@DeluxeWarPlaya oh I'm sorry! we'll have some videos later showing what can be done with a DSLR (and some dark skies, of course!) But telescopes are always handy!
When Roy brought out the DSLR, I thought, hey, I can take photos of the galaxy too, then he brought out some weird attachment and I was like, it's ok, it shouldnt cost any more than a few hundred... still had fairly high hopes... then he connected it to the telescope. Any hopes I had of taking photos were crushed at 2:53
While it's probably normal for an amateur astronomist to keep track of these things, my jaw still dropped a little when he instantly replied "Oh, that's Jupiter.".
I am so jealous of the 'lens' he's got for that camera! What I found fascinating, actually, was the ever-so-slight directional blur of the image. Might that be due to Earth's rotation?
I got my first telescope a couple of days ago and this the first deep sky object I found. It was very faint with the naked eye but when I pointed my telescope at it I found lots of tiny stars
@Tilaron The trick here is to "top hat" it - cover the telescope's aperture with a dark object (a top hat would be ideal, but a piece of black card would work just as well), open the camera shutter, then wait a few seconds for all vibration to stop, then take away the top hat/card/whatever dark thing you use to begin making an image.
Don't forget that the Messier objects are among the biggest and brightest of all the deep sky objects. You really don't need "professional-grade" equipment or a backyard observatory to see them. Heck, quite a few of them - open clusters especially - can be seen with a good pair of binoculars!
@DeluxeWarPlaya Ive got a rather common panasonic lumix digital camera and there is a "mode" where you choose the exposure to take pics at the sky from 15 secs to 60. Pics turn out really great!! The problem is that when you zoom on the pic so see the particular objetc you want, in stead of points of light you see lines, cuased by the earth's rotation, I guess the only way to overcome that is taht kind of motorized mounts
@DeluxeWarPlaya The weird attachment costs more than ten but much less than one hundred, as it's just an adaptor and contains no optics. To take sharp long-exposure pictures of the night sky doesn't require a telescope, however, but it does require a mount - the thing the telescope sits on (which often costs more than the telescope). The night sky moves, and the computer-controlled mount moves the telescope with it. Astrophotography is neither simple nor cheap!
It depends on the length of the exposure and the relative amount of 'zoom' you're using with the imaging apparatus. For 30 second exposures using a telescope like this you absolutely need good tracking otherwise the stars end up as streaky lines rather then points of light. You can generally get away with say a 4 second exposure without tracking, but you can take some pretty impressive pictures even without a scope or mount and just with your camera+ tripod and a decent lens.
@alfiestoppani it's a way you help explain it to people. How to find Jupiter: look for the brightest star in the sky. Usually fairly high up (if it's near sunrise/sunset it's probably Venus - hence the nicknames 'Morning Star' or 'Evening Star') :)
Because most cameras nowadays have relatively short focal lengths that give rise to a very wide angle field of view. Ergo the camera will capture a large portion of the night sky rather then looking just at the moon. Depending on the camera you can probably buy lenses or add-on lenses that can improve the situation.
when taking the 30 sec exposion does the telescope needs to be tracking the stars duuring the the 30 sec ? or can you do this at home whitout a telescope that tracks the stars whit a computer ? greatings from holland !
Omg was so freakin awesome to watch Jupiter right there! Are you going to cover planets aswell on this channel? Really interrested in those and most of all Jupiter.
@alfiestoppani A glowing thing in the sky's most commonly called a star (by the "general person") even though they sometimes are other things... Falling stars etc... Don't be a hardass!
@subliminalvibes oh no... now im going to have to trawl through my previous posts to see what i said!!! paranoia attacks!!! lol thanks very much for the heads up tho! need to stop posting while drunk... like i am now *facepalm/headshake*
@DeluxeWarPlaya oh I'm sorry! we'll have some videos later showing what can be done with a DSLR (and some dark skies, of course!)
But telescopes are always handy!
When Roy brought out the DSLR, I thought, hey, I can take photos of the galaxy too, then he brought out some weird attachment and I was like, it's ok, it shouldnt cost any more than a few hundred... still had fairly high hopes... then he connected it to the telescope.
Any hopes I had of taking photos were crushed at 2:53
While it's probably normal for an amateur astronomist to keep track of these things, my jaw still dropped a little when he instantly replied "Oh, that's Jupiter.".
I am so jealous of the 'lens' he's got for that camera! What I found fascinating, actually, was the ever-so-slight directional blur of the image. Might that be due to Earth's rotation?
I got my first telescope a couple of days ago and this the first deep sky object I found. It was very faint with the naked eye but when I pointed my telescope at it I found lots of tiny stars
@Tilaron The trick here is to "top hat" it - cover the telescope's aperture with a dark object (a top hat would be ideal, but a piece of black card would work just as well), open the camera shutter, then wait a few seconds for all vibration to stop, then take away the top hat/card/whatever dark thing you use to begin making an image.
Don't forget that the Messier objects are among the biggest and brightest of all the deep sky objects. You really don't need "professional-grade" equipment or a backyard observatory to see them. Heck, quite a few of them - open clusters especially - can be seen with a good pair of binoculars!
@DeluxeWarPlaya Ive got a rather common panasonic lumix digital camera and there is a "mode" where you choose the exposure to take pics at the sky from 15 secs to 60. Pics turn out really great!!
The problem is that when you zoom on the pic so see the particular objetc you want, in stead of points of light you see lines, cuased by the earth's rotation, I guess the only way to overcome that is taht kind of motorized mounts
@DeluxeWarPlaya The weird attachment costs more than ten but much less than one hundred, as it's just an adaptor and contains no optics. To take sharp long-exposure pictures of the night sky doesn't require a telescope, however, but it does require a mount - the thing the telescope sits on (which often costs more than the telescope). The night sky moves, and the computer-controlled mount moves the telescope with it.
Astrophotography is neither simple nor cheap!
It depends on the length of the exposure and the relative amount of 'zoom' you're using with the imaging apparatus. For 30 second exposures using a telescope like this you absolutely need good tracking otherwise the stars end up as streaky lines rather then points of light. You can generally get away with say a 4 second exposure without tracking, but you can take some pretty impressive pictures even without a scope or mount and just with your camera+ tripod and a decent lens.
Aaw Brady, perfect timing!
Got a lunch break and everything!
I'm loving these videos. Keep up the good work.
A beautiful cluster!
Amazing.
@VRPudz thanks... we'll try!
@alfiestoppani it's a way you help explain it to people. How to find Jupiter: look for the brightest star in the sky. Usually fairly high up (if it's near sunrise/sunset it's probably Venus - hence the nicknames 'Morning Star' or 'Evening Star') :)
coolest videos brother
@DeluxeWarPlaya some smaller telescopes are cheaper than some camera lenses. Not an insurmountable obstacle this one.
thank you, great vid as always, cheers!
Because most cameras nowadays have relatively short focal lengths that give rise to a very wide angle field of view. Ergo the camera will capture a large portion of the night sky rather then looking just at the moon. Depending on the camera you can probably buy lenses or add-on lenses that can improve the situation.
M45! Subaru fans want to see M45! haha I know you'll get around to it but I am want to see moar nao! haha
Brady would you be able to do a Medical channel sometime in the future?
when taking the 30 sec exposion does the telescope needs to be tracking the stars duuring the the 30 sec ? or can you do this at home whitout a telescope that tracks the stars whit a computer ?
greatings from holland !
Omg was so freakin awesome to watch Jupiter right there! Are you going to cover planets aswell on this channel? Really interrested in those and most of all Jupiter.
hopefully GAIA edr3 has more precise data on M34?
Brady, try to look at the west after sunset. U'll see venus around this time, much brighter than jupiter at lucid nights
NGC objects next Brady, right, right????
3:40-end Anyone else think the background noise in the old guy's observatory sounds kinda like the teleporters from the original Star Trek series?
@alfiestoppani A glowing thing in the sky's most commonly called a star (by the "general person") even though they sometimes are other things...
Falling stars etc...
Don't be a hardass!
@TheGlassDot ok maby i misunderstand.i was talking if i go out to look,then the brideste are venus.(im from denmark and very bad to english) srry
How does one get this job?
Question: Why can't I take a good picture of the moon when it appears huge to my eyes yet barely a pinpoint on my camera?
Indeed I hope they do one on NGC 457 :)
WOooow
If M34 is relatively 'close' to us, about how many light years away are we talking about?
DrSaxxy
Answering an old post I know but in case others read your question...
M34 is ~1500 light-years distant.
this video is so clustered
@dkrypto911 one does not, it takes at least three to get a job like that!!!! lol
@DrSaxxy
+/- 1400....could take a while 2 get there
@TheDingiso ya..he lie..its venus!
this makes me glad i have a telescope but i wish i had a better one
:) just simply :)
@subliminalvibes oh no... now im going to have to trawl through my previous posts to see what i said!!! paranoia attacks!!! lol thanks very much for the heads up tho! need to stop posting while drunk... like i am now *facepalm/headshake*
@MrPyroguy1 @
Yep the Messier playlist should be called “star clusters are boring.”