Re: [APML] film vs CCD

[Sean Walker <vze2c3z8@verizon.net>]

Thanks-
those were all taken in mag 6 skies, with the exception of M20, wich was brobably taken in mag
4.5. the south is the worst part where I shoot- about 5 miles north of Concord, NH. But CCD's
make light pollution a bit more managable.

Sean Walker

Bill Camp wrote:

>   Sean,
> Nice shots!  What kind of skys are you dealing with?  The shots I posted
> were all shot from typical 5.5 suburban skys.  I plan to do more shooting
> upstate NY where, on a clear night,  I can see m81 naked eye!  I'm planning
> a raised platform (4-5') with a permanent pier and maybe a portable dome to
> fight the dew.
> bill
> At 05:36 PM 12/9/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >Asking this question on a film list will give you  skewed responces <G>.
> >I went CCD last year, and to tell you the truth, it's real hard to get
> >myself to
> >put film through the telescope anymore, unless it's for a really big subject.
> >A good examples of the resolution theory you mentioned would be my ccd shots:
> >http://www201.pair.com/resource/astro.html/regular/products/tele-vue-optics/sean.walker.html
> >
> >All these were shot with a TV-85 and an ST-237.
> >
> >Sean Walker
> >
> >
> >Bill Camp wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > > I'm relatively new to this list (a couple of months) and have been
> > > thoroughly enjoying the images and the information.  I've been having fun
> > > with astrophotography for a while now using a 35mm camera on a Genesis and
> > > a Pronto as a guidescope with a reticle eyepiece and a powermate, all
> > on a G11;
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/androg.jpg
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/m42f.jpg
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/horsee.jpg
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/dumbo2a.jpg
> > > I typically use Royal Gold 400 and scan the negatives into Photoshop with
> > > an HP S20 at 2400 dpi.
> > > I've also had some good results with a digital camera held up to eyepiece
> > > of my portaball;
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/mooon6b.jpg
> > > www.portjeff.net/billcamp/lunyc.jpg
> > >
> > > I've been reading up quite a bit on CCDs and have been considering trying
> > > one.  One book says a CCD camera on a 6"  refractor gathers as much
> > > information as a 35mm camera on a 1 meter telescope.  Yet most of the posts
> > > to the list seem to be using film of different formats and types.  I'm
> > > wondering if I should get a CCD camera more capable of imaging or one just
> > > for guiding and stay with film.
> > > I would be curious to know how many people on the list have experience with
> > > both film and CCD and which they prefer and why.
> > > Also any comments/criticisms on my images would be welcome.
> > >
> > > bill
> > >
> > > --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
> > >              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> >
> >
> >
> >--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
> >              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>
> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>



--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>