Bart Porn

[Chrith]

http://www.wired.com/science/space/m...der_telescopes

[ken dog]

what is this?

[Kude]

obviously bart porn

[Teddy Parker]

no way

telescope photos are the shit


edit: another one from that same dude

[BART]

http://www.wired.com/science/space/m...der_telescopes

trifid nebula, 'found' this for the first time by accident last summer during a camping trip. that's about what it looks like through a scope too, expect in black and white. these clouds are where stars are born. some cool pics in there, amazing what can be done with an amateur scope in the digital age.

[benmasters]

here are a few of my pics. i literally put the lens of my point and shoot into the eyepiece. they mostly suck. i rarley get good ones like that

[skimmybits]

Wired.com Readers' Most Excellent Telescope Photos

[Jayce]

I love taking pics at night, here's a shot of the moon I took a while ago. No telescope, just a 70-200mm telephoto.

[Jayce]

Benmasters, there's a DIY article in popular science that I read that explains how to rig a digital camera to a telescope. From what I remember it seemed fairly simple but required you to strip your camera for components. Maybe if you had an old $10 digi it might be something to look into.

[benmasters]

they used a webcam. i havent tried that yet.

[sandsurfngbomber]

benmasters that last pic of yours actually looks pretty sick...

ben and bart: is there any site/forums that i could see what kind of telescopes produced what kind of images. i have yet to buy that dobsonian and i think i was looking at some one telescopes.com the prices arent that bad but i just want to see the difference in detail between an 8in and a 10in. i tried lookin everywhere but never found anything.
p.s. the pictures that teddy parker put up there of saturn, achievable by an 8in? 10in? am i even asking the right questions?

[BART]

the experience of the eye through a scope is much different than using digital techniques and cameras to capture a picture. the pic teddy posted of saturn is a result of averaging dozens of blurrier pictures using software. to do this you need also need a motorized EQ mount for your scope = $$$$.

[BART]

from a pm i sent to narwhal

Originally Posted by narwhal
Got any recommendations for telescopes?

Looks at spending 200-500

get a dobsonian design. this is simply a newtonian reflector on a very simple base. These kind of telescoeps you get maximum aperture for your dollar. Aperture is basically the diameter of the mirror, and the larger the better because it collects more light and focuses that on your eyeball. Most deep space objects (anything other than planets and the moon) are fairly faint because they are so far away, so the larger mirror is important. Meade, Celestron, Zhumell, and Orion all make good quality inexpensive dobsonians.

something like this (watch for a sale, you can find great deals sometimes even on new scopes):

http://www.telescope.com/control/pro...oduct_id=08947

i would expect above scope to go for like $250-$300 used on craigslist.

You can also check craigslist bc people are getting rid of dobsonians for cheap all the time (be patient over a few weeks and you'll see a few). If you buy used and are tempted to clean the mirror, make sure you read up on how to do it properly. You can't just wipe a telescope mirror like you would your bathroom mirror, because the silvering is on the top side (so you don't get light distortions from the light have to go through the glass.

I would look at 8" minimum, 10" is probably doable in your price range (esp used), and 12" is what i have which is also nice if you find a used bargain. one consideration with 10" and 12" is transporting due to size. My scope is a meade lightbridge, which is a truss scope (means you can break it down). a regular, non-truss 10" tube can fit in the back seat of a sedan, and the base will probably fit in the trunk.

my 12" + base fits in my honda accord entirely in the backseat.

you also need to factor in the cost of eyepieces. a less expensive eyepiece will be around $60-$110. an expensive one will be around $300 and up. in my experience, a $300 eyepiece is not 3 times as good as a $100 piece. but figuring what you choose and how expensive exactly is a complicated discussion. most scopes come with a wide-angle, then you'll want at least one more eyepiece of higher magnification. i only have 3 eyepieces, and i mostly only use 2 of them and don't really feel a need to get more. so 2 total is plenty is start with.

with a dobsonian you're investing your cash in the apeture. the scope itself is a push-to, meaning no tracking. at your price range, you could get a really cheap small apeture scope with a filmsy tracking tripod instead of a dobsonian, but it won't be nearly as good for galaxy and deep space hunting as a large apeture dobsonian. i don't think it makes much sense unless you're only interested in the planets and moon. not having the tracking is really no big deal, so don't let it worry you. it just means you'll have to learn the sky to find things, and that things will slowly drift out of view every 2-3 minutes or so, meaning you have to nudge the scope slightly. the sky drift is slow enough that you can get plenty of staring time before you need to nudge. for me, i actually really enjoy star hopping, i've gotten to know the sky very well and can pretty much point the scope and find things quickly. people are usually impressed i can find what im looking for 'where there's nothing'. you'll have to get a star map, which are like $10.

lastly, just so you know what to expect, these are similar to my experience with views of deep space objects through a telescope: http://www.backyardvoyager.com/eyepieceviews.html

you won't be able to make out quite as much detail as shown in the planets, but you can get that magnification on a good night. it does show you will see jupiter's moons, bands, and sometimes the spot (if you look hard for it on a good night). saturn + its moons is always awesome, the ring is unmistakable and on a great night you can actually see cassini's division, which is a split in the ring's bands. galaxies will be 'faint fuzzies', i absolutely <3 them nonetheless (that's 30 million lightyears bitches). globular clusters will probably be actually a little better than m13 is in the pic. you will also be able to split some double stars, which are two stars orbiting each other. there are some other nebula (large clouds of gas and dust in the miliky way) that will also be viewable as faint clouds with some structure. ring nebula is pretty much exactly as in picture, it looks like a small smoke ring.

traveling to a dark sky (minimal light pollution) and some elevation will make a big difference for viewing deep sky objects. if you live on the coast, there is a lot of atmopshere and humidity at sea level which limits resolution at higher magnifications, but i still have had some great nights of viewing deep sky off my deck.

here is the best forum: http://cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?Cat=

(see 'reflectors' sub-forum for dobsonian discussion)

-bart

[BART]

benmasters that last pic of yours actually looks pretty sick...

ben and bart: is there any site/forums that i could see what kind of telescopes produced what kind of images. i have yet to buy that dobsonian and i think i was looking at some one telescopes.com the prices arent that bad but i just want to see the difference in detail between an 8in and a 10in. i tried lookin everywhere but never found anything.
p.s. the pictures that teddy parker put up there of saturn, achievable by an 8in? 10in? am i even asking the right questions?

and the difference in seeing saturn in an 8in and 10in will be pretty much nonexistent. saturn, the moon and other planets are so bright you don't need much aperture. more aperture is more important when looking for deep sky objects like nebula, globular clusters, galaxies, because the larger mirror collects more light and will make these things more distinct and dynamic when viewing them. your biggest limitation on how much magnification you can use on a planet is atmospheric conditions.

any pictures you see from a telescope will be misleading in comparing 8" vs 10", because a camera captures light completely different than an eye does. i would recommend finding a local observatory that has star parties, or look up your local astronomer club as they likely have star parties in the weekends around the new moon, then you could look through some scopes. the club may even have a dobs they could loan you to try out if you joined the club.

[DjMattyD]

??

[benmasters]

i have an 8 in. celestron nexstar. barley use the nexstar part though.

[zeus]

where is deathstar from