English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

A solid mount and a good auto-tracker are the most important things for astrophotography. The type of telescope depends on the type of photography you want to do.

Cassegrains are very popular because they are compact and typically have enormous focus range. They are typically long-focus instruments, but you can add a focal reducer.

Apochromatic refractors are great for wide-field photography. Their disadvantages are limited aperture and high cost. The chromatic aberration in achromatic refractors presents a number of challenges, making them relatively less popular.

Many people use Newtonian reflectors, but they are somewhat awkward and have limited focus range.

All of these will need a field flattener for film or large-sensor photography, except for Ritchey-Cretiens, Meade RCs, and and Petzval-type refractors. Short focal ratio Newtonians need a coma corrector.

2007-10-20 10:45:40 · answer #1 · answered by injanier 7 · 1 0

The usual answer: it depends. On what you want to photograph, how much you want to spend, just how gung ho you are.

Taking pictures though a telescope is the hardest form as astrophotography, even with DSLR cameras. Some of the neatest pictures I've ever taken have been with a camera bolted on top of the telescope, looking at the sky with its own lens, but with the telescope mount providing precision tracking. Do a search for "piggyback astrophotography".

I have two telescopes that I routinely use for astrophotography: an 8 inch Celestron Schmidt-Cassegrain and a Takahashi TOA-130F. I use both (though not at the same time!) on a Losmandy G-11 mount.

Please consult any of the excellent references on the subject.

2007-10-23 12:38:42 · answer #2 · answered by laurahal42 6 · 0 0

First of all, you don't need any telescope for astrophotography. Excellent pictures can be taken with ordinary cameras. You can attach a camera to just about any telescope, but you will need a much more sturdy mount than for visual observation. Expect to spend at least as much money on the mount as on the telescope. But beware: astrophotography is by far the most difficult and expensive branch of amateur astronomy.

2007-10-21 11:35:00 · answer #3 · answered by GeoffG 7 · 0 0

You'll need a telescope with a sturdy mount (because the weight of the camera can be destablizing) and a tracking drive. Even the shortest exposures will be blurry if you don't have a drive.

Is there a local astronomy club near you? Those guys have the best equipment. Try meeting up with them some night.

2007-10-20 17:19:12 · answer #4 · answered by eri 7 · 1 0

The bigger the better. Make sure you have a mount which has a tracking device. This allows you to follow the heavenly body. Not necessary for the Moon. I use a 10" Newtonian. I guess anything 6" or over should be good if you want to gert some details.

2007-10-20 17:06:04 · answer #5 · answered by worldneverchanges 7 · 0 2

Use the hubble telescope. I'll see you there.

2007-10-20 17:03:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers