Photos of the stars and such.. How do you do it??

[Toolz]

OK so i have seen a lot of shots of the stars and such and im wondering what you guys use to do these most awesome shots.. im a tad green with envy that you guys are able to get such awesome shots and i want to know what you use and how you do it.. i am aware that i will have to save my pennies to get me a decent lens that i can use for just such photos but in the mean time please share with me your words of wisdom as to how you get such AWESOME shots..

oh and please keep those awesome shots coming cos they rock.

[rjd]

http://zarphag.com/2012/11/star-photography-a-guide/

[Toolz]

oo cool thanks ill bookmark that for future reference. my son is getting into astronomy so he loves all the astronomy type pics on here as well.

[SteveB]

That's a good write-up Rob.
Toolz, make sure you ask before you spend anything on a telescope (just in case you were thinking of it) because everyone buys the wrong thing to start with.
And your camera/lens doesn't need to be that flash. This is taken with a point&shoot (Canon S3IS). It's the Orion Nebula (M42).
Most people can find "The pot". If you look at the handle of the pot with binoculars on a dark night, the middle star looks fuzzy. The photo is the handle of the pot.




Steve

[Toolz]

wow thats impressive..

i have looked into a telescope for me (my son was given a cheap one for xmas which is good enough for him at the moment) that does a decent job but im just thinking of getting a decent telephoto lens cos i will have more use for it than i will a telescope.

[rjd]

Most of my star shots are done with wide lenses, astro shots you will need 400mm lens or something.

The kit lens is f3.5 at 18mm, that is plenty.

Whack it up to ISO 1600, find somewhere with as little light pollution as possible.

[Toolz]

oh cool thanks ill give it a try

[SteveB]

If you are planning on doing any sort of astrophotography (beyond the wide angle and star trail stuff) then the mount is by far the most important thing. A moderate mount with a standard camera and lens will get you good results, whereas anything on a poor mount will get you nothing but grief.

For the telescope itself, you want to stay away from anything that is advertised on the basis of its magnification. That's a pretty good indicator of a poor quality telescope. The key parameter for a telescope is the aperture in inches/mm. The bigger, the better. If you're at the budget end, I'd consider the telescope is for looking through and do your photography with just your camera on the mount. The exception is the moon where you can take photos through the telescope eyepiece.

[Toolz]

i did a hunt for telescopes and emailed a guy that sells them here in nz and he has given me some really good advice on the type of scope to get for my price range based on aperture rather than magnification. his suggestion was this one.. http://langwoodsphotography.com/esho...r_Special.html

[SteveB]

OK. That's pretty good bang for the buck. That'll make you say "wow" when you see Saturn and some of the faint fuzzies.
Just be aware that the mount is near the bottom of the food chain so don't expect to get Hubble like images.
Do you think that you could stretch to this if he'll give you the sale price ? The mount is a tiny bit better but it's easy to take the telescope off and put your camera on, depending on what you want to do that night. Keeping the total weight on the mount as low as you can makes a lot of difference for photography. For either mount, you'll need to add a motor-drive.
If you wanted to just do photography, you could probably get into the next league of mounts within your budget, but not with a telescope too.
Just a point about the Newtonian telescope that you linked to. They periodically require a process called collimation, where you to line up the mirrors. It's not difficult, just methodical. If you get frustrated doing things that need a bit more, bit more, bit more, too far - than maybe a newtonian may not be for you.

[Toolz]

i dont have the $$ at the moment to get one its going to be a saving till i do have it so the one you linked to would be an option i would just have to save for a little bit longer lol

[rjd]

I need to not look at that store!

I'm guessing they are somewhat better than the $80 pack and shove one I bought...

[Toolz]

I need to not look at that store!

I'm guessing they are somewhat better than the $80 pack and shove one I bought...

lol yeah im guessing so

[MikeW]

Deep sky objects using telescopes require some equipment and patience. But just about any camera will take something like the below.

This one I did at ISO 3200, 20 seconds at f/4. Camera was lying on the ground. Was camping up at the Pinnacles. 16mm fisheye lens.

[Toolz]

nice.

im looking forward to getting a nice clear night so i can give it a try

[Arthurhh]

lol yeah im guessing so

Oh bugger

I Looked

It fits in Gadget class

I am screwed

[Toolz]

lol sorry my bad..

[SteveB]

If you need some other sites not to look at, I'm only too happy to help