It was a beautiful night on Palomar Mountain. When the fog and low clouds come in to cover the coastal cities it can be an especially dark night in the mountains.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Misc Astrophotography (Shoot the ISS, etc) besides moon shots...
- Thread starter mtbdudex
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you were planning to go to Palomar just to see the meteor shower then you didn't really miss much. I didn't go to see or photograph the Lyrids, I was there because it was a good night for astrophotography (moonless, clear, relatively warm, and with light winds). I was actually glad to see the clouds come in over the coastal cities since that makes the skies a little darker in the mountains.
In any case, here is another photo I took that same night using a Nikon D5100 and a Nikkor 105mm lens at f2.8 (tracking/guiding provided by my manual-driven barn-door mount):
Antares, M4, and the Rho Ophiuchi Nebula on Flickr you can view a larger image and read a few more details on the photo.
Lyrids Meteor Shower - zero but 2 bonus captures
Very nice!
We had cloudy skies Sunday morning here in SE Michigan, so I tried this Monday morning again to capture some images from CY2012 Lyrids Meteor Shower.
Zero meteor streaks, however I did get (2) satellite flares.
I searched heavens-above for the time/location to see if Iridiums/ISS/etc, and no match...secret satellite??
T1i + 15-85 @ 15mm, f3.5, ISO800, 25 sec exposure. no cropping, used CS5 for light pollution removal.
This is by far the most brilliant satellite flare I've ever captured.
From the length of this the flare lasted 6-8 seconds.
(on the original frames I can see the satellite trail crawling thru the other exposures)
Crop of the flare
This other one lasted longer, less brilliant, full image no crop
Very nice!
We had cloudy skies Sunday morning here in SE Michigan, so I tried this Monday morning again to capture some images from CY2012 Lyrids Meteor Shower.
Zero meteor streaks, however I did get (2) satellite flares.
I searched heavens-above for the time/location to see if Iridiums/ISS/etc, and no match...secret satellite??
T1i + 15-85 @ 15mm, f3.5, ISO800, 25 sec exposure. no cropping, used CS5 for light pollution removal.
This is by far the most brilliant satellite flare I've ever captured.
From the length of this the flare lasted 6-8 seconds.
(on the original frames I can see the satellite trail crawling thru the other exposures)
Crop of the flare
This other one lasted longer, less brilliant, full image no crop
Last edited:
I was otherwise occupied doing Cinco de Mayo things, but got home and had the presence of mind to snap these of the "super" full moon tonight. Not bad, considering they were taken in a lit parking lot 
ISO: 200, Exposure: 2.0 sec, Aperture: 4, Focal Length: 22mm
ISO: 400, Exposure: 1/250 sec, Aperture: 9, Focal Length: 55mm
These were taken on a tripod-mounted D3100 wearing the 18-55 kit lens. The lens does very well in the low light, but I clearly am going to need a longer piece of glass if I want better resolution of the moon itself. A 1:1 crop of the moon exposure at 55mm:
Any suggestions or comments are appreciated. This is my first moon shoot and I am very pleased with my results. I've been meaning to pickup a decent telephoto...I guess this is just one more reason to splurge.
ISO: 200, Exposure: 2.0 sec, Aperture: 4, Focal Length: 22mm
ISO: 400, Exposure: 1/250 sec, Aperture: 9, Focal Length: 55mm
These were taken on a tripod-mounted D3100 wearing the 18-55 kit lens. The lens does very well in the low light, but I clearly am going to need a longer piece of glass if I want better resolution of the moon itself. A 1:1 crop of the moon exposure at 55mm:
Any suggestions or comments are appreciated. This is my first moon shoot and I am very pleased with my results. I've been meaning to pickup a decent telephoto...I guess this is just one more reason to splurge.
The Whirlpool Galaxy (M51) photographed with a Nikon D5100 DSLR and a 105mm telephoto lens (manually tracked with a barn-door mount -- basically two boards, a hinge, and a screw you turn by hand to keep in synch with a clock). Wide angle view on left (galaxy is near the top just left of center) and a 1:1 pixel-scale crop from the same image.
Next big event, 2012 transit of Venus June 5 or June 6 - depends on your worldwide location
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/transit12.html
local transit time calculator:
http://transitofvenus.nl/wp/where-when/local-transit-times/
For people in Michigan, 6pm Tues June 5th thru sunset
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/transit12.html
local transit time calculator:
http://transitofvenus.nl/wp/where-when/local-transit-times/
For people in Michigan, 6pm Tues June 5th thru sunset
I was all excited about this until I read that I probably can't capture it without a telescope, and a special filter..
Next big event, 2012 transit of Venus June 5 or June 6 - depends on your worldwide location
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/transit12.html
local transit time calculator:
http://transitofvenus.nl/wp/where-when/local-transit-times/
For people in Michigan, 6pm Tues June 5th thru sunset
Yeah, that's what I'm going to try and shoot. Unfortunately, nobody on any of the photo/astrology forums I visit answered my question about mounting a camera to a 0.965" eyepiece instead of just 1.25"
If I can't get an answer, I'll probably just have to order an adapter.If you use an afocal setup you really don't need an adapter (for 0.96"), you just need a way to position/hold the camera behind or over your existing eyepieces.
In any case, unless you have a very small and light camera I doubt that the average 0.96" star diagonal or focus/drawtube would hold the weight of a camera (focus may not hold, drawtube may droop or just fall out).
Do a search on afocal telescope photography, for a very long time that is all I used for my lunar and planetary work.
I've got one of the Canon Rebels, so when the battery grip isn't on it you can easily tell it's plastic by the weight.
Also, I'll check out the focal method, I hadn't really seen much on that previously. Thanks!
These are my first two attempts at astrophotography. It's a star trail shot of Crux and nearby constellations.
deviantART tends to downgrade all of my photos...but since these are only thumbnails, I guess it's kinda expected.
http://alphaintercept.deviantart.com/
deviantART tends to downgrade all of my photos...but since these are only thumbnails, I guess it's kinda expected.
http://alphaintercept.deviantart.com/
nice start, what lens did you use? These look 50mm?
For star trails I go wide as possible, which is 15mm on my crop Canon T1i, about 24mm FF equiv.
Thanks! It was a 24-70mm f/2.8 at ISO 400 and 15 seconds on a T2i. First one's f/2.8 66mm (105.6mm equiv. o.o) and second one's f/6.3 25mm (40mm equiv.).
My framing was limited due to me living in between two floors and a big dumpster getting in the shot if I went any wider. No one likes a dumpster in front of a starry night sky.
If I could, I'd choose the 18-55mm kit lens for the wide angle.I do have one question. I used manual focus and the distance scale to focus to infinity, but I don't know how accurate the scale is. Is this the right thing to do?
Thanks! It was a 24-70mm f/2.8 at ISO 400 and 15 seconds on a T2i. First one's f/2.8 66mm (105.6mm equiv. o.o) and second one's f/6.3 25mm (40mm equiv.).
My framing was limited due to me living in between two floors and a big dumpster getting in the shot if I went any wider. No one likes a dumpster in front of a starry night sky.
I do have one question. I used manual focus and the distance scale to focus to infinity, but I don't know how accurate the scale is. Is this the right thing to do?
Sounds like a good reason to have a late night country drive, big wide/dark skies
Yea, I know easier said than done.
Focus, I do exactly same, start with the infinity mark then using live view:
(this copy/paste from another post on same subject, diff forum)
Sounds like a good reason to have a late night country drive, big wide/dark skies
Yea, I know easier said than done.
Focus, I do exactly same, start with the infinity mark then using live view:
(this copy/paste from another post on same subject, diff forum)
Thanks xD maybe I'll hike out to the nearest field next weekend and give it a go.
It was cloudy here, so I didn't get to take any good photos
I was able to see it, and I have a couple photos that I'll edit later, but I don't think any came out well.I used binoculars attached to my tripod to image the transition onto the side of my truck. Not the greatest surface to use, but cool none the less. You can see the transit of Venus and 3 (or 4) sunspots. I attached the processed image first, and then the non-processed image. Both are crops.
The nice thing about using binoculars is you can tell the the sunspots from the dirt on the truck or optics. A secondary image is used from confirmation.
The nice thing about using binoculars is you can tell the the sunspots from the dirt on the truck or optics. A secondary image is used from confirmation.
I didn't have access to a telescope. During the crossing I was on a boat in the Destin, FL, harbor on a dolphin sighting cruise. It was raining when we started, and I was worried I wouldn't be able to see it. I got this shot from the back of the boat just after we went under the 98 bridge that goes over the harbor with my Canon 60D at 200mm.
SmugMug link to see full resolution.
SmugMug link to see full resolution.
Keleko, if you used a filter, what was it? I see it was 1/664 sec at f/22 and ISO 100.
Considering you were bouncing around on a boat, I'm surprise it came out so well with a 200mm setting on the zoom.
Taken with a NexStar 5 telescope and a Sony NEX-5N digital camera:
Venus Transit, Near Second Contact June 5, 2012 3:24PM PDT
There are two other pictures on my Flickr site (full disk of sun and at sunset, follow the above link).
Venus Transit, Near Second Contact June 5, 2012 3:24PM PDT
There are two other pictures on my Flickr site (full disk of sun and at sunset, follow the above link).
Keleko, if you used a filter, what was it? I see it was 1/664 sec at f/22 and ISO 100.
Considering you were bouncing around on a boat, I'm surprise it came out so well with a 200mm setting on the zoom.
I used no filter.