E-10 and Telescope: Anyone Done It?

Thanks, Walter,

Yes, I've done some initial testing using blank noise shots to subtract, but I need to experiment more. In night-sky shots, we're really pushing the noise characteristics of the E10 to the limit. And, like most Astronomy, it should have spin offs for more conventional work.

DN

walter w said:

There was a thread somewhere about long exposure noise reduction. A
second shot is taken with the lens cap on and eyepiece shutter
closed. Use the same shutter time and just after the first shot is
taken. Use PS to subtract the hot pixel noise from the picture.

Walter

PS excellent shots.

David Nicholls said:

The URL below attaches a ')' to the string. The correct URL is

http://www.dcnicholls.com/e10/astro.html

DN

David Nicholls said:

One thing I found - and I don't know the solution - is that the
bulb setting on the E10 appears to be limited to 30 seconds max.

Also, I had a lot of trouble getting the camera to stay set to
infinity.

This turned up when I was taking fixed tripod shots of the night sky
(see http://www.dcnicholls.com/e10/astro.html ). If you set the
manual focus ring to its "maximum" the focus is quite often not
sharply set on infinity. At least, that's what I found, and I'd be
intersted to find if anyone else has that problem. Autofocus is
similarly variable, but seems, oddly to be more reliable. It could
be my technique, but feedback would be appreciated on others'
findings.

Also, any answer to the apparent maximum for bulb.

DN

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I thought I would update this thread, but the news is not very good. I tried some "afocal" shots over the weekend with the E-10 and found it virtually impossible. The E-10's lens is so large that all I could get was a tiny, blurry vignetted point of light. I called the folks at http://www.scopetronix.com . They make a mount for digital cameras. They said a 62mm lens was much too large for this sort of thing. Using my M35 Macro just made things worse. BTW, I'm using a Celestron NexStar4 with a 25mm eyepiece. I hoping someone can tell me something obvious I'm missing here. :-(

Joe Hawblitzel

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Has anyone figured out how to mate the E-10 to a telescope? (Just
got another toy.) Since the lens is fixed, I know a T-adapter is
out of the question. It sounds like the whole enterprise is
doomed, but there are lots of smart people in this forum so I
thought I'd ask. Please don't make me buy a D30

Joe Hawblitzel

--
Joe Hawblitzel

Click to expand...

Joe Hawblitzel said:

I thought I would update this thread, but the news is not very
good. I tried some "afocal" shots over the weekend with the E-10
and found it virtually impossible. The E-10's lens is so large
that all I could get was a tiny, blurry vignetted point of light.

Click to expand...

I tried again with my 3.5" Questar with the same results. The image is pea sized at best. I tried through an eye piece, with the macro lens and without and also at prime focus. At prime focus I have to be 2-3 feet from the rear of the telescope! My Kodak 260 did much better, but has a crappy LCD refresh rate, so it is hard to use to focus correctly. I guess this is one time the smaller the lens the better.
Mike

Hi Joe,

I've got a Starmaster Dobsonian telescope with the 2" Eyepiece capability. But at 62mm, the E10 lens is still a little large. Not to mention the camera's great weight. Just doesn't lend itself to hanging off a telescope using EP projection. With my scope, even if you could mount the E10, it would destroy the balance. I bought one of those adapters from Scopetronix for my Casio digicam, but haven't had much luck with it. I've seen good results from others, but never have been able to duplicate it myself.

Gene

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Joe Hawblitzel

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Has anyone figured out how to mate the E-10 to a telescope? (Just
got another toy.) Since the lens is fixed, I know a T-adapter is
out of the question. It sounds like the whole enterprise is
doomed, but there are lots of smart people in this forum so I
thought I'd ask. Please don't make me buy a D30

Joe Hawblitzel

--
Joe Hawblitzel

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thanks, Mike and Gene -- It looks like I'll be dusting off the old Minolta Maxxum for my star pictures. Gee, I'm not sure I remember how it works. . .

Joe H

Gene Bonin said:

I've got a Starmaster Dobsonian telescope with the 2" Eyepiece
capability. But at 62mm, the E10 lens is still a little large. Not
to mention the camera's great weight. Just doesn't lend itself to
hanging off a telescope using EP projection. With my scope, even if
you could mount the E10, it would destroy the balance. I bought one
of those adapters from Scopetronix for my Casio digicam, but
haven't had much luck with it. I've seen good results from others,
but never have been able to duplicate it myself.

Gene

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Joe Hawblitzel

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Has anyone figured out how to mate the E-10 to a telescope? (Just
got another toy.) Since the lens is fixed, I know a T-adapter is
out of the question. It sounds like the whole enterprise is
doomed, but there are lots of smart people in this forum so I
thought I'd ask. Please don't make me buy a D30

Joe Hawblitzel

--
Joe Hawblitzel

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Thanks, Mike and Gene -- It looks like I'll be dusting off the old
Minolta Maxxum for my star pictures. Gee, I'm not sure I remember
how it works. . .

Click to expand...

Joe, I was being serious when I said what I did about doing piggyback photography with your camera. I've got a celestron 5 inch Schmidt Cassegrain and was considering astrophotography again so I talked to Jason Ware, a well published astrophotographer in Texas and the most knowledgable around here. He suggested to me that with anything smaller than an eight inch you would be better off doing piggyback. I looked into it and you can do some great constelation stuff at the equivalent of fifty mm lens, as well as with using the telephoto lens adapters available for the E10 you can get good stuff of the Orion Nebula, comets, the moon, planets with their moons ,ect. The idea is to use the clock drive of the telescope to stabelize your rotation. Then you can do stuff like using a fog filter for part of the exposure and getting the bright stars of a constelation to baloon while the background stars all remain pinpoint, all the nebulas in the area show up in color too. Very neat stuff. Much more forgiving technically and much more creative way to record the stars than trying mate the camera with the back of the scope. Also, I believe that the 450mm adapter is the equivalent of a pair of 9 power binoculars, but I'm not sure how much weight your telescope can handle. If I'm not mistaken, that same telescope platform carries an eight inch focal tube too, so it might handle it. I hope this will help you with your dilema. DavidT

Hi David,

I don’t want to disappoint you but piggybacking the E10 will not get you much in the way of better images than those posted by David Nicholls a few days ago. At the very best you will get constellation shots and those of the moon will need considerable enlargement. Any planets will just be points of light, even the Tcon300 at 400mm is not enough. My Meade 8” at prime focus is 2000mm and Jupiter shows up about 1/8” across on 35mm film, and because of the 30sec shutter limitation you will not get much in the way of deep sky objects where exposures of 10-30 minutes are common. In summary the E10, at best, is OK for astronomy ‘snapshots’, for serious photographs you need to use film or dedicated astronomical CCD cameras (I am considering a SBIG for my next ‘toy’). If I can find the time I will try some piggybacked shots with the E10 on my Meade and post them but I will not expect to approach what can be obtained from my OM1 and 800ASA film.
John W.

John W. said:

Hi David,
I don’t want to disappoint you but piggybacking the E10 will
not get you much in the way of better images than those posted by
David Nicholls a few days ago. At the very best you will get
constellation shots and those of the moon will need considerable
enlargement. Any planets will just be points of light, even the
Tcon300 at 400mm is not enough. My Meade 8” at prime focus
is 2000mm and Jupiter shows up about 1/8” across on 35mm
film, and because of the 30sec shutter limitation you will not get
much in the way of deep sky objects where exposures of 10-30
minutes are common. In summary the E10, at best, is OK for
astronomy ‘snapshots’, for serious photographs you need
to use film or dedicated astronomical CCD cameras (I am considering
a SBIG for my next ‘toy’). If I can find the time I
will try some piggybacked shots with the E10 on my Meade and post
them but I will not expect to approach what can be obtained from my
OM1 and 800ASA film.
John W.

Click to expand...

John, I completely agree! That's why in my first post I said he wouldn't get much with less than an eight inch scope. He was asking about mating theE10 with a 4 incher. As for the constelation shots, there have been some articles and several shots in Astronomy magazine this year and last, that are about split exposures with and without a fog filter, of constelations. The bright stars, which are the constelation stars balloon during the fog part of the shot, then you burn in the background stars with a long exposure without the fog filter. 30 seconds total should do it. This can be done beautifully with film but I'm not sure how the E10 is going to react, since digital seems to flare point sources of light, BUT, if it would work these "mere" constelation shots are REALLY COOL! They also show the locations of most of the deep sky objects within the constelations, at least on film because of their color signature. I had an eight inch Celestron a few years back but sold it, later got a C5+ and decided not to do photography all night since I do it all day, but this constelation shooting seems to be the really easy and fun part of astrophotography,so here we go again! I bought counterweights and have an OM1 to do it with but I just have to try it with the E10 sometime this month! If you get to try some piggyback soon, try partial exposure with some kind of fog filter so we can compare notes! I'll be a while getting a CCD camera tho. That's serious tech stuff!....and in the dark too! DavidT

Thanks, David and John

I'm learning a lot from you. You both make good points and I've got to do some more thinking/studying about this whole matter. Right now I would be happy to get a couple of good moon shots. I'm sure I would need a good 8 inch scope for deep space, but right now I just can't sink that much $$$ into what might be a passing fancy. Of course if I can't do what I want, it's more likely the scope will just wind up in the basement. Hmmm . . .

Joe Hawblitzel

David T. said:

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Thanks, Mike and Gene -- It looks like I'll be dusting off the old
Minolta Maxxum for my star pictures. Gee, I'm not sure I remember
how it works. . .

Click to expand...

Joe, I was being serious when I said what I did about doing
piggyback photography with your camera. I've got a celestron 5
inch Schmidt Cassegrain and was considering astrophotography again
so I talked to Jason Ware, a well published astrophotographer in
Texas and the most knowledgable around here. He suggested to me
that with anything smaller than an eight inch you would be better
off doing piggyback. I looked into it and you can do some great
constelation stuff at the equivalent of fifty mm lens, as well as
with using the telephoto lens adapters available for the E10 you
can get good stuff of the Orion Nebula, comets, the moon, planets
with their moons ,ect. The idea is to use the clock drive of the
telescope to stabelize your rotation. Then you can do stuff like
using a fog filter for part of the exposure and getting the bright
stars of a constelation to baloon while the background stars all
remain pinpoint, all the nebulas in the area show up in color too.
Very neat stuff. Much more forgiving technically and much more
creative way to record the stars than trying mate the camera with
the back of the scope. Also, I believe that the 450mm adapter is
the equivalent of a pair of 9 power binoculars, but I'm not sure
how much weight your telescope can handle. If I'm not mistaken,
that same telescope platform carries an eight inch focal tube too,
so it might handle it. I hope this will help you with your dilema.
DavidT

Click to expand...

Joe! Don't scrap the telescope! Mine is only a tiny bit larger than yours but I find it really great for camping as well as evenings out at the viewing site when I don't want to lug out "Big Bertha". It's much better than binoculars and I think you can find 80 or more Messier objects with binoculars(out of about 110). Makes for a great start, learning the skies ,and it will keep you busy for a year or two. Lets look into whether or not you can use the clock drive part for the camera. I'm not up on computer drive telescopes since both of mine are the "find it yourself" type. If you get the telephoto attachment for the E10 sometime you could get a pretty good shot of the moon, but I would just get a slide form NASA and put it on a slide projector, and shoot it with the E10, then paste it up with some terestrial landscape in photoshop of photodeluxe. Cheap, expedient solution to a possibly expensive problem. Wait till you look thru an eight inch scope tho! You'll start learning with yours and saving your money! As for the basement, get some tungsten lights and set up a studio down there. DavidT

This is kind of off the wall but 10 30sec pixs melded into PS would give a very good S/N and have the equiv of a 300sec shot. Does this make sense or am I REALLY off the wall?

Walter

John W. said:

Hi David,
I don’t want to disappoint you but piggybacking the E10 will
not get you much in the way of better images than those posted by
David Nicholls a few days ago. At the very best you will get
constellation shots and those of the moon will need considerable
enlargement. Any planets will just be points of light, even the
Tcon300 at 400mm is not enough. My Meade 8” at prime focus
is 2000mm and Jupiter shows up about 1/8” across on 35mm
film, and because of the 30sec shutter limitation you will not get
much in the way of deep sky objects where exposures of 10-30
minutes are common. In summary the E10, at best, is OK for
astronomy ‘snapshots’, for serious photographs you need
to use film or dedicated astronomical CCD cameras (I am considering
a SBIG for my next ‘toy’). If I can find the time I
will try some piggybacked shots with the E10 on my Meade and post
them but I will not expect to approach what can be obtained from my
OM1 and 800ASA film.
John W.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not sending it to the basement yet. I've got a lot of experimenting to do. Next month Mars will have its closest approach to Earth in 13 years. And I've already had some fun with the GOTO function. I've waited for years for a scope that was affordable and could actually find/track stars for me (I'm remarkably lazy.) I bought a T-mount for my old Minolta SLR today and the scope has a straight-through camera adapter, so at the very least I'll get pictures. I was just hoping for digital. Thanks to all for the help.

Joe Hawblitzel

David T. said:

Joe! Don't scrap the telescope! Mine is only a tiny bit larger
than yours but I find it really great for camping as well as
evenings out at the viewing site when I don't want to lug out "Big
Bertha". It's much better than binoculars and I think you can find
80 or more Messier objects with binoculars(out of about 110).
Makes for a great start, learning the skies ,and it will keep you
busy for a year or two. Lets look into whether or not you can use
the clock drive part for the camera. I'm not up on computer drive
telescopes since both of mine are the "find it yourself" type. If
you get the telephoto attachment for the E10 sometime you could
get a pretty good shot of the moon, but I would just get a slide
form NASA and put it on a slide projector, and shoot it with the
E10, then paste it up with some terestrial landscape in photoshop
of photodeluxe. Cheap, expedient solution to a possibly expensive
problem. Wait till you look thru an eight inch scope tho! You'll
start learning with yours and saving your money! As for the
basement, get some tungsten lights and set up a studio down there.
DavidT

Click to expand...

Hi Joe,
Have a look at this site http://www.sac-imaging.com/HTML/FrameSet2.html

I have recently brought the SAC-IV. It gives images of the moon and planets that are very close to the samples shown. The only downside is that the CCD camera has to be connected to a computer. I just use my laptop. Its a very inexpensive way to get into astronomical digital photography.
John W.

Hello again, Mr Hawblitzel,

I'm afraid that I come in search of advice, and not able to give any. I want to use mty E-10 for(low power,

Anyway, does the T-adapter have any glass inside, or is it simply a lightproof way to couple the devices? I imagine that if there isn't, a 62mm to T wouldn't work, right?

I read up at some of those sites, and along with my remaining physics, can grasp the afocal, virtual image, eypiece projection, and prime-focus stuff -- but I can't "see" what would be required to make it work. What is needed, anyway?

I'd love to experiment with this, so any input is appreciated.

Thanks,

F.J.

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Has anyone figured out how to mate the E-10 to a telescope? (Just
got another toy.) Since the lens is fixed, I know a T-adapter is
out of the question. It sounds like the whole enterprise is
doomed, but there are lots of smart people in this forum so I
thought I'd ask. Please don't make me buy a D30

Joe Hawblitzel

--
Joe Hawblitzel

Click to expand...

John W. said:

Hi Joe,
Have a look at this site
http://www.sac-imaging.com/HTML/FrameSet2.html
I have recently brought the SAC-IV. It gives images of the moon and
planets that are very close to the samples shown. The only
downside is that the CCD camera has to be connected to a computer.
I just use my laptop. Its a very inexpensive way to get into
astronomical digital photography.
John W.

Click to expand...

COOL SITE, JOHN! This is one I'm gonna have to try. Reconditioned G3 I Macs are available for 699.00. I can work them. That puts the whole rig under a grand. Great deal. Thanks for the info! See, I KNEW this was a great forum! DavidT

Hi Mr. F.J.

As you surmised, the T-adapter has no glass, but merely is a "universal" coupler for other optical devices. Essentially it allows you to use the other device in place of your camera lens. You will also need a device-specific adapter which connects the T-mount to your microscope (or whatever.) The big issue here is the non-removable E-10 lens. As you've read earlier in the thread, none of us has had any luck projecting into the huge E-10 lens. So what will make it work? So far no one knows, at least in this neighborhood. Having spent some time working on, it I'm growing pessimistic. So I can't offer much advice beyond what has been summarized above. I'm going to work the 35mm angle for awhile and see what happens. Good luck.

Joe

F.J. said:

I'm afraid that I come in search of advice, and not able to give
any. I want to use mty E-10 for(low power,
so I've read this thread with interest, as the problems are similar.

Anyway, does the T-adapter have any glass inside, or is it simply a
lightproof way to couple the devices? I imagine that if there
isn't, a 62mm to T wouldn't work, right?

I read up at some of those sites, and along with my remaining
physics, can grasp the afocal, virtual image, eypiece projection,
and prime-focus stuff -- but I can't "see" what would be required
to make it work. What is needed, anyway?

I'd love to experiment with this, so any input is appreciated.

Thanks,

F.J.

Joe Hawblitzel said:

Has anyone figured out how to mate the E-10 to a telescope? (Just
got another toy.) Since the lens is fixed, I know a T-adapter is
out of the question. It sounds like the whole enterprise is
doomed, but there are lots of smart people in this forum so I
thought I'd ask. Please don't make me buy a D30

Joe Hawblitzel

--
Joe Hawblitzel

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

John W. said:

Hi Joe,
Have a look at this site
http://www.sac-imaging.com/HTML/FrameSet2.html
I have recently brought the SAC-IV. It gives images of the moon and
planets that are very close to the samples shown.

Click to expand...

John, Thanks for the pointer! If one has to use a computer, the typical web cameras can be used if held in the eye piece, or dissassembled to be something close to what this place is selling.

Mike

Hi Mike,

Actually I was just about to strip my QucikCam and convert it to connect to my telescope when I came on that site. The camera is a little more expensive than a web cam but it is made for the job (you just mount it instead of an eyepiece) and comes with all the accessories and software. I guess I'm just lazy )
John W.

Mike Tichon said:

John, Thanks for the pointer! If one has to use a computer, the
typical web cameras can be used if held in the eye piece, or
dissassembled to be something close to what this place is selling.

Mike

Click to expand...