Astrophotography - Blurry Moon

Bohrio

Hey just a question to anyone familiar with astrophotography

I recently decided to buy a T-ring and a T adaptor and try taking a few pictures of the moon (all I can do for the moment as I dont have a motorized scope).

So I got my tring and adaptor (nikon) last week and decided to hook it up to my Celestron XLT 150.

The first thing I noticed is that I could not focus on infinity, after some digging I found out that apparently this is a known issue and the only solutions are: get a barlow lens (not sure if this will work so I wont be buying one just yet) or just connect the t-ring directly into the scope's focuser (to do this all is needed is to remove the 1.25 inches eyepiece adaptor of the focuser and screw the nikon t-ring into it)

Now I have gone for the second option (focuser) and indeed, now I can get a proper focus (or so I think) but the picture seems blurry, out of focus (dont thing is a focus related issue).

I am using an IR remote to trigger the picture and the camera is in mirrow up mode.

I have seen people taking excellent pictures with my camera (Nikon D7000) so I know the camera can perform...

Any suggestions?

See yourself

This is a picture of the moon (obviously) taken through the focuser with the camera connected to the telescope (picture has been reduced down to 90%)

moon reduced.JPG

This is a cropped section of the moon from the original picture (above before being reduced) at actual resolution.

moon cropped actual res.JPG


And this is a picture of the moon using my Sigma OS 2.8 70-200 (at max foc length 200), this last picture is actually cropped but is still very sharp compared to the other one.

moon 200 reduced.JPG



The pictures should be very sharp but so far nothing...

Nerro

You have quite a heavy camera, are you locking your focuser after you get focus?

Bohrio

Nerro wrote: »

You have quite a heavy camera, are you locking your focuser after you get focus?

I noticed that the focuser wobbles a bit but I wasnt sure this could affect the picture. I noticed that yesterday while trying to find a reason for all this. But I thought it was "normal" or at least, I didnt see a way to fix this...

So sorry if this seems like a stupid question but how do I lock the focuser? I could hold the camera with a monopod but I am not sure if this will work

Thanks!

Bohrio

I was thinking, there is a screw on top of the focuser (and 3 holes, one on each side)

Maybe this is it, I will look into ii later and report back.

Thanks again

Nerro

I am not familliar with your scope but there should be a screw on the focuser (usually a big one).when you tighten it you can rotate the focusing wheels but the focuser wouldnt move.If the focuser is loose there shuld be another screw (usualy a small one) which tightens your focuser so you can mount heavier payloads.
The simple way to test it is to mount your camera to OTA daytime and rotate it 90degrees camera facing down.If you notice any movement at all, it means your equipement is too heavy for the focuser to handle.

Bohrio

Nerro wrote: »

I am not familliar with your scope but there should be a screw on the focuser (usually a big one).when you tighten it you can rotate the focusing wheels but the focuser wouldnt move.If the focuser is loose there shuld be another screw (usualy a small one) which tightens your focuser so you can mount heavier payloads.
The simple way to test it is to mount your camera to OTA daytime and rotate it 90degrees camera facing down.If you notice any movement at all, it means your equipement is too heavy for the focuser to handle.

So you were indeed right. The focuser was loose hence the lack of sharpness in my pictures.

The results are quite something (the picture has been reduced down to 30% the original size)

moon reduced 30pc b&w.jpg


However is still not as sharp as I was expecting, however, I think the problem is with the Tring as it does not seem to fix to the camera properly. I mean it locks but if you twist it you can feel it move slightly... I think its going back to Amazon along with the t adapter.

Thanks again Nerro

Iancar29

Hi Bohrio - I have the same camera as you and too recently wanted to get into Astrophotography more... ive yet to get a telescope for my camera yet and will certainly look into more about the problems you are having before i buy anything. Until then ive been using my Dad's 500mm prime F4 lens . with a a monfrotto 393 tripod mount it works perfectly and doesnt shake at all when locked in correctly.
Heres my shot of the moon i took the other night ( cropped by 60 % and sharpened and extra 30% )




HI Res version.. http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8309/8045254776_aedd5e476b_k.jpg

Been trying to figure out if i can do anything else with it ...like get orions nebula or something ...?

Kersh

I have not come across a T-ring being loose in a camera, bit odd that!

Can you get what looks like sharp focus when you look at the camera screen? Or is it never sharp?

Bohrio

Kersh wrote: »

I have not come across a T-ring being loose in a camera, bit odd that!

Can you get what looks like sharp focus when you look at the camera screen? Or is it never sharp?

It looks sharp enough if I look through the viewfinder, however, when I take a picture is nowhere near that sharp.

I still think this is all related to the t ring or maybe the surface the CG mount is on (its on the balcony).

Here is a vid of my t ring, I am not sure if you can tell from looking at the video but it just doesnt seem to lock properly (sorry about the quality hard to get focus from that distance)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blRhiF9ntuU

Do you think that could affect the picture sharpness?

Iancar29 wrote:

Been trying to figure out if i can do anything else with it ...like get orions nebula or something ...?

That's a really nice and sharp picture, I have seen people take good pictures of nebulas with a 500 mm but you will need a motor for your tripod, so it can follow earths rotation as otherwise the exposures will be too blurry (you will be taking long exposures pictures).

My telescope is fine for astrophotography, and the nikon d7000 is great too. But you will need to add a motor to the scope if you want to take deep space pictures.

Handiest scopes for astrophotography I believe are smith-cassegrain as it is very easy to attach a camera to them (as well as a computer). But they are expensive (i think they go for around 800 euro for a 4" scope.

Nerro

Bohrio wrote: »

So you were indeed right. The focuser was loose hence the lack of sharpness in my pictures.

The results are quite something (the picture has been reduced down to 30% the original size)

moon reduced 30pc b&w.jpg


However is still not as sharp as I was expecting, however, I think the problem is with the Tring as it does not seem to fix to the camera properly. I mean it locks but if you twist it you can feel it move slightly... I think its going back to Amazon along with the t adapter.

Thanks again Nerro

I recon the focus is still not quite there yet but i dont think its due because of T ring.I have one that has some play in it aswell but here are some pictures taken :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68202745@N08/

The thing with almost full moon you really have to play around with exposure and ISO settings to get good results.

Nerro

Bohrio wrote: »

Handiest scopes for astrophotography I believe are smith-cassegrain as it is very easy to attach a camera to them (as well as a computer). But they are expensive (i think they go for around 800 euro for a 4" scope.

Not quite.smith cassegrain's are really good for solar system (planets etc.) you can go for DSO but usually it means you have to add focal reducers, wedges etc. Really expensive for good ones....
The best rig on budget for a begginer is EQ mount (motorized) with APO triplet or doublet refractor, newts are good aswell but i would think that they are for more advanced users as you WILL NEED to collimate each time you use it unless you have observatory....but the good thing is that they are cheap.
And if you are loaded then ultimate scope is Richie cretain....but they cost a small fortune....

Bohrio

Nerro wrote: »

I recon the focus is still not quite there yet but i dont think its due because of T ring.I have one that has some play in it aswell but here are some pictures taken :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68202745@N08/

The thing with almost full moon you really have to play around with exposure and ISO settings to get good results.

Those pics are just absolutely beautiful... exactly what I wish to accomplish one day...

I have actually come accross those pictures before, never thought they could belong to a boardsie.... Seriously good pics

Ok, I will try playing with different exposures. So far I have tried anything from 1/100 to 1/320 at ISO 100-400 (just with the moon). I might also try setting up the scope on a different surface (my balcony floor has a wooden frame covering it) as I believe this is not helping me getting a steady picture.

Glad to hear newtonians are good, I might upgrade mine and get a motor, or I could buy a bigger scope (8") already with a motor but I am not worried about this yet. Probably the motor will be the best option.

Until then I wont bother with deep space pictures.

Thanks again everyone

Bohrio

Nerro wrote: »

Not quite.smith cassegrain's are really good for solar system (planets etc.) you can go for DSO but usually it means you have to add focal reducers, wedges etc. Really expensive for good ones....
The best rig on budget for a begginer is EQ mount (motorized) with APO triplet or doublet refractor, newts are good aswell but i would think that they are for more advanced users as you WILL NEED to collimate each time you use it unless you have observatory....but the good thing is that they are cheap.
And if you are loaded then ultimate scope is Richie cretain....but they cost a small fortune....

uuummm, nice scopes Richie Cret.

I dont know what you mean by a small fortune

scope

:eek:

Mr Benevolent

Bohrio wrote: »

uuummm, nice scopes Richie Cret.

I dont know what you mean by a small fortune

scope

:eek:

That's a large fortune.

Bohrio

Iancar29 wrote: »

How can i attach a motor to my tripod if its not a telescope one?... this is the same tripod i used ..


The i know i need a motor to track the stars across the sky but wouldnt it just make a tripod turn from left to right and not at an angle , or does that not matter? ...

It just feels like i have everything i need bar one thing to get the type of shots it want

I remember looking at a tripod mount (motorized) some time ago, wasnt cheap but it was apparently very good

Astrotrac

For that price you can probably buy a motorized telescope tbh...

Iancar29

Bohrio wrote: »

I remember looking at a tripod mount (motorized) some time ago, wasnt cheap but it was apparently very good

Astrotrac

For that price you can probably buy a motorized telescope tbh...

Cheers man... your right ... i was looking at this Meade Ac 80/400 ...

Do you think it would give decent shots like Nerro's in any way?

I do be itching when we get a clear night here to be able to nail down something! Ill post a shot shortly that i did actually take with the 500mm... had to do it at a real fast exposure as the trails start real quick at 500mm!

Iancar29

Heres one of the 500mm Star shots.



Exposure 3 seconds ( after 3 trails start! )
Aperture f/4.0
Focal Length 500 mm
ISO Speed 3200

Btw took this out my back here in Finglas so its not the darkest of skies about..

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41948286@N02/8050380685/sizes/z/in/photostream/

Bohrio

Honeslty I dont know!

Here you see some examples of pictures taken with an 80/450 mm scope as my scope

link

I have the feeling he has probably a 8" or 10" scope but I could be wrong! I am hoping he will tell us!

Nerro

Bohrio wrote: »

I remember looking at a tripod mount (motorized) some time ago, wasnt cheap but it was apparently very good

Astrotrac

For that price you can probably buy a motorized telescope tbh...

astrotrac wedge is only a part of the mount.....you will need a verry good solid tripod,ball head, polar scope and some other bits and pieces, more or less it works out at 1000e plus as if you buy a dodgy tripod or ball head the whole rig becomes useless.but it is portable.you literally can bring it on your hollidays or anywhere you want as it weights only a couple kilos.for a budget option motorised EQ3 will do the same thing only its heavier and a lot cheaper.

Nerro

Bohrio wrote: »

Honeslty I dont know!

Here you see some examples of pictures taken with an 80/450 mm scope as my scope

link

I have the feeling he has probably a 8" or 10" scope but I could be wrong! I am hoping he will tell us!

Not quite.....
I am using acsession 80mm triplet apo as my main scope on NEQ6 pro mount and 80mm celestron pigybacked for guiding and unmoded nikon D5000
your results depends entirelly on the mount you are using.you could buy a scope worth 20k but if your mount is not up for the job then you aint going to get anything...

Nerro

Iancar29 wrote: »

Heres one of the 500mm Star shots.



Exposure 3 seconds ( after 3 trails start! )
Aperture f/4.0
Focal Length 500 mm
ISO Speed 3200

Btw took this out my back here in Finglas so its not the darkest of skies about..

The ISO seems a bit high...or you were taking the picture when it was not completely dark?

Iancar29

Nerro wrote: »

The ISO seems a bit high...or you were taking the picture when it was not completely dark?

Ye true i was just seeing what else it would pick up at higher ISO... 800 wouldve done fine.

Basically im probably gonna get something like this in the next week or 2 . http://www.astroshop.eu/celestron-maksutov-telescope-mc-90-1250-nexstar-90-slt-goto/p,20042
And just wondering what else would i need apart from the Nikon t-ring adapter? ...

Cheers!

Nerro

Iancar29 wrote: »

Nerro wrote: »

The ISO seems a bit high...or you were taking the picture when it was not completely dark?

Ye true i was just seeing what else it would pick up at higher ISO... 800 wouldve done fine.

Basically im probably gonna get something like this in the next week or 2 . http://www.astroshop.eu/celestron-maksutov-telescope-mc-90-1250-nexstar-90-slt-goto/p,20042
And just wondering what else would i need apart from the Nikon t-ring adapter? ...

Cheers!

Honestly @ F/12 this OTA would be too "slow" for any kind of deep space photography, but it would be brilliant for planetary work and you would need a webcam like spc one and webcam adapter.Plus the mount is not best suited for photography.

Iancar29

Nerro wrote: »

Honestly @ F/12 this OTA would be too "slow" for any kind of deep space photography, but it would be brilliant for planetary work and you would need a webcam like spc one and webcam adapter.Plus the mount is not best suited for photography.

Hmmm i probably rather nebula shots tbh.. ...

Any link then to one you could get decent shots with ?... Budget around 500 .

Whats your one?

Kersh

Bohrio wrote: »

It looks sharp enough if I look through the viewfinder, however, when I take a picture is nowhere near that sharp.

I still think this is all related to the t ring or maybe the surface the CG mount is on (its on the balcony).
Handiest scopes for astrophotography I believe are smith-cassegrain as it is very easy to attach a camera to them (as well as a computer). But they are expensive (i think they go for around 800 euro for a 4" scope.

I cant imagine the T-ring is the problem there. Bear in mind it can take a good while to nail focus just right. And its critical to the pic, so worth taking the time.


Scopewise, if you want to do DSO pics on a budget, then a reflector on a motorised EQ mount is the only way to go. Collimation of a reflector isnt too hard once you do it a few times.

If you dont fancy collimation and maintenance, then a simple refractor, achromatic, like a Startravel 120, or Evostar 120 is pretty decent. But you will get a bit of false colour around bright objects, like planets.

If you dont like the sound of that then you are into ED Refractors, with double and triple ED lenses, and that pushes the budget up.

The mount is very important though, as more than likely you will keep it and upgrade the scope as you go along. HEQ5 sized is the minimum future-proofed mount. EQ3 would do the job if you are pretty sure you wont be putting big scopes on it . . . but aperture fever usually takes over, and your scopes will only get bigger and better!!

Nerro

Iancar29 wrote: »

Nerro wrote: »

Honestly @ F/12 this OTA would be too "slow" for any kind of deep space photography, but it would be brilliant for planetary work and you would need a webcam like spc one and webcam adapter.Plus the mount is not best suited for photography.

Hmmm i probably rather nebula shots tbh.. ...

Any link then to one you could get decent shots with ?... Budget around 500 .

Whats your one?

Unfortunately you have to at least double your budged for a decent SECOND HAND set up....If you have a 500mm lens already I would buy a HEQ5 mount and mount your camera, that way you will get 1min exposures. If you want longer exposures just add some cheap 80mm scope and a webcam for guiding ,piggy back your camera and away you go
The alt az mount you are looking at is useless for DSO.

Bohrio

Kersh wrote: »

I cant imagine the T-ring is the problem there. Bear in mind it can take a good while to nail focus just right. And its critical to the pic, so worth taking the time.

I have given up! I tried again yesterday, changing exposures, iso etc... no much improvement, I was hoping to see a sharp moon but nothing, the moon looks sharp through the eyepiece but nowhere as sharp when I look at the picture.

I am thinking it could be the scope itself... although the pictures look sharp enough through the eyepiece.

I need to check but unless I am wrong the camera shouldnt be the problem as I have taken sharp pictures with it before, I might check this tonight.

Something I have noticed is that if I zoom in the moon using the live viewfinder the moon doesnt seem as sharp as it does when using the camera eyepiece

I have also tried focusing on a ie a traffic sign and I can't get a perfect focus or sharp letters (it looks ok through the eyepiece though but that's probabl because I am not zooming in).

Although it shouldnt be necessary I have collimated the scope but this made no difference.

I am just giving up for the moment, no astrophotography for me I am afraid at least for a while... now I am depressed

Nerro

Bohrio wrote: »

Kersh wrote: »

I cant imagine the T-ring is the problem there. Bear in mind it can take a good while to nail focus just right. And its critical to the pic, so worth taking the time.

I have given up! I tried again yesterday, changing exposures, iso etc... no much improvement, I was hoping to see a sharp moon but nothing, the moon looks sharp through the eyepiece but nowhere as sharp when I look at the picture.

I am thinking it could be the scope itself... although the pictures look sharp enough through the eyepiece.

I need to check but unless I am wrong the camera shouldnt be the problem as I have taken sharp pictures with it before, I might check this tonight.

Something I have noticed is that if I zoom in the moon using the live viewfinder the moon doesnt seem as sharp as it does when using the camera eyepiece

I have also tried focusing on a ie a traffic sign and I can't get a perfect focus or sharp letters (it looks ok through the eyepiece though but that's probabl because I am not zooming in).

Although it shouldnt be necessary I have collimated the scope but this made no difference.

I am just giving up for the moment, no astrophotography for me I am afraid at least for a while... now I am depressed

Well that's Astrophotography...you try, fail and try again.thats the only way to learn.when shooting DSO I use only half of the images I take as others are rubbish.
If you are from Dublin area, myself and few other lads are thinking to head to sugar loaf this weekend for some observing (depending on weather) you are welcome to join if you want to get few pointers what are you doing wrong.

Iancar29

Can i not just buy an astrotrack http://www.astrotrac.com/Default.aspx?p=tt320x-ag , and hook that up to my camera and tripod?

Nerro

Iancar29 wrote: »

Can i not just buy an astrotrack http://www.astrotrac.com/Default.aspx?p=tt320x-ag , and hook that up to my camera and tripod?

You can indeed, but again you will have to double your budget...as I mentioned before on this thread...

Iancar29

Nerro wrote: »

You can indeed, but again you will have to double your budget...as I mentioned before on this thread...

I might just do that... i already have a monfrotto tripod and get get a lend of a monfrotto ball head.


Thanks for all the info man!