If you don't know the depth of the water, you might want to check first before you leap, especially when you don't yet know how to swim. What the heck does that have to do with astrophotography? well read on and see.

　

You look up in awe at the night sky and realize you want more from it than the mere naked eye views you are currently limited to. You want to venture into a new hobby that can introduce you to the many wonders of our Solar system and beyond the stars into the deep space of the Universe. You want a telescope so you start shopping around and reading magazines. Then you are find an overwhelming abundance of information on the Internet. All the while you are exposed to beautiful images of various nebulae, distant spiral galaxies, dense star clusters, all in the colorful glory. Then the light comes on in your head, you want to see objects that look like that; Surprise! You can't see objects in their full colorful glory like those pictures in magazine or throughout the Internet. To the human eye the universe is mostly black and white with various shades of gray. Some brighter objects when under the right conditions can reveal very subtle colors. But in reality it's not much, and definitely nothing like those pretty pictures reveal. So now what, you want to capture images on your own so you can keep and share with your family and friends what you see out there beyond the stars. Be Prepared! If you have a small limited budget you might be in for a shock. However, don't despair.

So are you ready to venture into the wonderful hobby of amateur astronomy?

If you are then you are in for a wonderful adventure that will never end. As long as you are armed with a little knowledge you should be good to go. Knowledge which you will find many more experienced amateur astronomers are willing to share with you. All you have to do is ask.

Now I ask you this: are you considering starting this new hobby with the intention of jumping right into astrophotography so you can capture some nice pictures of what you see through a telescope? You have no idea of what to get, or how to get yourself started do you? If you so then please sit back, relax and enjoy; read all this and you should have a better idea of what to expect and what you will need. At least I hope you will be a little better prepared when you're done.

If you're aiming to capture those nice colorful images of deep sky objects, or the moon and planets, you're not alone. Astrophotography is a wonderful hobby to occupy your nights. I must warn that it can be quite lonely out there in the dark by yourself. Nonetheless, just getting started in amateur astronomy itself can be quite overwhelming when trying to decide on what kind of equipment to purchase. There is a lot you will need to consider before taking that first big leap. So many different kinds of telescopes, mounts, and much more. So many different accessories are needed, or what kind of accessories are you going to want just because the might be useful and so on and on. There are so many choices to consider with so much available and so many experienced people telling you what their experiences have been with their favorite equipment, or not so favorite. Information Overload! I've got a headache!

To top it off, you want to jump directly into a more advanced area of amateur astronomy. Well, like I said already your not alone, and it can be done. Though there are many different methods or techniques used, levels of expertise and/or proficiency to achieve varying results. As long as you are properly prepared you can achieve some wonderful results yourself.

Be careful, You may find or see a nice looking telescope setup for a reasonable cost. It may appear as though it will work for your desires, however, not knowing any better you could easily get in over your head real fast. You will soon find that it is not as simple as connecting a camera to any telescope and taking a picture. You could end up with equipment that is plenty suitable for visual astronomy, but on the other hand it will be very inadequate for astrophotography, giving you less than desirable results, and causing a lot of disappointments and discouragement. You will probably want something suitable for both. In this case you will need to be more careful in your decisions getting something more suitable for astrophotography purposes rather than visual.

You can either start out with equipment that is just adequate, then add to it overtime as you go. You might probably make a few replacement purchases which overtime can turn out to be a very costly investment by the time you tally it all up. Or you can save up and put out the cash and get a very nice proper set up that will last a life time, and overtime will have actually saved you money and headaches. .

Note:

You will see it is very common for people involved in both visual and photographic astronomy to have multiple telescopes and mounts with one dedicated astrophotography setup. Or you might just learn some people once into astrophotography dedicate themselves to photography rather than the visual enjoyment many others get with a telescope.

Let me tell you I must admit right off hand, there are many people that are much more qualified than I am on the topic of astrophotography, However, I still wish to make a few comments and suggestions.

I am not going to go into all the details of exposure times and processing etc, although related that's a different more complex topic. I am only going to discuss equipment considerations so you become aware of the actual commitment and possible costs involved. At the bottom I have provided some web links where you can learn much more about astrophotography. Included also at the bottom of this post are two very good book recommendations. 

With the advent of new and ever improving technology with digital imaging, it's now more accessible, affordable, and, easier for the average person. More people are taking up interests in photography of all kinds. It also seems that more people are becoming more aware of what's above their heads in the night sky. With publicity of such things as the (HST) Hubble Space Telescope and the many wonderful images it has produced, I believe things such as that are playing a large part in the ever growing curiosity in the personal visual exploration further into space by people of all ages.

Be aware however, those nice looking Observatory or HST images are produced, processed and manipulated by technological advances in equipment and software applications for image processing to bring us the colorful images we see as an end product. Image manipulation and processing can be very misleading to the average person. Some people want to, or think, they can see the same through their telescopes that they see in those pictures. Well! unfortunately that is not going to happen. Those images are long exposure and/or multiple long exposures with cameras that are many times more sensitive than the human eye can ever be. They are also processed and manipulated to correct and enhance color and detail within them to make them more presentable.

Once people realize and understand the facts about colour in images, and what they actually see through a telescope, they can learn to enjoy amateur astronomy much more. Many will eventually want to capture their own images such as those seen all over the Internet and in magazines. After all who can blame anyone for wanting that, they are some beautiful and colorful images that can give you some very nice memories to reflect back on. Hey that is all fine and dandy, I recommend it to anyone who can afford it, and is willing to put the time and effort involved into it. Moreover, I would also like to make a point to get people to understand there is much more to it than getting any Ole telescope and mounting a camera to it. Many people imagine themselves getting pictures similar to those that are published in magazines or found on the Internet. No problem right? Well, we will see! Not to say you can't do it, in fact quite the opposite, this can be done, it is done everyday by many amateur astronomers of all ages. As long as you meet a few prerequisites first then you will be able to create some very eye pleasing results. You may need to, or want to, set a little more money aside than you initially planned on if astrophotography is your goal.

More often than not, I have seen people with extremely limited budgets wanting to take the giant leap into astrophotography without taking the first learning steps. They want to get right up there where others are that did take those necessary learning steps. Most more experienced astrophotographers took many months and possibly even years to get to the level they are currently at. So hopefully everything I am about to tell you here will help the awareness process so you will be prepared for some of the possibilities.

Never fear though, there are different techniques or methods of astrophotography that are suitable for all levels of experience in amateur astronomy. I will start with the easiest method working on up to the most difficult, briefly explaining each in the easiest way the best that I can to include what you will need as far as equipment and accessories, and the concerns of each method. If you want more you can refer to those web links I placed at the end.

First couple methods require one of two types of cameras: a 35mm SLR camera with (B) bulb setting for the shutter, and a remote cable to lock the shutter open. Or a Digital SLR camera with (B) bulb shutter setting/programmable exposure and or remote to control the shutter.

With a 35mm SLR camera you will lock the shutter open and let it go for a long timed exposure. Time would depend on the film and how dark your skies are, and what method you use. With a DSLR depending on the object, you will take long and/or multiple short to long exposures then stack the individual image frames on your computer with the appropriate software. You will need to learn about image stacking and the purpose for it. You can find that information on the Internet. That's a little too lengthy to add to this already long blog.

　

Method 1: all you need is your SLR or DSLR camera and a simple but stable camera tripod. With the camera on a tripod, just angle the camera toward an interesting star filled area of the night sky and take a long or set of long exposures for a lengthy period of time to record "Star Trails". These make very interesting pictures and are a great start for experimenting with exposure times. This is the easiest and least expensive method to get you started in astrophotography.. Many people enjoy the open sky toward the celestial poles so they get that nice circular rotation of star trails around the pole.

Method 2: is more difficult and becoming more and more popular with almost any telescope. You can get some very nice single shot digital planetary and lunar images even with a simple Alt-Az Dobsonian mounted telescope. This Method is known as "A-focal". You can use almost any kind of camera for this method. The proper mounting hardware to help hold the camera in place over the eyepiece can make it easier or more stable, although it can and has been done by hand which some people might say is easier for them. If you try it that way you will need a steady hand or you will get a very blurry image.

A-focal photography is simply bringing the image to focus in an eyepiece of your choice in your telescope, then taking a picture of that image projected through the EP with your camera. With the object focused in the eyepiece of the telescope, if using a SLR or DSLR you will set the lens focus to infinity and take the shot. Difficulty increases as you increase magnification, especially with a telescope without tracking such as a Dobsonian. You can, if you have steady hands just hold the camera over the eyepiece and take the shot. Not as easy as it sounds, believe me. You will probably take dozens of shots just for that one you will keep.

This method is great for very short exposures of the moon or larger planets such as Jupiter and Saturn using a point and shoot digital camera or digicam. If you have a Digicam or single shot point and shoot digital camera with a video mode you can also take short videos then stack the individual frames into a nice crisp high resolution image. Some people will use multiple short AVI videos then stack the frames from all the videos to combine into one single high detail image. You may have to convert the video from .MOV to AVI with any available conversion software such as RAD Video Tools. Web-cams such as the Phillip SPC900NC are becoming more popular for A-focal / planetary imaging.

Below is an example set up for A-focal photography with a simple point and shoot single shot digital camera.

A few examples of single shot A-focal images with a Kodak EasyShare digital camera held to the EP of a 10" DOB

If you dare, A-focal could also be used for long exposure DSO photography, however I would not recommend it. Other than the possible intrusion of unwanted stray light between the camera lens and EP which will ruin a picture, you will need a more expensive mount with extremely precise tracking with very precise polar alignment and guiding. Any and all errors will be detected immediately by the camera and can ruin what otherwise might have been a good picture.. Not many people do DSO photography using this method, in fact I don't know any, especially with the newer DSLR and CCD cameras. IMO It’s not worth the trouble, I've tried and failed a few attempts.

Note: Unless you have a large aperture telescope with a very long focal length, (although it is still possible), a DSLR is not the preferred camera of choice for planetary imaging regardless of photography method used.  The field of view with a DSLR is too large making the image scale of the planet very tiny.
Additionally, Digital magnification and/or image enlarging does not produce a desirable planetary image.  

For the next few methods you will need a good mount, preferably an equatorial mount. Although a fork mount will work with limitations, or the addition of an EQ wedge. You want a good hefty mount with a load capacity that is more than suitable to handle at least twice the weight of the telescope and all necessary accessories required for astrophotography. You don’t want to approach, reach or exceed the instrument load capacity of a mount for astrophotography. The closer you're equipment weight is to the maximum capacity, the more undue stress and strain on the motor drives there will be possibly compromising the accuracy of tracking/guiding, and the stability of the mount can or will also be compromised. Tracking will be more difficult, tracking errors will be more frequent and corrections will be slower.

I cannot emphasize strong enough the importance of a good quality, heavy duty, sturdy and accurate mount for this purpose. Preferably an (EQ) Equatorial Mount! This is often where people on a limited budget will run into problems. Their desires often overrun their budgets, and they may shy away from trying. That's not the purpose for what I am writing, I'm not trying to discourage anyone away from astrophotography, I only want to make sure they understand the expenses that can be involved, and the different methods available to them.

A good heavy duty mount capable of quality Deep Sky Astrophotography can get very expensive. For some people it might even be cost prohibitive. The mount itself can cost several hundreds, or thousands of dollars. Starting around $700.00 for a 35 lb capacity mount. Other than the camera, the mount is the single most important piece of equipment required for astrophotography, then the telescope. There are things you can get away with on visual astronomy where the mount is concerned that you don’t even want to consider for astrophotography.

That being said, You can take a picture through almost any telescope with the proper camera and accessories. The Field Of View, Object Size/image scale, and Resolution will be determined by the aperture and focal length of the telescope, and the film plane or sensor chip of the camera. However that will all be meaningless if you don’t have a mount good enough to meet the task at hand.

With DSLRs and CCDs it is easier to manipulate the object size and detail with image post processing software. Provided there is the proper amount of quality clean error free image data collected. You can also manipulate scanned film images on the computer, although there isn’t as much needed, or that you really can do to film like you can with digital image data.

At this point I will continue on with some of the equipment needs, or equipment that can be used for the following methods of astrophotography. .

You will obviously need a telescope, the size of the aperture is up to you and what you can afford. Optical quality is a great concern for photography. The better the quality of the optics in the telescope, the better the images will be. Any optical defects that can not be seen with the human eye will surely be picked up by a camera. Achromatic refractors are famous for Chromatic aberration / false color in images. Too much of that can leave you with less than desirable effects.

Anyways, like I already stated above you can take a picture through almost any telescope. Just remember this though, "Aperture rules". The larger the aperture the more you will get out of astrophotography, the deeper you can go into space capturing those faint distant objects. You want to mount your telescope on a good sturdy mount with motor drives on the RA and Declination axis. Additionally, don’t let the fact that the mount has tracking mislead you, you will still need some way of guiding the telescope during the imaging process/exposure,.especially if you're using film. Even though a mount has tracking, unfortunately they don’t do it perfectly. There will be periodic errors(PE) in sidereal tracking. There may also be drift caused by imperfect polar alignment, imperfect balance and the wind. Many mounts will have Periodic Error Correction (PEC). You can train the drives and it will learn to correct and track a little more precisely to allow for longer unguided exposures. However, you still want some way to make sure it is tracking the object accurately while imaging. There is just too many variables that can cause tracking errors that will need to be corrected.

There are a few methods of guiding for photography. Many people use a second smaller telescope mounted piggy back on the primary telescope called a Guide-scope. Or the smaller telescope is used for photography while the main telescope is used for guiding and carefully observing at the same time.

Manual guiding with a Guide-scope will also require the use of an illuminated reticle eyepiece so that you can center on a star and keep it centered. This will allow you to Keep an eye on the star making any necessary adjustments if you see any drift or tracking errors. Note: The added weight of a guide scope will also be a major consideration for you when thinking about the mounts load capacity. Everything you load onto the mount to include the camera must be considered. Also, trying to guide on a star in less the ideal atmospheric seeing can prove to be difficult. The guide star can be shifting and jumping all over the place due to atmospheric instabilities. It could cause you to make unnecessary adjustments that could also be picked up in the picture. Manual guiding is something that will take practice. However it is not suggested to take images in bad seeing conditions anyways.

Illuminated Reticle or Micro Guiding Eyepiece

With Illuminated Guiding and Measuring Scales

or with Adjustable Crosshairs

　

Dual refractor setup for manually guided prime focus photography.

The above setup is the Celestron C6-R GT. It's a 6" achromatic refractor on the Celestron ASGT CG5-GT mount. The small telescope mounted piggy back is the Celestron C80 ED refractor which is currently my primary photography telescope.

Another way of using a Guide-scope is with a mount that has Auto-guiding capabilities. This method you will require a PC or laptop and/or Auto-guider to connect to, a CCD camera or web cam.(web cam is essentially a CCD video camera). With the CCD or web cam connect to the Guide-scope focused on a selected guide star, through the Auto-guider or computer with Auto-guiding software connected to an auto-guider port or the hand control on the mount, the Auto-guiding software on your computer will make all necessary adjustments as they are detected by the camera and computer. This can be the most accurate way of guiding and will also make your nights of imaging much easier and less straining on the neck. All you need to do is set up and configure everything to do what you want for whatever length of time and you can virtually fire and forget until it is done. Auto-guiding is great on those long cold nights so you can head into your nice warm house, or if you have a second telescope and want to do some visual observing as well.

The following is my Celestron C6 R-GT and C80ED setup for auto-guided DSLR photography. A Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT attached to the C6 R, and Philips SPC900NC(ToUcam Pro III) as the CCD sensor camera for Auto-guiding attached to the C80ED.

Estimated cost of all this is about $3200.00 and this is a lightweight modest set up.

　

Auto-guided image.

There are a couple more methods that don’t require a guide scope. One way is with an Off-Axis Guider(OAG), another special accessory that attach's to the telescope between the camera body and the focuser. They have a special built in mirror that allows the image to be seen off axis from the camera through a eyepiece while still allowing the light to reach the film plane or sensor chip of the camera. This way you can guide and take a pictures through the same telescope and focuser without increasing the load too much on the mount. This is not commonly preferred by experienced photographers. They have a few disadvantages or problems that could be undesirable for good astrophotography..

Off Axis/Radial Guider

　

Another but more expensive way and often preferred by many is with a dual chip CCD camera. One sensor chip is for gathering all the image data and the second smaller sensor chip is used to focus on a guide star and used along with the image capture / Auto-guiding software.

SBIG Dual Sensor Self-Guiding CCD Camera

　

At this point you might be able to see were this can start getting expensive. Not including the cost of a good mount and telescope A good quality DSLR or CCD camera can get costly too. However CCD cameras are becoming more common place lately and less expensive. You can use almost any DSLR to achieve satisfactory images for a reasonable cost. However the more expensive higher quality DSLR such as the Canon EOS 20D DSLR or its successors can get expensive. Or the Canon EOS 20Da which was a limited edition DSLR designed for astrophotography purposes which can cost on-wards of more than $2100.00 just for the basic camera body. However if you look around now that the 20Da has been discontinued you can find the Camera body for a relatively much lower price.

　

Method 3: Piggy back photography. This method requires a 35mm SLR or a DSLR mounted piggy back on the telescope or a special mount attachment to mount the camera to the telescope. This is great for long exposure wide field images of the night sky with your camera and its own lens system. The field of view will depend on the lens you use. If you use a Zoom lens you will want to make sure there is some way to lock the zoom/slide ring in place so it does not slip when the angle of the telescope is vertically aiming high in the sky. A simple rubber band is often suitable for this purpose of the zoom doesn't have a lock.

With piggy back photography you can still, although carefully, observe the object through the telescope while the camera is taking the picture. Be careful not to bump the telescope when looking into the EP.

This method is the least sensitive, more forgiving, to any alignment and tracking errors unless you use a long focal length zoom lens. With a good set up and polar alignment, and, Properly trained PEC or precise motor drives you can take some very long exposures before seeing any visible errors in the image.

I have seen some very impressive images / panorama's of the summer milky way with a short focal length lens such as a wide view 15-20mm lens.

Wide field Piggy back image of the North America Nebula in the Cygnus constellation

Wide field piggy back image of The Orion Constellation

A typical piggyback mounting method

　

Orion Telescopes makes a little mount with tracking drives just for a camera that can achieve the same results as piggy backing on a telescope.

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=296&item

In addition, a nice simple method used to capture wide field shots with your camera similar to piggy back photography, without an expensive mount, is to build a Barn Door tracker, or Scotch Mount.. These are excellent for entry into long exposure photography. refer to the following link to learn more about them.

http://www.astronomyboy.com/barndoor/links.shtml

　

Method 4: is "Prime Focus Astrophotography" in effect you're turning the telescope into the Camera lens. With this method if you are using either a 35mm SLR or a DSLR you will need an additional accessory called a T-ring. Depending on the telescope and focuser you may also need a T-adapter to slip into the telescopes focuser.

Remove the Lens from the camera and replace it with the T-Ring and if need the T-Adapter. Then attach to or insert into the focuser of the telescope. Now you have a large and powerful lens attached to your camera. If you are using a purpose built CCD camera designed for astrophotography then it will have a nose piece that is already designed to be fit into the telescopes focuser. If you are using a Web Cam such as the Phillips ToUcam Pro, then you will need a special adapter to attach to or replace the lens so that it will fit into the telescope focuser. aka Mogg adapter

Prime focus is probably the most common and practical method of astrophotography to capture those (DSO’s) Deep sky objects or lunar images. IMHO, Not the best method for planetary images when using a SLR or DSLR camera though. Not near enough magnification/image scale, and it's very hard to get correct and even exposure without overexposing the planet. For planetary images at prime focus you would want a purpose built CCD camera for planetary imaging such as the (LPI) Lunar planetary imagers or Solar System Imagers that are sold by Meade, Orion and Celestron. These are designed specifically for those objects and are very affordable. Web-cams such as the Phillips ToUcam are also very useful for lunar and planetary imaging at prime focus with the suitable adapter to fit to the telescope focuser.

In Primary focus photography you will want a quality, heavy duty, sturdy mount with accurate tracking. You will also have to ensure proper telescope balance and accurate polar alignment. For long exposures you will need to either manually guide or use an Auto-guider as described above.

If you attempt this method with a less than stable or substandard mount you will probably not be satisfied with the results of your images and soon become discouraged.

Prime focus image of the Orion Nebula complex: Unguided and you can see the tracking errors when looking at the stars.

　

Some short manually guided prime focus photos through 80mm ED refractor on Fuji 400 Slide film

M13 Globular Cluster in Hercules Exp:12min

　

M57 area of Lyra Exp: 25min (Tiny red dot is the ring nebula)

M17 Swan Nebula in Sagittarius Exp: 15min

　

M8 Lagoon Nebula in Sagittarius Exp: 22min

　

M31 Andromeda Galaxy, total Exp: 90min

　

You are welcome to view more of my image, many of the most recent and better images were shot with a Canon EOS Digital SLR rather than a 35mm SLR Film camera. Those can be found in my Facebook photo albums.

　

Method 5: Next and final method is called (EP) Eyepiece projection. You will need an additional accessory for this method of photography called a EP projection adapter. This item threads onto the T-Ring and allows you to place an eyepiece inside it then connect to the focuser. This method is probably the hardest and most sensitive to any stability problems with the mount along with any polar alignment and tracking errors.

This is probably used more often for lunar and planetary photography than it would be for DSO’s. IMO, the exposure lengths required for many of the fainter DSO’s is often too much to achieve satisfactory results without too many noticeable errors. (Not unless you're willing to invest a small fortune into a premium mount capable of tracking accuracies within a few parsecs rather than arc-seconds).

Nevertheless, it can and has been done. It is just more difficult and the need for a stable accurate mount is even more important. This is the least forgiving method because you are using more magnification. More magnification used = the more you also magnify any kind of errors, and the more magnification used = the more likely to introduce visible errors into your image.

　

EP Projection through Celestron 6" refractor using with 25mm plössl eyepiece

Camera: Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT / 350D

single 1/20 second exposure, ISO 100.

Converted to gray-scale.

　

　

Equipment considerations / requirements for astrophotography dependent on method:

Mount:

The Mount is probably the most critical component of any good astrophotography platform. It is the foundation of the complete set up. As a general rule of thumb you don't want to exceed 50% to 60% of the maximum instrument load capacity of your mount for photographic purposes. Stability issues are not the same for visual as they are for photographic uses.

The type of mount: For some people it is a personal preference, however in my honest opinion I would say preferably a German Equatorial Mount. (GEM or EQ for short). If not then a stable alt-az Fork mount, With a fork mount you might also want an EQ wedge for prolonged exposures without detectable field rotation. Note: Newer digital technology and post processing software and methods can overcome many minor tracking and other issues caused by the mount, sky conditions and noise inherent with electronic devices.

Most mounts will come with a tripod, this is very much one of your stability consideration. You definitely don't want a flimsy little tripod. There are some that you can't even breath on without sending vibrations through and into the telescope.

You may want to consider a pier in place of a tripod. Especially with a Large telescope, or if you plan on a permanently mounted telescope in a personal observatory of some kind.

Power supply:

You will need some kind of portable power supply and or an ac to dc adapter if you have access to a ac power source.

Telescope:

Newtonian, Schmidt Newtonian, Schmidt Cassegrain, Maksutov Cassegrain, Ritchey Chretian, Achromatic refractor, Apochromatic refractor.

So many to choose from.. That is more often a personal preference issue. Each different type of telescope will perform better in some ways that another may not. That's up to you and what you learn in your endeavors to learn all you can. .

Guide Scope w/guide-scope rings:

Usually a smaller refractor. Generally no less than half the focal length of the primary telescope used for photography.

Guiding EP:

Illuminated reticle or micro-guiding EP.

You will want one of these regardless if you manually guide or not. They do come in very handy for other purposes, such as polar alignment which you will find is very important.

Attachment accessories:

T-Ring, T-Adapter, EP projection Adapter, Off-Axis Guider and/or piggy-back mounting hardware.

Computer:

PC or Laptop and necessary cables and cord consideration for the computer and camera. (not necessary for manually guided film photography)

Image capturing software and/or Auto-guiding software. Most purpose built CCD Camera will include their own image capture and editing software with original purchase.

Image processing and editing software. Adobe Photoshop CS is a common but expensive program. It will do wonders with your images. However, you can find suitable programs on the Internet for less or no cost. GIMP or Pleiades PixInsight LE are both good.

A popular Image stacking program is Registax which is more useful for lunar and planetary image stacking, and Deep Sky Stacker for Deep Sky images, both of which you can get at no cost also. Nebulosity by Stark Labs for capture and stacking is my personal preference but has a small cost, amount dependent on which version you want to purchase. Please remember, many of these programs might be freeware, however, if you like the program a small contribution never hurts. These people invest hundreds of hours of their own time developing these programs that make things easier for us. If you can show your appreciation.

Camera:

(35mm SLR, Web-Cam, Digital, DLSR or purpose built CCD)

　

35mm SLR camera with T-ring universal EP projection adapter and T-Adapter.

Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT with 2" T-Adapter attached, Remote Switch, AC Power Adapter.

　

A popular web-cam used for Lunar and planetary imaging.

The Phillips SPC900NC

Sorry but this particular web cam has been discontinued from production. You might however still be able to find one for sale somewhere or from someone.

　

Adapter required to use web-cam with telescope(aka Mogg adapter)

　

A good web-cam such as one of the Phillips ToUcam pro series web-cams can perform just as good or even better than some of the more expensive (LPI)Lunar Planetary Images or (SSI)Solar System Imagers you can find on the market.

　

One of my Web Cam images of Jupiter

　

Note:

Once again I will emphasize to you that the Mount is the most important piece of equipment when considering a venture into astrophotography.

I will also add that many people get a smaller high quality refractor to sit piggy back on a larger telescope for quality Rich/Wide field images. You can use the smaller piggy back telescope for photography and use the larger telescope for guiding or vise versa, depending one the object or your desired goal.

Most important for astronomy and especially astrophotography is:

Dark Skies

Sturdy quality precision mount

And for greater light grasp and resolution, "Aperture Rules".

As promised, a few links for more detailed information about astrophotography:

http://www.allaboutastro.com

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/6529/primer.html

http://www.astroimages.com/

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/astrowhat.html

Books:
Michael Covington Digital SLR Astrophotography

Robert Reeves Introduction to Digital Astrophotography

Another link you might want. This is a CCD calculator that will calculate the Image Scale and FOV for your telescope camera combination
http://www.newastro.com/book_new/camera_app.php

Enjoy

NICE POST!!

Gone_super_nova wrote:

NICE POST!!

Thank you, Actually it is still a work in progress.

To All:
If anyone with astrophotography experience sees that there is something that could be added to my post please PM or Email me with your ideas and I will take them into consideration.. However keep in mind I am trying to keep it as simple as possible with consideration to the equipment only, All other references to more expanded knowledge and detailed information concerning astrophotography can be found in the astrophotography forums or the links I have provided at the bottom of my post.
I also don't think we need to turn this into a catalog of recommended equipment, equipment sources and equipment prices. There are plenty of posts for each particular circumstance already and we can also handle any other individuals situation seperately.


Have A Nice ___________

Tim,

I truley do respect you for taking the time to post such a thing. Great work!

David

Im a begginer, and i've learned a lot just by reading this post! man you should write a handbook bout this stuff thanks a lot!

kurei wrote:

Im a begginer, and i've learned a lot just by reading this post! man you should write a handbook bout this stuff thanks a lot!

Your not the first to say that. Between this post and a couple of others I have posted, If you print them out then you have yourself a little book.

Glad it helped

Have A Nice _________

wow really great post that is written using terms everyone can understand,ver helpful, I quess you have to sat that astrophotography like happiness is a journey not a destination.

Here is another thread I replied to with a lengthy right up that may also be useful to some people.

http://www.astronomy.com/ASY/CS/forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=317186 

 

Have A Nice __________ 

This is the feelings towards astrophotography by another member here as he has started his adventure into astrophotography.

The title to his post is  Astrophotography... Is it worth it?

Kevin Bozard wrote:

For the newer members here that may be thinking about getting into astrophotography. I offer this piece; based on my experience, and my opinions on the subject. Of course, all of this will depend on what kind of camera you're using too. But my experience is with a Deep Space Imaging CCD.  Astrophotography is a long and trying process, that's sometimes cold and lonely, or hot and muggy and lonely; depending on the season. There are a ton of things that will try try your patience as well. Clouds, ground fog, those little biting critters that always come out at night, or ice crystals that have formed in the astmosphere that really kills a good image. You may even be in the middle of capturing an awesome image on a clear steady night, and suddenly the power goes out. Thanks to the electric company, you've just lost probably the best image you could imagine taking. This only touches on the things that can go wrong when you're sitting there waiting on that perfect image, and I'm sure your imagination can conjure up hundreds more. Besides that, let's look at the nights when things go right, and you're able to capture an image on the target you're persuing. Once you've centered the object in your field of view, then you have to get it focused. This can be a task in itself. There are a few things you can do to help you achieve focus, but none of them will keep you focused from one object to the next. So you spend a good amount of time trying to reach focus. That time could range from a few minutes, to as much as thirty minutes, depending on how lucky you are, and how many problems you have while trying to set up that perfect image. I've gotten an object focused to my camera, only to decide that I wanted to add a 2x barlow to magnify the image even more. Well guess what, you just threw the time you spent focusing out the window. Now you have to refocus all over again. And if you can keep the object in the field of view while adding the Barlow, you've saved yourself another time consuming step of having to realign the object in the field of view. Now that you have the object centered, and have it as focused as you can possibly get it, it's time to find a decent exposure rate in which to image it with. On the Sombrero galaxy, I started with a 90 second exposure. After waiting a minute and a half, you then realize you have to lengthen the exposure time to drag in any detail out of the galaxy. So then I try 200 seconds. Now I have over exposed the image, so I cut it back to 120 seconds. This image looks pretty good, and thats the time I decided to go with. Now I could have tried 130, 140 or even 150 seconds to see if that would have helped the image any, but I decided to stay at 120. I've now spent approximately 20 to 30 minutes just getting focused, and finding a suitable exposure time. Then I spend another 20 minutes taking 10 images at 2 minutes per exposure just to capture my image. So on a good night, I've burned an hour just capturing one image. Then theres the post processing to stack all the images together, to come up with one final image, but I won't get into that now. The number of images you can capture in one outing depends on the amount of time you're willing to spend outside, and the amount of obstacles you have to overcome to achieve the captures of each image. When I do an all-nighter, I'm literally out there all night. From dusk to dawn, so you could be in for a long tiresome, sleepness night if you're willing. I have spent all night imaging and only came out of it with two decent images to share. Sometimes you can't even get that. So is it worth it? To me, it's worth every single second. Just spending time with the night sky is worth every misaligned, poorly tracked, atmosphere ruined image I've ever attempted. A bad night under the stars, beats a good day at work, or doing honey-do projects any time. So don't let anyone's bad experience with astrophotography change your mind about diving in head first. If you love what you're doing, then it doesn't matter how bad it gets, or how bad things turn out. Just keep at it. One of these nights you're going to succeed in your efforts, and that one time will quickly wash away all the bad times you've ever had.

Astrophotography! Great isn't it. it's the challanges and the rewards that make it all worthwhile.

It's like the ABC wide world of sports. "The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat." Gota love it. 

Surprising to see how many people think it is a simple task to achieve some of the results seen here. Just capturing the image data is only the beginning of the adventure. There is the post processing that is another adventure of its own. Also easier said than done in many circumstances. Sometimes that can be more difficult and take longer than the actuall capturing of the image.

It's a lot like work. a lengthy painstaking effort to achieve satisfactory results. A labor of love and devotion to aquire the end product.  Only to have the hardest critic (yourself) determine that it is not good enough, start over again until you get it right. Whatever that is! 

 

Have A Nice ___________

Hi Tim,

Wouldn't it be great if they could make your post on this subject a (Sticky)or a permanent posting visible all the time on the forum where anyone that visits the forum can see it right away?

It would save a lot of energy,  you wouldn't have to be replying to the same type of posts all the time.

Dennis ;)

Star Dragon wrote:

Hi Tim, Wouldn't it be great if they could make your post on this subject a (Sticky)or a permanent posting visible all the time on the forum where anyone that visits the forum can see it right away? It would save a lot of energy,  you wouldn't have to be replying to the same type of posts all the time. Dennis ;)

It's no big deal for me to keep replying to new people as needed. When they ask I can just link them to this post rather than repeating myself over and over..
Also, every now and then I extend a warm welcome to all new members in the introduction forum and post links to a this post, another of mine along with a couple other links to helpfull information here on astronomy.com.  

The only reason it was showing today is because I have maing edits and additions to it.

 

Have A Nice _________

Anyone know if you can get a camera adaptor with a 58mm dia thread, to screw on to the front of the camera lens?

No but what you can do is use a universal camera mount like shown in one of the images above for Afocal photography. Then you would be using the telescope with an eyepiece, then aligning the camera over the eyepiece to take your picture. All you would need to do is get the image focused as best that you can in the eyepiece, then set the camera lens focus to infinity(∞). This is an effective means of planetary and lunar photography. As for deep sky photography using the Afocal method, it is tough. You will need some very good and precise equipment. 

 

Have A Nice ________ 

 

For better or worse, I didn't even think about astrophotography when I bought my first (well, okay, three) telescopes. Now here I am five months later and really wishing I had thought ahead.

I live close to the Orion store in Cupertino, CA so I am predisposed to buying from them due to the ease of purchasing/returning items (plus no shipping cost) and the "walk-in and ask" quotient is pretty high for me as well. But if there are compelling reasons to buy elsewhere, I'm willing :)

With that in mind, I have no idea, despite lots of reading on the subject, what would be an ideal (and not too expensive) astrophotography scope? I plan to buy a CCD camera or two (for auto-guiding) or possible an SBIG with the autoguide chip built in. So I'd also need a mount (I'm leaning towards either the Sirius or Atlas EQs, depending on the weight of the scope I get)

That leaves....the SCOPE

And that is where I can't seem to get a grip on things. If it weren't for the fact that I already have a 10" Dob, I'd get a 10" Newt and be done with it, but it kills me thinking I'm buying a (nearly) identical tube. Also, I have read and heard that the ED Apos refracters are better due to their higher quality optics...

Can anyone give me the skinny on this? Personal anecdotes, research papers, stories of questionable authenticity?

Each of the scopes I already have has one major drawback with regards to using it for photography. The Dob won't focus properly due to the location of the secondary mirror (as opposed to a regular Newt). The MCT doesn't have any way to mount a guide scope to it (unless I get the SBIG, then it won't matter). The 100mm refractor isn't a good quality scope and will suffer from spiking and other optical flaws.

So, I could buy another 10" Newt (that's the biggest tube I can get in my car) and a guide scope to piggy back. Then get two of the Orion StarShoot II CCD's + the Atlas EQ autoguide mount. This whole setup will cost about $3500.

Or

I buy the SBIG (dunno which model...advise?) and put it on my existing 150mm MCT and still buy the Atlas EQ mount.

The second option is more expensive due to the SBIG, but seems to offer more flexibility because it has the autoguide CCD built in so I don't need a separate guide scope. This setup will cost about twice as much as the first one due to the SBIG, I suspect.

Oh, one last item. I have a brand new Macbook which I planned to use for controlling whatever beast I end up with, in addition to some other non-astronomy related hobbies (underwater photography, etc) so the software for any of this would need to be OS-X compatible.

Thanks for any/all of your advice. 

Christopher

 

PS - almost forgot...I am a DSO addict... 

insinu8 wrote:

With that in mind, I have no idea, despite lots of reading on the subject, what would be an ideal (and not too expensive) astrophotography scope? I plan to buy a CCD camera or two (for auto-guiding) or possible an SBIG with the autoguide chip built in. So I'd also need a mount (I'm leaning towards either the Sirius or Atlas EQs, depending on the weight of the scope I get) That leaves....the SCOPE

Your on the right track in thinking about matching the scope to the mount. Just make sure you get a mount that will be adequate for the telesocpe you have in minde plus some. As a general rule you don't want to exceed half the instrument load capacity of the mount.  

insinu8 wrote:

And that is where I can't seem to get a grip on things. If it weren't for the fact that I already have a 10" Dob, I'd get a 10" Newt and be done with it, but it kills me thinking I'm buying a (nearly) identical tube. Also, I have read and heard that the ED Apos refracters are better due to their higher quality optics... Can anyone give me the skinny on this? Personal anecdotes, research papers, stories of questionable authenticity? Each of the scopes I already have has one major drawback with regards to using it for photography. The Dob won't focus properly due to the location of the secondary mirror (as opposed to a regular Newt). The MCT doesn't have any way to mount a guide scope to it (unless I get the SBIG, then it won't matter). The 100mm refractor isn't a good quality scope and will suffer from spiking and other optical flaws.

The Optical tube of a 10" Dob is a Newtonian. The mirror placement of the secondary is not different. If you were to buy the Atlas 10" EQ newtonian it is essentially the same telescope. The difference is the altitude bearing system mounted on the sides of the OTA. If you want you can even mount that OTA to an EQ mount with the proper rings. There are people here who have done it and have had success with that set up. Look in this forum for the thread titled "Post pics of your telescopes".  However, it is a large and somewhat heavy telescope so you would want a large heavy duty mount. The Siriua and Atlas are adequate for visual and some limited photography, however it has a large cross section susceptible to the effects of the wind.  

The 100mm refractor won't have spikes, that is inherent to Newtonians and caused by light diffraction off the spider vanes holding the secondary mirror. It will have the problem of Chromatic Aberation(CA) since it is an achromatic refractor. But much of that can be edited out in post processing.  BTW, Some people like the effect of diffraction spikes and some people even create them in post processing or with string or thread in front of their telescope lens.
And that leaves the MAK; you can purchase the necessary hardware for mounting a piggy back telescope on the OTA of a Cassegrain, or you could buy a side by side mount plate for whatever mount you get.  

 

Have A Nice __________

All those pictures you have up there....especially Saturn and Jupiter,  is that what they might look like through an 8" dob? I am new to astronomy, and have been doing a lot of research and I am leaning towards an 8" dob, and that is how I imagine I will see things such as those planets, but I am just not sure if 8 is big enough.  In order to see Saturn or Jupiter like that in the pictures would I need to go bigger like a 10"??  Thanks in advance.

Tim,

Thanks for the input. I'm curious about folks putting their Dobs onto EQ mounts. At least one of the people at Orion told me it wouldn't work for astrophotography. Is that the difference? Visual = Yes, Photo = No?

I had actually bought a set of rings with this in mind, but due to my desire to start into astrophotography and their comments, I backed off to reconsider. Now I'm thinking they don't know what they're talking about.

I figured to buy the heaviest EQ mount they offer with the goto, which would be the Atlas. That way I can add bit & pieces to the tube w/o worrying overly about the mount being overloaded. I appreciate the advice about not going above 50% mount load. Dunno about the wind effects on the mount with that large of a tube....always some trade-off, eh? :)

I suppose my anxieties have been caused by dealing soley with Orion. They want to sell their stuff and aren't going to do much in the way of offering up any other options. I asked about some manner of using the MCT for photography and the answer was a flat "no, there is no way to mount a guide scope on it". Hmph!

I think if one or two folks here would vouch for using the 10" Dob on EQ autoguided mount for photography, I'll go that route and try to just get together with the folks at SBIG to find a camera w/autoguider to use on both the MCT and Dob.  That way I don't have to deal with adding a finder scope.

Cheers!

 

insinu8 wrote:

Tim, Thanks for the input. I'm curious about folks putting their Dobs onto EQ mounts. At least one of the people at Orion told me it wouldn't work for astrophotography. Is that the difference? Visual = Yes, Photo = No?

I would'nt take everything a sales person tells you as true.
look through the following thread and you will see at least a couple people who have mounted a 10" dob onto a an EQ mount.

http://www.astronomy.com/ASY/CS/forums/305627/ShowPost.aspx 

two that I know of for sure are, one that is mounted on the Orion atlas and another on the Celestron CG5. Both have used them for astrophotography. Even with out mounting the telescope on an eq mount you can get some beautifull lunar and planetary images. With the eq mount you have the ability to track and guide. People use fast 10" newts all the time. I have no idea why an Orion rep would have told you that you can't. The problem with both the Orion Atlas and the Celestron CG5 mount is the load capacity. Although it is capable of handling that telescope, you would only be able to use it on calm nights. Any amount of wind would cause a vibration since that OTA has such a large cross section. Kind of like a sail! 

I figured to buy the heaviest EQ mount they offer with the goto, which would be the Atlas. That way I can add bit & pieces to the tube w/o worrying overly about the mount being overloaded. I appreciate the advice about not going above 50% mount load. Dunno about the wind effects on the mount with that large of a tube....always some trade-off, eh? :)

Yea, even with my set up I have to work at getting a half way descent image..  

Have A Nice _________

 With the recent changes to the forums, some of the links no longer work. I went through the index and found those posts of mine the members had been bookmarking for reference.  If you like you can bookmark now and it will work..

 

Have A Nice ________ 

 I asked a couple of questions today and tkerr answered them all and then sent me to this thread after he took the time to write out the answer to my questions.  I just want to say that I have learned more today from these threads then I have with my own research over the past few months.  Thanks to all who have posted on here and especially to you tkerr. . .you've helped more people with questions on astrophotography with this thread than have told you.