Re: [APML] Best Scope and mount for $2000 was Scope Question

[Joe Pedit <pedit@email.unc.edu>]

Rob,

There are several astrophotographers in the two astronomy clubs
in your area (Raleigh <http://www.RTPnet.org/~rac/> and Chapel
Hill <http://rtpnet.org/chaos/>) that may be able to offer some
advice.  Most of the imagers are using CCDs with schmidt
cassegrains, but there are a couple of us using film with small
refractors.  We have an observing session scheduled for this
evening on the west side of Jordan Lake if the weather
cooperates.  I will send you directions if you are interested in
joining us.  Like yourself, I also don't have much interest in
visual astronomy, but there are several large dobs in the clubs
that offer some pretty nice views of those hard-to-appreciate
faint fuzzies.

Joe Pedit
Pittsboro, NC



Rob Miracle wrote:
> 
> At 12:07 AM 3/8/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> 
> >>Viewing is really not that important.   I've oooohhhed and aaahhhed at
> >>the great nebula in Orion.  But after that, whats to see?
> >
> >Hi Rob,
> >
> >There is only the rest of the universe to see!  It is a subtle hobby
> >though, not for the M-TV generation.
> 
> Well, I've tried pointing the scope at other objects and frankly a lot of
> nebulas and deep sky objects are just fuzz balls unless you are
> photographing them.  The eye can't capture enough photons to make a good
> visual.  Thats why we need to take long exposures, so we can capture them, no?
> 
> >>But for deep sky work, and shooting a few galaxies here and there would
> >>be cool, the 8" from what I've read should be a good sized scope.   Of
> >>all the scopes, other than a refractor, its the best when dealing with
> >>camera's attached.
> >
> >
> >Ok, then, if that's what you've read, then that is definitely what you
> >should do.  I'm going to bet that you are the kind of person who only
> >learns the hard way.<G>
> 
> Well, my main source of information is Covington's Astrophotography for the
> Amateur.
> 
> >>   I still have trouble understanding why a scope with a GOTO computer
> >> that supposed to be able to track cant track without an Equatorial
> >> mount.   If it can point to object A in the sky, it should be able to
> >> point to it in the sky 5 minutes from now.
> 
> I'm a computer programmer by nature.   If I can point at object A now, why
> can't I point at it now+5?  I understand the rotational stuff, but if the
> software is smart enough, it should be able to adjust for the
> rotation.   The problem, I assume is the software isn't smart enough.
> 
> >If you don't understand this, then you are not ready to take pictures with
> >an equatorial mount...
> 
> Possibly not, but I'm not getting anywhere new with fixed tripod shots
> either.   I shot some stuff this week.  I got some good 8-15 second
> exposures of constellations, on my D1 (it was cold enough that the dark
> current noise wasn't too bad).  I shot some 3-5 minute exposures pointed at
> Polaris on film so I have to wait and see what came out there.  I'm hoping
> for some nice star trails.
> 
> I guess I need to read Covington some more.
> 
> Thanks,
> Rob
> --
> Rob Miracle
> Photographic Miracles
> 203 Carpenter Brook Dr.
> Apex, NC 27502
> http://www.photo-miracles.com
> 
> --  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>