Partial Solar Eclipse Photo's

[Speed]

Here they are. I finished the roll in the N80 (Porta 160 NC), then switched cameras and finished the roll in the F5 (Superia Xtra 400).

These are from the N80 and the Celestron C-8.

BTW, the black spots on the sun are sunspots.

[Arctirus]

Very cool! I wish I could have seen it from PA. I read somewhere that digitals cannot properly photograph the sun, anyone know if this is true?

[lidarman]

Indeed, cool pix.

I don't see a reason a digital cannot capture the sun. Just like in film, you need the proper ND filter. but I would like to know if there is a reason otherwise.

[jar_e]

Great shots, could never see it from over here on the west coast! Nice shots, and I think as long as you have the right filter you can shoot it with digital. (Probably one of the only times you need a filter for digital)

Jared

[mjs1973]

Hey Speed, great shots! Seeing shots like this, and your moon shots, makes me want to dig my telescope out of the basement and set it up for taking photos.

What is the image to the lower right of the sun in the 2nd photo?

[walterick]

Awesome!

I am happy you got to see it from NC. It was cloudy and rainy all day up here Oh well, maybe the next full moon or meteor shower will have me shooting the heavens...

Nice shots!
Rick

[Speed]

Very cool! I wish I could have seen it from PA. I read somewhere that digitals cannot properly photograph the sun, anyone know if this is true?

Digital can be used to photograph the sun. In fact, many people did so for this eclipse.

Here's the Sky and Telescope link:

http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1497_1.asp

Thanks for the comments!

[Speed]

Indeed, cool pix.

I don't see a reason a digital cannot capture the sun. Just like in film, you need the proper ND filter. but I would like to know if there is a reason otherwise.

Thanks for the comments!

You are right about digital. You can shoot it just like film for astrophotography work - except for the long exposures. Noise becomes a problem then. Proper filtering is always neccessary when shooting the sun regardless of what medium you are shooting with.

[Speed]

Great shots, could never see it from over here on the west coast! Nice shots, and I think as long as you have the right filter you can shoot it with digital. (Probably one of the only times you need a filter for digital)

Jared

This eclipse wasn't visible on the west coast. About half the US could see it, and only those on cruise ships in the Pacific ocean got to see totality (the full eclipse).

Thanks for the comments.

[Speed]

Hey Speed, great shots! Seeing shots like this, and your moon shots, makes me want to dig my telescope out of the basement and set it up for taking photos.

What is the image to the lower right of the sun in the 2nd photo?

Dig it out Michael! If it takes a standard 1.25" eyepiece, then you get a T-Ring and a T-Adapter and hook up your camera. If it has a smaller eyepiece, there are several camera mounting systems out there that will allow you to hook your camera up and take astrophotographs. Check out these sites for what you need:

www.celestron.com
www.telescope.com
www.meade.com

The speck you are referring to in the second photo is lint. I scanned these onto my computer, re-sized them, and uploaded them to PR. Sorry about that. If I had noticed it earlier, I would have cloned it out.

Thanks for the comments, and I'm delighted that my photo's have proved to be a source of inspiration.

Here's a cleaned up version of number two for you buddy!

[Speed]

Awesome!

I am happy you got to see it from NC. It was cloudy and rainy all day up here Oh well, maybe the next full moon or meteor shower will have me shooting the heavens...

Nice shots!
Rick

I'm sorry you missed it! I was sweating it big time with the clouds. But I got some shots!

I'll let you know when the next heavenly event suitable for photography takes place.

Thanks for the comments my friend!

[mtbbrian]

Good Stuff Robert.
I learned a thing or two from this post.
Thanks!
Brian

[Speed]

Good Stuff Robert.
I learned a thing or two from this post.
Thanks!
Brian

Hey Brian,

Glad you enjoyed the post.

So what, pray tell, did you learn?

You've piqued my curiosity now!

[mtbbrian]

Not much really..
Just about how to photograph stuff like this..
Filtering and all that..
I have no interest in something this, but it is interesting on a technical note.
What else have you been photographing lately?
Brian

[mjs1973]

Here's a cleaned up version of number two for you buddy!

Thanks for the info and the links Speed! You didn't have to clean the photo up for me. ;) You could have told me it was another planet, or a spaceship.

[Speed]

Thanks for the info and the links Speed! You didn't have to clean the photo up for me. ;) You could have told me it was another planet, or a spaceship.

Now that I think about it, that is that crooked comet you've heard about.

Yeah! That's the ticket!

;-)

[Speed]

Not much really..
Just about how to photograph stuff like this..
Filtering and all that..
I have no interest in something this, but it is interesting on a technical note.
What else have you been photographing lately?
Brian

Just stuff. Crappy bird shots, other peoples kids, my kids playing soccer. Hopefully next week I'll get lots of shots of my lovely wife. In May I'm going to the mountains with my old college buddies. So stay tuned.

Glad you learned something. Nice to see I'm not the only one who enjoys learning for the sake of learning.

Here's the lousy bird shot.

[mjs1973]

Speed, I just dug out my telescope to see what I could figure out with it, which wasn't much. It's nothing special I can tell you that much. After all, I got it free for sending in Marlboro Miles. The same way I got one of my 35mm cameras. Anyway, it's a Bushnell 78-9512. There are no markings on the eyepiece so I'm not sure about the 1.25" sizing. So if it is the standard 1.25" size, these two pieces are all I would need to hook my camera up to it?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=156547&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=261256&is=REG

[Speed]

Speed, I just dug out my telescope to see what I could figure out with it, which wasn't much. It's nothing special I can tell you that much. After all, I got it free for sending in Marlboro Miles. The same way I got one of my 35mm cameras. Anyway, it's a Bushnell 78-9512. There are no markings on the eyepiece so I'm not sure about the 1.25" sizing. So if it is the standard 1.25" size, these two pieces are all I would need to hook my camera up to it?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=156547&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=261256&is=REG

Hey Michael,

You have a Deep Space Series Telescope. It is a 60mm refractor, that is, the front lens element, known as the objective lens, is 60mm in diameter. It has a focal length of 700mm. Here's a link to a Bushnell PDF file on it:

http://www.bushnell.com/customer_ser...ep%20Space.pdf

BTW, it does not have the 1.25" eyepiece. The links you sent would be the correct ones for a 1.25" setup. Get the T-Ring for your EOS

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=261256&is=REG

and then get a universal camera adapter like this one:

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/pr...&iProductID=73

This slides into the eyepiece hole, and you tighten it in place like an eyepiece. Then you thread your T-Ring onto the end of it, attach your camera and shoot!

A setup like this will work great for photo's of the sun (with proper filters) and the moon. Planets require longer exposures, and hence tracking. For deep sky shots or meteor showers just mount you camera onto a standard tripod and open the shutter. One more thing - if you don't have a remote/cable release, then by all means get one. Using the self-timer also works, but it's not as flexible.

My first telescope was a 60mm refractor with a focal length of 900mm, so I started with very similar gear! In fact, I still have that telescope. It is a simple telescope, but it will give you great service. You can learn a lot about astronomy with such a unit.

If you have any other questions, drop me a line and I'll do my best to answer them for you.

[mjs1973]

Hey Michael,

You have a Deep Space Series Telescope. It is a 60mm refractor, that is, the front lens element, known as the objective lens, is 60mm in diameter. It has a focal length of 700mm. Here's a link to a Bushnell PDF file on it:

http://www.bushnell.com/customer_ser...ep%20Space.pdf

BTW, it does not have the 1.25" eyepiece. The links you sent would be the correct ones for a 1.25" setup. Get the T-Ring for your EOS

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=261256&is=REG

and then get a universal camera adapter like this one:

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/pr...&iProductID=73

This slides into the eyepiece hole, and you tighten it in place like an eyepiece. Then you thread your T-Ring onto the end of it, attach your camera and shoot!

A setup like this will work great for photo's of the sun (with proper filters) and the moon. Planets require longer exposures, and hence tracking. For deep sky shots or meteor showers just mount you camera onto a standard tripod and open the shutter. One more thing - if you don't have a remote/cable release, then by all means get one. Using the self-timer also works, but it's not as flexible.

My first telescope was a 60mm refractor with a focal length of 900mm, so I started with very similar gear! In fact, I still have that telescope. It is a simple telescope, but it will give you great service. You can learn a lot about astronomy with such a unit.

If you have any other questions, drop me a line and I'll do my best to answer them for you.

Hey Speed, remember this thread?

I was just thinking about getting out my telescope and setting it up to take some pics so I went back to this thread to see what you said about it. My question is about the eyepiece adapter. You said that my telescope does not have the 1.25" eyepiece, and that I need to get a universal adapter. The link you posted to univeral adapters still works, but they say they are compatible with 1.25" focusers. So will they work with my scope or not? Also, what does the variable adapter do that the regular one doesn't. What does prime focus photography and eyepiece-projection photography mean?

Sorry for all the questions, but as you can tell, I'm pretty clueless about this type of set up.

Mike

[shutterman]

Speed, very cool! Do you know the difference between the 1st and 2nd? Why is the coloring/shading so different?

[Speed]

Speed, very cool! Do you know the difference between the 1st and 2nd? Why is the coloring/shading so different?

Hey Shutterman,

I must admit, I was very surprised to see this thread again! I posted the original thread back in April.

The difference between # 1 & # 2 is the amount of cloud cover. They affect how much light gets through, and thus, the color of the light. Similar to why sunrises and sunsets are red. The light is coming through hundreds of miles of atmosphere, and that filters out the blue/green end of the spectrum. Whereas when the sun is overhead, the light is only passing through about 100 miles of atmosphere, and we see white light.

Check out these pic's of Venus transiting the sun for more of this effect. In the first post, the sun is more red/orange, whereas in the second post the sun is more yellow. The sun was rising as I took these, but the cloud cover had a much greater effect on the colors.

Venus Transit Photo's - Volume 3

Venus Transit Photo's - Volume 4

[shutterman]

Glad it was just the clouds - I was bracing myself for some sort of magnetic burst or cosmic rays! the 2nd definately has an ominous feel!

On the 2nd link you sent you can really see the clouds, but it almost looks like they could be coming off the sun itself.

Thanks for posting. these are images I like to see and just don't have the equipment to get. It is is easier and far cheaper for me to have you continue posting!

[Speed]

Hey Mike,

Yes I do remember this thread. And I never thought I'd see it pop up again!

The Universal Adapter should work fine. If you have any questions, call the folks at Orion Telescopes (http://www.telescope.com) 800-447-1001, and they should be able to answer any questions you have. I have bought several things from them (camera T-Rings, solar filter, etc) and have been very pleased with the service and quality.

The difference between the variable adapter and a regular one, is that the variable (or universal) is made to fit on various sized eyepiece holders, whereas the "regualar" one is made for the standard 1.25 inch size.

The telescopes I've seen have eyepieces in one of three sizes. The so called beginner telescopes, like those you find at Wal Mart, K Mart, etc, usually have .965 inch size eyepieces. The serious telescopes, and by far the most popular size, have 1.25 inch eyepieces (these are "standard" size). And some of your larger, very serious, very expensive telescopes have 2.0 inch eyepieces. As the size goes up, the field of view, eye relief, and price all go up.

Prime focus photography is where you place the camera where the eyepiece goes and you take your photograph using the telescope as a large telephoto lens. The rule of thumb is, for every 50mm of focal length, you get one power (1X) of magnification. Thus, a telescope with a 700mm focal length will give you a 14 power view at prime focus. The sun and the moon are ideal prime focus targets.

Eyepiece projection is where you use an eyepiece and place your camera behind it. This requires different adapters, and you lose a lot of light, but you gain considerably more power. It is used primararly for photographing planets. Planets are so small that they show up as little more than dots at prime focus. With eyepiece projection, you can get a large enough image to show some detail.

Don't worry about the questions. I've been interested in astronomy since I was 12 years old. That's over 30 years I've been reading about space, and looking up at the stars and planets! I'll be happy to share any information that I can.

[mjs1973]

Thanks for all the info and the phone # Speed. It's pretty slow here at work today, so I will give them a call!

Thanks again!