at the moment! You'll still learn a lot that way ... Good luck on your trip and experiment!

I used to just take a picture of some scenery or even my telescopes on the first couple frames during the daylight. That gives the reference frames you need and maybe even some picture you will want to keep.

I have a sony A100 dslr only because i also have a minolta 700si film <same lense mount>and have 2500 dollars worth of lenses  . the sony is ok for shooting constilations and stars if the sky is dark . I leave the camera on night photography and tripod mount the camera . again this only works whene the skys are real dark and no turbulance . the tripod i use is a slik professional . it alone weighs about 18 lbs . digitals are great for shooting the moon as mine has a 1.5 crop factor , which makes a 500mm lense 750mm. my sony is 10.2 megapixels the newest model is 24 megapixels but costs 3000. dollars for the body only. If i had to start again i would go with canon .

 Sorry for joining in so late, was just browsing around this forum. So how were the results of your photo session?

 I found it interesting to note that film is no longer used much. I still use film out here in Mumbai, India and we do get film around here still so not a problem even with the developing. I usually use Kodak 400 ISO colour print film which is pretty cheap out here at around $2 each. Processing costs are only about $5 including the 36 prints (size 4X6 inches) and a CD with high resolution scans at 300dpi.

 It is always a good idea to take a regular picture for the first couple of frames so that the automatic processor will know where to cut the film all along in the right places. You can also ask them not to cut the negatives and cut them yourself.

 I took pictures of the recent total solar eclipse from China also on the above mentioned film and the results are there on the online gallery in the Sun and Moon Section. Hope you see them and leave your comments there. 

Cheers,

Aadil.

 Well that night was a bust... I ended up screwing up the camera so I could not take any pictures, no clue how I did that either. Since then I've been attempting to take some pictures and gotten a few done but I've not had much free time so I've not been attempting astrophotography lately. Just mainly observing with my binos. I did get a few scanned in and posted them in my deviant art account at Chaoticgeek's DeviantArt.

 Sad to hear that your camera didn't work that night. Guess what, even mine did not work during the total solar eclipse in China, well one of the two cameras I was using on my camera mount. Sometimes it happens. I was lucky I had a couple of back ups so I did not lose all the pics!!! But I did lose a lot of good pics for sure. Next time I hope to have at least one DSLR as well!!!

 I saw your pics on your website and think you can improve a lot with a good motor drive and a normal SLR camera with manual settings which do not require a battery to operate the shutter. I have a two Pentax ME Super cameras but both are not working properly right now since they need servicing. Another one I use is a Practika MTL-5B which is a screw thread mount for the lens. These are quite good for my normal astrophotography. I have heard the Olympus had some problems with battery life but not sure which model it was.

Cheers,

Aadil.

 Ya but life happens... I am saving up for a scope that I'll be able to attatch a motor drive to so that I can use it with that once I get everything going. Although with driving an hour each way to go to school and back twice a week it is getting a litle tough. My regualr college classes and my H&R block tax classes eat up so much of my time I get little time to work at my job. I'm hoping that once the tax classes are done and I can get a job there for part of the tax season I can start to save up a significant portion of money for the scope. So I'm going to guess that sometime by this time next year I'll be all set with the scope and a decent mount minus the motor that will come later. So hopefully by the time of the lunar eclipse that I can see in december 2010 I'll have everything around and a few times out with the camera to be able to get some nice shots when the lunar eclipse comes along. Although everything I've been reading has said I should go with a dobsian style scope for my first one but I'm gonna say that is going to be just blown straight out of the water.