more moon attempts

Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good results:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

Pudentame wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think
I'm getting pretty good results:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final &
overlay them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one
was not as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x
converter but probably a little more detail just because of the
conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

The second is definitely softer, not as sharp. The stacked converters
may be contributing to that loss of sharpness.

I'm pretty sure it's the viewing conditions and maybe different
sharpening, ISO & exposure. TCs make a less sharp image uncropped but in
terms of actual magnified image detail on the subject, they do get you
more, I've done a bunch of tests of this.

I added a full pixel crop, here's the two for comparison although it's
not very meaningful:
http://edgehill.net/1/Misc/moon/2008...4215+2_f11.jpg
http://edgehill.net/1/Misc/moon/2008...p/_PBF4366.jpg
The second is 1.4x more magnified. The first one was also taken before I
corrected an infinity focus problem with the lens but neither is
anywhere close to the sharpness of a closer subject without atmospheric
disturbance nor do they begin to utilize all those pixels at full size.

Here's some shots of flowers about 50 feet away (ignore middle one):
http://edgehill.net/Misc/misc-photos/3-2-08-magnolia
full pixel crops:
http://edgehill.net/1/Misc/misc-phot...p/_PBF4285.jpg
http://edgehill.net/1/Misc/misc-phot...p/_PBF4295.jpg

On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good results:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2
http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm where
it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at 1000mm. Both
are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not as
good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter but
probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

I would be proud of any of those photos, they are awesome! Blah

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?

Micahel Covington's book, Astrophotography for Amateurs, described numerous
was to do this task.

Jim

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?


For my telescope, I just bought an adapter for the scope, and a matching one
for the camera. Slid them together, tighten a couple of screws, and --
presto -- it's mounted.

Good Luck,
Dudley

"Jim" wrote in message
. net...

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?

Micahel Covington's book, Astrophotography for Amateurs, described numerous
was to do this task.

Jim

Thanks for the info.

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:qVhzj.74697$C61.74494@edtnps89...

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final & overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?


For my telescope, I just bought an adapter for the scope, and a matching one
for the camera. Slid them together, tighten a couple of screws, and --
presto -- it's mounted.

Good Luck,
Dudley


Thanks, that sounds easy enough.

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:qVhzj.74697$C61.74494@edtnps89...

"XxYyZz" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 1:26 pm, Paul Furman wrote:
Playing with the new (old) 500mm f/4.5 lens & teleconverters I think
I'm
getting pretty good
results:http://edgehill.net/Misc/moon/pg1pc2...sc/moon/pg2pc8
The second one I calculated the actual f/stop to be f/112 at 1400mm
where it reads f/14 on the ring. The first read f/11 on the ring at
1000mm. Both are 1/4 second which is probably a bit slow but close.

On the second one you can click the pic for a full pixel crop but it
doesn't have any extra detail if I scale up the 1/3 size final &
overlay
them. The converters do increase detail though. The second one was not
as good viewing conditions I think. The first is only the 2x converter
but probably a little more detail just because of the conditions.

Advice for improvements welcome.

But a small apo telescope? Seriously, you did a very good job with a
lens and T/C.
Check out this one done by a guy on that group with a 500mm f8 apo
telescope costing about $500.00.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...&q=moon&qf =m


How do you mount a camera to a telescope ?


For my telescope, I just bought an adapter for the scope, and a matching
one for the camera. Slid them together, tighten a couple of screws,
and -- presto -- it's mounted.

Good Luck,
Dudley


Thanks, that sounds easy enough.


Most bigger scopes will use a T mount.