RE: [APML] 35 mm Camera & Focuser

["Serge Theberge" <serge.theberge@wti.on.ca>]

Hi Jerry,

Thanks for your reply. In fact I had already gone to your web site for your
discussion on the various focusing options.  I also sent my order over the
weekend for your "Photoshop for Astrophotographers" e-book.  I am looking
forward to read it!

> You won't find much difference between the Canon and Olympus for your 
> purposes. The Beattie screen will be brighter, but you 
> basically won't be 
> able to focus on the screen anyway. It might help if you get 
> the Lumicon 
> magnifier, but remember that if your scope is pointed overhead, the 
> magnifier will be pointed straight down and will be extremely 
> difficult to use.

That takes care of the Beattie screen option!
 
> 
> >- Finally, on a line of thought similar to John's Lumicon, the last 
> >approach I found was from Scott Tucker's web site where he 
> uses a Peake 
> >22x loupe mounted on a camera that has a removable finder. 
> Neither my 
> >Canon or the Olympus OM-1 have removable finders, which 
> would therefore 
> >leave me to buy a camera body such as a Nikon F series. 
> Snooping around 
> >the APML archives, I found a thread where Wil Milan states 
> that "The F1 
> >can work, the F2 and F3 are probably the best for pure astro 
> work, the 
> >F4 can work well but is very heavy and very expensive, the 
> F5 would not 
> >be a good choice because it has no manual (i.e., no-battery-drain) 
> >time-exposure mode as do the F1 - F4."
> 
> Wil has it right. Get an F2 if you have to go Nikon.  Get a 
> Canon F1 if you 
> have a choice. I would definitely stick with Canon if you 
> already have 
> Canon lenses.

You have got a good point here.  If I need to upgrade camera, I might as
well simply get a used Canon F1 body so that all my lenses would still fit.

Serge Theberge
Toronto Centre
RASC

_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo