Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 17, 2013, 4:47 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
It's an E500. You know the one where they decided that the camera didn't need any external attachments. not even electric releases. So yes!: I'm using a 2.5 sec timer.

I had a good look with a flashlight today and it looks to me like it needs cleaning "Inside" It's hazy inside the glass. I called Anacortes, they don't do cleaning, all they suggested was a ships instrument fixer upper in Seattle. Not sure if I want to go that route.
I was afraid of that. It would require some dis-assembly.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 18, 2013, 11:51 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
I was afraid of that. It would require some dis-assembly.

Ted
Found the telescope place in Seattle, 'bout 90 minutes away. We're headed there right now. They sounded good on the phone, been working ships instruments, telescopes and binos for over a hundred years. (They have this old, old guy locked in a back room.) They understood exactly what was needed and quoted 25% of Celestron's "receptionists" price. The gas will offset the mail..! Takes about a week.

I'll let you know how it goes, in the meanwhile Terry is ordering a Nikon mount for his D600 for it. I'm ordering a tripod mount to go along with the celestial mount and equatorial mount.
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 18, 2013, 1:51 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
Found the telescope place in Seattle, 'bout 90 minutes away. We're headed there right now. They sounded good on the phone, been working ships instruments, telescopes and binos for over a hundred years. (They have this old, old guy locked in a back room.) They understood exactly what was needed and quoted 25% of Celestron's "receptionists" price. The gas will offset the mail..! Takes about a week.

I'll let you know how it goes, in the meanwhile Terry is ordering a Nikon mount for his D600 for it. I'm ordering a tripod mount to go along with the celestial mount and equatorial mount.
Sounds great! What you're doing won't guarantee great photos (astrophotography is difficult) but you'll have removed all the barriers.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 18, 2013, 9:44 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
Sounds great! What you're doing won't guarantee great photos (astrophotography is difficult) but you'll have removed all the barriers.

Ted
Wadda ya mean...? Just because the earth rotates at one speed, the moon, stars, galaxies, and nebula all have their own speeds and angles, why would that be hard..

The motor in the tripod is actually a 24 hour clock with a rheostat. That will only work in concert, if you zero the scope first at Polaris.


Yes it's difficult, setting up to shoot the moon (so to speak) is enough, I had to set the moon up and to the left of the viewfinder and wait a second as it moved into frame. A few seconds later and it's gone. Even getting the shot a 1/25th sec it still showed motion. (no motor)

Used as an long lens it's 2,500mm. It will focus down to 16 feet though. I can see getting a bit of fun out of it.

The place we took the lens to was fantastic, a 2 story Aladin's cave. I don't think anyone was under 60 working there.
http://www.captainsnautical.com/c245/About-Us.html
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.

Last edited by Scouse; Jun 18, 2013 at 9:53 PM.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2013, 6:58 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
Wadda ya mean...? Just because the earth rotates at one speed, the moon, stars, galaxies, and nebula all have their own speeds and angles, why would that be hard..
Actually all celestial objects except the moon and planets, all have only one speed which is the earth's rotation - they're too far away for their own speeds of motion to be detectable within the scale of a human lifetime. But you're right that lunar photography is easier if the scope mount is one that can move opposite to the earth's rotation and give you longer exposures than, say, 1/250 sec.

OTOH, the good news is that the moon is a sun-lit object that only needs exposures similar to daylight exposures in terrestrial photography. The rest of the celestial objects are generally so dim that astro-cameras have sensors that are actually cooled (Peltier Effect cooling) to reduce the noise levels that in our DSLRs are usually overwhelmed by the brightness of the subject.

One of the issues with a telescope is, as you've found, achieving good focus. This usually surprises terrestrial photographers who aren't familiar with telescopes. They think you have to do is set the scope's focus on infinity when in fact there's no such setting. Your telescope was designed to be only one part of a two-part optical system. Like a microscope, it was designed to use a range of eyepieces so the mirror (that's what's moved in a mirror-lens optical system like yours) has to move a lot to accommodate eyepieces that, like camera lenses, range from ultra-wide-angle to extreme telephoto. The focus knob has to be turned a lot to cover this range, so its gearing isn't able to also provide the very fine range of movement you'd want for critical focus. There are accessory electric focus motors available to give that fine focus control - these are commonly used on larger telescopes.

Telescopes that are sold specifically for terrestrial photography ("mirror lenses") do tend to have an infinity focus stop, but my understanding is that often the stop isn't accurate and even at infinity you have to futz with the focus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
The place we took the lens to was fantastic, a 2 story Aladin's cave. I don't think anyone was under 60 working there.
http://www.captainsnautical.com/c245/About-Us.html
As long as they have the experience to be able to re-align and collimate the optics after re-assembly you should see a big improvement.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2013, 10:55 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Good post Ted. I plan on trying to fine tune the motor with the C5. I realize the earths rotation, 24 hours plus a bit, is a major factor in longer exposures, I doubt though that I could take any longer exposures than needed for moon shots.

The store has one guy who's only job is to work on scopes.
Then they had this "Beautiful" C11...on a trailer, with so many bells and whistles it made you drool.....

I thought infinity was where parallel line met....
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2013, 1:55 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
Good post Ted. I plan on trying to fine tune the motor with the C5. I realize the earths rotation, 24 hours plus a bit, is a major factor in longer exposures, I doubt though that I could take any longer exposures than needed for moon shots.

The store has one guy who's only job is to work on scopes.
Then they had this "Beautiful" C11...on a trailer, with so many bells and whistles it made you drool.....

I thought infinity was where parallel line met....
Ted, no comment on my infinity quote.

I thought it was fairly clever, or did I just think I was clever in so much I got it when my instructor (Way back when) in the Mortar platoon said it..
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2013, 5:26 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,908
Default

LOL I thought it was kinda clever and plan on using that line myself it the need ever arrives.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2013, 6:55 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse View Post
Ted, no comment on my infinity quote.

I thought it was fairly clever, or did I just think I was clever in so much I got it when my instructor (Way back when) in the Mortar platoon said it..
I missed it - sorry. Pretty funny.
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2013, 11:05 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
I missed it - sorry. Pretty funny.
You obviously meant "profound"
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 PM.