OM body on the back of a telescope is a very effective way to get good
moon shots. Here's one I did with a 6 inch refractor, otherwise known
as a 2140/14 lens:
http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/photos/moon.jpg
I'd give the Celestron a go. You'll get a moon image 10mm across on
film (Moon size on film is approximately (focal length)/100), which is
enough to see masses of detail - craters, lava flows, mountains and valleys.
I really must use the 6900/11 'lens' they have at the University of
London Observatory. Used it once, and although chromatic aberration is
noticable (forgivable, I think, as it was built in 1901), with a
monochrome filter and black and white film the results are remarkable.
I took some Saturn pictures with it some years ago but unfortunately
overdid the exposure.
Roger
Jim Brokaw wrote:
on 5/23/02 4:37 PM, tom wagner at sally30@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Try the moon first it's very easy:
http://www.pietro.org/images/Articles/TomWag_moon_110101.jpg
Wow Tom, how many teleconverters did you stack up to get that detail?
I have a Celestron C90 that is supposed to make a 1000/11 lens, guess I
could try that out...
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
