Astrophotography

[ROXunreal]

A search has not yielded a topic about this yet, which I find strange as I imagine there are at least a few here who are probably into this.

I'm as low budget as it gets - I don't have a fancy mount, I don't have guiding, I don't have a CCD, my camera is not even IR modified, I don't have a telescope and my lenses are cheap. Still I'm more than satisfied with my images given the my technological circumstances, even if they can never rival images taken by people with a few thousand dollars in gear. I kind of feel almost honored to be able to even register the presence of such celestial beauty on a medium with this modest gear, let alone get the amount of detail I sometimes get.

I use an unmodified Canon 500D with the EF 50mm f1.8 II, EF 75-300mm f4-f5.6 and standard EF 18-55 f3.5-5.6 lenses, mounted on a used Celestron ADM mount with tracking but without guiding. I stack the pictures in DSS and post-process in Photoshop CS5. As I don't have a telescope I'm limited to widefield photography.

This is my gear:

My deep sky photos:

Cygnus constellation - basically all the main sights are visible: leftmost and brightest is the star Deneb, under it are the North America nebula and immediately above it the fainter Pellican nebula and a few other wisps. The bright star in the upper center is Sadr and is responsible for illuminating the vast Gamma Cygni nebulosity surrounding it. The third bright star on the lower right is Gienah and the two cyan wisps of nebulosity to its right are parts of the elusive Veil nebula, a supernova remnant. The bunch of stars on the right edge of the frame is the open cluster NGC 6940. The many red dots in the pictures are orange stars that have reddened when I turned the red saturation up to compensate for my camera's lack of IR modification which prevents red nebulae from appearing properly red on photos, if I had a modded camera this picture, and many of the following ones, would be a lot better.

Orion's belt and around. There are seven nebulae visible in this picture if you look hard enough: Barnard's loop is the big faint purple wisp to the left, M42 is the biggest nebula in lower center, Running Man nebula is the smaller one just above it, the Flame nebula is the brownish patch next to the leftmost big star in the center, the famous Horsehead nebula is the purple area just below the same star (you can see the horse head!), M78 is towards the top and left of the Flame nebula (very tiny, looks like a big star with a dark streak over it), and the tip of the hard-to-image Witch Head nebula on the lower right edge. This image is only 36 minutes of total exposure (most other deep sky images are over two hours). I dream of making a proper Orion photo of 4 hours at least, but it's hard to get good weather, a moonless night and free time to coincide.

Omega and Eagle nebulae (left and right respectively) at 300mm and 134 minutes of total exposure. Image is rotated 90° to the right from how it looks from northern latitudes.

A cropped and rotated part of the upper image, the famous Pillars of Creation can barely be resolved in the Eagle nebula.

The Andromeda Galaxy with its satellite dwarf galaxies M32 and M110.

Sagittarius region at 50mm showing countless dark nebulae which block the center of our galaxy behind them from direct view. The yellow colored areas ARE our galaxy.

Lagoon and Trifid nebulae at 300mm (these can be seen in the above image as well, Lagoon nebula being the purple blob).

This ugly image was more of a test of the limits of my budget equipment. The star is Gamma Cassiopeiae and it is the star that points the middle tip of the W shape of the constellation Cassiopeia. The two nebulae beside it to the left are IC 59 and IC 63, they are very faint and hard objects to photograph and the glare of the star only makes it harder. I'm glad I could get them to show up, even if they didn't give me any of their red color.

M81 and M82 galaxies, along with three more much smaller and fainter galaxies. This image needs a lot more exposure to bring out the color. M81 is blueish while M82 has some red details.

Very underexposed and badly post-processed picture of the star Anteres, M4 globular star cluster and the vast Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex which is the dark nebula obscuring the stars in the top of the image.

Crop of the above image, showing Antares with M4 globular star cluster on the right side, and the much fainter NGC 6144 globular cluster between and above them, in more detail.

Another Orion / Running Man nebula photo I took before the one near the top of this post, again underexposed, only 26 minutes before fog rolled in. This was imaged from the city so light pollution also became a hindrance.

Leo triplet galaxies, only a puny 3 minutes of exposure before my gear died. Needs A LOT more.

Some star trails with lots of light pollution.

More Milky Way towards Sagittarius. Can see the massive Dark Horse nebula clearly.

And this is my first DSLR astrophoto ever, showing the Leo constellation. The orange "star" is actually Mars.

My solar system photos:

A bit of Moon at 300mm, I can't get it more sharper than this it seems.

Planetshine

Jupiter and the Moon and Jupiter's moons.

Venus transit imaged with an ordinary compact camera, the Canon IXUS 1000HS with CHDK firmware, photo taken through a double layer of exposed camera film at a 1/8000 exposure (electronic shutter FTW) and 60 ISO.

This must be a world record of some sort, as I imagine few people if any have tried photographing sunspots with an "idiot" compact camera, and succeeded. The camera is the same as the one mentioned in the above photo caption, same settings, more exposed film layers. Here is a picture from spaceweather.com of the sunspots as they appeared that day.

Comet Panstarrs

Some of the solar system photos are hosted on Facebook so their horrible .jpg photo compression is evident.

One day far from now I hope to buy an ED 80 refractor and set up guiding of some sort so I can do longer exposures than those of only a few minutes, and perhaps have an IR mod done on my camera. For now my financial priorities lie elsewhere.

All of these pictures were taken from Croatia where I live, most of them from the Istria peninsula.

[cantab]

These are all awesome. It's a fine demonstration of what I've normally advised people - a telescope is unimportant for deep-sky astrophotography, you just need a DSLR with the kit lens and a mount.

What are your sky conditions like?

[ROXunreal]

Yep, it was quite the discovery that a normal camera can reveal some amazing hidden night sky beauty as long as it can follow the sky for even just one minute.

A mix of Mediterranean and central European climate here. Cloudy often cold winters and scorching hot summers. Light pollution is a problem, but unlike most of Europe there are a few safe havens in the country, notably the Lika area and some southern islands. South-east Istria where I imaged is also better than most places I've been to.

Edited January 21, 2015 by ROXunreal

[RogueMason]

You say you're low budget, but everything you have there is better than what I've got with my camera pointed down my telescope with a mounting clamp! Then again, the problem with my set-up is the camera; t'is just a 12 megapixel point and shoot with a few extras (the Nikon Coolpix L22). A very good camera for anything but astrophotography, especially with the apparent lack of an exposure setting

It's probably also to do with Liverpool and all its lovely lights being just over the Mersey... ugh.

Don't get me wrong, with the limitations I have, I'm pretty happy with that picture, but compared to yours, it's nothing.

That being said, I've got some decent pictures of the Moon and Jupiter, too.

There was an astrophotography thread or two around, but they've long succumbed to the second page and beyond. In fact, here's one of them. Luckily, I'm still subscribed to that thread, so I could just search my profile for it

I'll have to invest in a DSLR at some point...

[PakledHostage]

This is my gear:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/ROXunreal/AF/eq.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/v/t1.0-9/556274_3510556239133_2107091335_n.jpg?oh=3efc9d2b2ce3d66091a5b459b65efae6&oe=55239800&__gda__=1432106947_574a1212efa7e8d70f73c5231019e568

https://scontent-b-vie.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/484517_4220290342042_698941637_n.jpg?oh=9f9fb531da3f6602f6e72e63b7068c30&oe=5569DF38

What are you using for a tracking mount? I'd posted a thread a while back asking if anyone had suggestions. Cantab gave me an idea for a low budget solution and I've got a mid-range option for a single axis tracking mount, but I would be interested in comparing those with some higher end options? Is your mount a multi-axis goto tracking mount? I haven't bought a mount yet because there's no rush (it is cloudy or foggy here throughout most of the winter).

[ROXunreal]

As I wrote in the OP, it's an old used Celestron ADM, like this one:

It's kind of a best buy budget-wise - built like an EQ-5 which means it's big, sturdy and stable compared to an EQ-3, yet probably the cheapest mount of such size (I carried the mount head in a small rucksack and the tripod under my arm many times). I got two basic tracking motors with it but they're nothing to write home about, even though they're good enough for my purposes.

Don't get me wrong, with the limitations I have, I'm pretty happy with that picture, but compared to yours, it's nothing.

I guess I got spoiled by hanging out on my country's astronomy forum where 99% of astrophotographers are packing astrophoto CCD cameras, guided EQ-6 mounts and 100-120mm refractors or 200mm+ reflector scopes. The pictures that some of those guys make pass for magazine-grade with ease.

Really the only thing I bought was the mount (used for about 180$) and the nifty fifty lens for less than 100$, also used. The camera and two other lenses I borrow from my dad.

Your moon is awesome and that Jupiter is better than anything I ever got from it. If you could further stabilize your rig you could probably get a sharper moon picture.

Edited January 21, 2015 by ROXunreal

[PakledHostage]

As I wrote in the OP, it's an old used Celestron ADM

Sorry, I missed that. Thanks!

Edit: I just Googled "Celestron ADM" and that seems to be a standard for mounting hardware rather than a type of tracking mount... What am I missing?

Edited January 21, 2015 by PakledHostage

[ROXunreal]

Ah sorry, maybe I got the wrong name of that mount for all the three years that I've had it haha, it's also called Celestron CG-5. Though by googling I also get newer mounts, maybe new models in the same category because this one looks really old.

[Motokid600]

Those are beautiful shots. Makes me want to get back into the hobby again. I got over $10k worth of telescope and imaging equipment. And I hit a wall. I desperately need a permanent setup. I have a cpc11 on an EQ wedge and its a real hassle to set it up and break it down every night, spend hours drift aligning only to get four or so hours of imagining in before the sun rises. Gotta do a roll off roof observatory.

I find it does something to you. I spend a night out under the stars either imaging or viewing and in the morning despite only having sleept for a few hours.. I feel really good. As if starlight bathes you in vitamin C or something.

[cantab]

Ah yeah, setup time can be a problem.

I've heard that even just having a fixed pier can help. You still need to take the mount out and bolt it on each time, but it means quick good alignment.

[ROXunreal]

Mine were basic eyeball alignments through the viewer I find they're more than sufficient for the magnification I use, and the drift that is apparent on some photos at >250mm is due to periodic error.

I really want to image comet Lovejoy now, but it's overcast galore here.

I got over $10k worth of telescope and imaging equipment. And I hit a wall. I desperately need a permanent setup.

If I was in that league I'd start aiming at something like a TMB 175mm refractor

Edited January 22, 2015 by ROXunreal

[Motokid600]

Lol at that point it'd be $15k. I've got an AstroTech 72ed refractor that's part of imagining equipment as a guide scope. The cpc11 is good it just needs new bearings and.. that permanent setup.

[Newt]

Have any of you ever tried to work with satellite tracking?

[How2FoldSoup]

Here's some pictures I took last year for a school project. We were attempting to use a rasberriPi for astronomy and autotracking of stars..it turns out you can't mess with exposure settings of the standard webcam that comes with the pi. Having said that, here ARE some pictures we got just from plopping the camera onto the lense(with it's own lens removed) of an 8" dobonsian.

It's not too bad but I really wish we could have configured the exposure, the potential is huge.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edit: We did get better quality pictures than that which we used for our poster, but I can't seem to find them anywhere. I do have the poster though but that doesn't help!

[Sidereus]

Here's a star trail photo I did a while back:

And a long exposure of the ISS passing overhead:

[The Raging Sandwich]

Here on this thread, you can show your pictures of stuff through your telescope or binoculars, tell what sort of astronomy equipment you use, and ask questions about astrophotography. I'll occasionally add my own photos here. If there is already a thread about this (I've never seen one), feel free to lock it moderators. 

[tater]

Plate camera on the 24" (0.6m) Boller and Chivens Cassegrain reflector at the Capilla Peak Observatory. It was before we installed the CCD. It had been used for years with a photometer, and we stuck the old plate camera on and messed around with it. The plates had been in the fridge for a LONG time, and many were moldy (notice blob lower right). I took the image (hand-guiding the scope), an developed the plate as well in the darkroom (chemicals were also pretty ancient).

 

[tater]

I forgot to say it was the Great Nebula in Orion, lol, as it's so obvious.

[Green Baron]

Plate camera :-) I still have my darkroom equipment from student times stowed in the garage ... no large negative sizes, just 6*7cm. Did you try to smear it off with the finger ? You could sell the blob as a comet @tater !

But ... dear mods, would it make sense to merge the

in here ?

I got my christmas present 2 days ago, a monochrome CCD cam. That night was really good and i tried it out immediately, doing more than 4 hours of LRGB-exposures. Just to realize the other day that i should check the distance of the optical elements (reducer/camera chip) as well as focus each filter separately (refractor) ... would have been too high an expectation if the first try had just worked.

More soon(tm), weather dependent ... :-)

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by Green Baron

[tater]

I might have tried to wipe it off. I took that image... 32 or 33 years ago. (how can I have done anything that long ago? This should be in the what makes me feel old thread.)

[Dartguy]

1 hour ago, Green Baron said:

Plate camera :-) I still have my darkroom equipment from student times stowed in the garage ... no large negative sizes, just 6*7cm. Did you try to smear it off with the finger ? You could sell the blob as a comet @tater !

But ... dear mods, would it make sense to merge the

in here ?

I got my christmas present 2 days ago, a monochrome CCD cam. That night was really good and i tried it out immediately, doing more than 4 hours of LRGB-exposures. Just to realize the other day that i should check the distance of the optical elements (reducer/camera chip) as well as focus each filter separately (refractor) ... would have been too high an expectation if the first try had just worked.

More soon(tm), weather dependent ... :-)

 

Can't expect to have a clear night and have everything work well on the first night!

[NSEP]

U know this right?

[The Raging Sandwich]

3 hours ago, NSEP said:

U know this right?

Of course I do!

[Green Baron]

Open cluster M45, Plejades and reflection nebula

First try with my new toy. Adjustments are not right yet. UV/IR-cut filter (limunance channel). Color channels RGB didn't come out correctly yet. 20*5min exposures, 16 bias frames, 16 dark frames. More soon(tm). Stacked with deepskystacker, gamma adjusted with fitswork.

Edit: Version 0.1.

 

Edited November 30, 2016 by Green Baron

[The Raging Sandwich]

Awesome stuff I'm seeing here!