It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Astrophotography - Tripods vs Motorized Mounts

page: 5
71
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: makkerskilap
a reply to: eriktheawful

Thank you. I actually figured it out while eating my dinner just now, lol.
Can't seem to find the pics after I upload them though, so I'll just do this...

imageshack.com...

imageshack.com...

imageshack.com...


Brilliant photos I'm beginning to regret my adequate astro photos some of the ones that have been posted make mine look basic lol. Thanks for sharing the outback must be an amazing place to view stars im highly jealous.

Seems this thread is bringing out the photographers on ATS




posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

Don't fret.

Takes a lot of practice and patience.

Even then, there will be many times that you think you've set up the perfect shot, only to not have it turn out the way you wanted it to.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful
Ha don't worry I'm not thinking of giving up I've already realised things don't always go according to plan with photography even when I'm snapping pics of planes I still manage to screw up




posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: IntruderAlert



Here we go flat Earther statements, To keep the stars on the exact same place on the camera sensor or on film in the good old days the camera has to be ALIGNED with the rotational axis of the Earth and a drive mechanism to compensate for the Earth's rotation so as the Earth rotates the camera moves to keep the stars in the same position.

If you get a chance look at the Moon through binoculars watch how FAST the Moon will go out of view but it is only on average 238,000 miles away NEAREST star is 25 TRILLION miles away.

It's NOT rocket science well it kind of is



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThePeaceMaker
a reply to: eriktheawful
Ha don't worry I'm not thinking of giving up I've already realised things don't always go according to plan with photography even when I'm snapping pics of planes I still manage to screw up



You might be interested in these threads.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: IntruderAlert
a reply to: wmd_2008




Here we go flat Earther statements, To keep the stars on the exact same place on the camera sensor or on film in the good old days the camera has to be ALIGNED with the rotational axis of the Earth and a drive mechanism to compensate for the Earth's rotation so as the Earth rotates the camera moves to keep the stars in the same position.


Yet you totally ignore the largest motion, of 69,000 miles per hour, around the sun.

Now the OP has already stated that moving the telescope in any direction for a 100 meter would throw off allignment.

A telescope on earth moves 19 miles per second, which is a movement in a direction, that is far greater, yet you can magically ignore this.

The model you all put your faith in is on the verge of collapse.



All the objects locally in the Solar Sytem are moving relative to the Sun WE CAN SEE the movement in the local objects the Moon Venus Mars ETC the furter away the objects are the less their relative movement to us.

Watch this zoom test at first you cant even see the MOVEMENT of the moon due to rotation of the Earth but ZOOM in and you can



Does that help

No only the SCIENTIFICALY CHANLLENGE can't understand.

Will this help it sink in an object is 1000 ft from you and moves 1 inch in any direction an object 5 feet from you moves 0.25 inches which object would YOU notice moving

edit on 17-2-2017 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:07 PM
link   

THIS IS NOT A FLAT EARTH CONVERSATION



Any further references to such will be removed and other appropriate actions taken

Thank you


(post by IntruderAlert removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)
(post by IntruderAlert removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

Don't worry about it.

I remember back in the 1990s, I bought a special split adapter for my telescope focus mount, so I could mount the camera to the telescope, while also having an eyepiece attached off to the side, for tracking a star while taking photographs through the telescope.

Turned out I got the wrong one. I couldn't get the camera to focus to save my life. I was on the phone with the company that I bought it from, trying to figure out what was wrong, and I swear the guy was most likely doing a face palm.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: IntruderAlert
a reply to: wmd_2008




Does that help


No it does not, since it doesn't apply to the scenario I was discussing with the OP. The premise was that if you move a telescope that is zoomed in on Polaris, for a 100m, without changing the angle, then it would be out of allignment.


It does it shows WHY alignment for long exposures is critical..

It can take a good 15-20 mins to get an alignment to allow really good exposures of more than a few seconds as we are ON the spinning globe the alignment to the axis of the Earth's rotation is critical.

The RELATIVE movement of DISTANT objects takes second place the star trackers also have a setting for the Lunar rate of rotation as you see on the video I posted so the Moon can be tracked.

Also you DON'T zoom in on polaris the TRACKER IS ALIGNED with Polaris using usually a small telescope something with about 6x magnification also Polaris is not 100% bang on the axis and that has to be allowed for as well.
edit on 17-2-2017 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)


(post by IntruderAlert removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)
(post by IntruderAlert removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

Very good right up👍👍 but the 500 rule is 500 / focal length = seconds is for a full frame sensor camera. For a cropped sensor Canon = 1.6 crop factor (EXAMPLE) 1.6 x 16 = 25 | 500/25 = 20 SECONDS.

If you are feeling adventurous try Magic lantern for Canon cameras, it will change the way you shoot.
I run it on a 1100d/T3.
Milky way and a Perseid meteor from the 2016 shower


Canon 1100d/T3 iso 3200 exposure 20 seconds 18-55mm kit lens f3.5

A short time lapse from last summer


For other photos and time lapse check out my signature
edit on 17-2-2017 by hillbilly4rent because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Hi All the Star Capella and some wispy cloud Sony SLT A37 iso 800: 50mm prime f2.5 for 5 seconds.



Remember right click on picture and select view image for the larger size.
edit on 17-2-2017 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Back a bit about Barn Door Trackers....

This has to be the simplest I have ever seen:



I bet trying to polar align this is hairy. Here's a link to it and how to make it:

garyseronik.com...

This one is a bit more proper, and doing the alignment on it is easier:



Here's the link for building it:

barn-door-tracker.co.uk...

If you're one of those brave types that want to put more meat into it, you can go all out and motorize it:



Here's a link for the plans, schematics for the electronics, and the software code:

ridetheclown.com...



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: hillbilly4rent

Great picture!

I started up another thread yesterday talking about Magic Lantern:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

Alignment should be ok look up along hinge at Polaris as long as you are not after multiple minutes of exposure.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join