I saw video of a man do the same thing with same telescope. He took off the 1.25" adapter and then took off the 1.25 inch part on the telescope...it's unscrews. The adapter threads screw onto there and you get a solid connection which is what the complaint here is. Try it that way. It's still eyepiece projection but connected different.
@@GarnettLearyI now have one in my hands and it works on my meade etx 60AT until I try the 9mm eyepiece. 25 works fine but I can only focus the 9mm on very close objects like 30 feet away. It's like I can't make my tube short enough. I guess stay away from the higher magnifications? I only have two eyepieces. I'll try at night on a star with bahtinov mask but I sort of think that my 9mm eyepiece is useless in this setup.
Another neat trick: if you have a point and shoot with filter threads, you can attach an m42 step-up ring, then attach the point and shoot to the projection adapter. A lot more stable than a smartphone and way easier to center.
Garnett. Thank you very much. I've been sitting in a room full of adapters and T rings and Barlows in a haze and never thought to drop the ocular into the adapter. Clear skies.
Thanks for the formula at the end of the video! CTE = Distance CCD-sensor-to-Eyepiece FLE = Focal length of Eyepiece Magnification = (CTE-FLE) / FLE I wish I had understood this before buying a 40mm eyepiece, which I can't get to focus, and now I know why.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks Garnett. But can you tell me how the formula allowed you to understand what was going on? What did the formula tell you? Sorry if that is a dumb question!
No such thing as a dumb question. So basically you punch your numbers into the formula and you can determine wether or not you can focus or if you are exceeding the limits of your optical system. Give me an example and I’ll try to explain it.
So very helpful. I just got my projection adapter in the mail and two Plossl eyepieces. I was going crazy trying to work out how it all went together. Thanks for your help! Craig - Geelong, Ausrtralia
I tried that route with Celestron what you call EP Adapter that cost me a Celestron price. What it did was mar up my EP and it was NOT secure with my 8SE mount setup. I was afraid of my DSLR falling off. Not only that - it was very long and heavy. Great presentation for reminding me of this sloppy pitfall I experienced. EPA is on shelf collecting dust.
+Jeff Lucas I wouldn’t dare put it on an 8SE. You’re a greedy man Jeff. Lol. You can remove the nose of this one and thread it directly to a visual back.
Thank you very much for this Garnett. I realise there are variables, but judging from these examples I'm opting for prime focus wherever possible. Obviously, with a longer focal length OTA, maybe a good quality barlow for more reach, prime focus covers a lot of situations.
You have whole telescope or part of it in resonance with motor that pushes it at frequency at about 5 Hz. Try to move one of the counterweight and observe the difference. Try add weight close to the camera mount, then balance telescope again. What I want to say - your telescope probably having high Q (quality) of resonance at the frequency of motor intervals. Since you can't remove weight from the refracting lens element and the camera, you can add so that it is not symmetric. The key point is mass distribution. While center of the mas can remain the same, moving elements can help re-distributing mass, thus reducing high Q factor of the resonance at certain frequency.
Great Video. I had a refractor that really didnt do much better than my DSLR with a strong telephoto lens. I switched to Newtonian scope and I havent put it together yet...still waiting for extra parts to come in (focus extender thing). I was hoping I made the right decision switchiing to Newtonian but watching your vid convinced me I will have a better time.
I think so. The chromatic aberration from refractors is bad. You get more aperture per dollar for reflectors and the bigger the scope the more resolution.
At 6:15 I can see that it oscillate in horizontal plane. Since your telescope is moved forward to compensate added weight of the camera, try to add more weight near the primary lens element, move telescope back (to achieve balance), and move one of the counter-weight to compensate added weight near the lens element.
Really nice video. I wonder about your magnification calculation. In my limited experience I always get the same EPP magnification that I would see visually with the same eyepiece without the camera. The EP is always at the end of the holder and the holder in the closed position.
Thank you very much for this. Just bought this gadget, and could not get it to focus. I need to wait for a clear sky and the moon to really test that though. I was very interested in the math at the end of the video, but I think I might be doing it wrong. I have a 35 mm DSLR. Using a 25 mm plossi I calculated from sensor to eyepiece at full extension to be 110 mm. Using your equation I get 3.4 magnification (110 - 25 and then divide by 25). Is that 3.4 times the prime focus?
You need to be in focus. You also need a critical measurement which is the distance between the sensor to the lens adapter of the camera body itself. That varies depending upon the manufacturer. Great question by the way. I should have been more thorough. Do a search for “flange focal distance”. If you’ve already considered that into the equation then you’re on the right path. It is possible to exceed the magnification limits of your equipment however. You definitely need to find the critical focus point first. Without being in focus you can only guess your magnification range to exist within the minimal and maximum range of the extension. Your end result will fall in there somewhere. Clear skies.
Wow ! This was highly useful to me. I'm wanting to take pictures with an old 120mm x 1000mm Orion scope. I've been wondering which mount to get. Your video answered a lot of questions for me. It looks like the CG4 I was thinking of buying might be marginal or maybe even useless for pictures with that scope. I'll have to get a short tube if I continue pursuing taking pictures. Thanks.
I am using HQ Picam for basic astrophotography. I can focus using prime focus technique. But I am unable to reach focus using camera projection method.
Thanks for the video, it really explains a lot! By the way, will it be possible to use usb telescope camera initially designed to replace an eyepiece with this adapter (Celestron Neximage for instance)? The point is that I want to stream a live video on the laptop screen not at prime focus but through the eyepiece. Thanks!
You can do that but you have to discover the correct focus distance from the eyepiece to the camera. It will vary depending on the depth of the sensor to the face of the camera for different devices. Think of how many guidescope cameras are focused. You’ll have the same issue.
@@GarnettLeary oh, I see... since the adapter you showed in the video has a variable length it might be possible to find the correct position between the sensor and the eyepiece inside the adapter. Thank you very much! I've read the comments and it looks like you are working full time astronomy professor here answering us ))
That’s where most people struggle. Two of the easiest targets to acquire proper focus on are the termination line of the Moon and very bright stars such as Vega and Sirius. With the Moon it’s obvious where the sharpest point of focus is. Stars are a little more tricky but you want them as small as possible. Typically an optic will arrive at perfect focus on the inner or outer side more than the other. What I mean is the spot past perfect focus wether it’s going out or in towards it. Every scope and lens I’ve ever used seem to arrive sharp from one side or the other easier. You know how you’re there fiddling with it and it seems right until you take your hand off? If you can’t get to that sweet spot it could be in some cases that the focuser is too sensitive. If it’s a knob, like a Maksutov has, often people will attach a clothes pin or something similar to create a reduction or fine focus. Ultimately the easiest work around is a Batinov mask. So many people have 3D printers now so getting one cheap off Etsy is easy. With a Batinov mask there’s zero doubt that your focus is spot on. Just remember that most all optics will go out of focus under temperature changes. If you setup and say the temperature falls five degrees then you definitely need to check it again. I spent the better part of 15 years manually focusing. It’s something that remains difficult no matter what and ultimately nothing beats a good Batinov mask along side a star test.
Need to know this too. I've just brought one for a large Cassigrain telescope with 2" attachment, hoping once I get it I can see how if fits with the other adaptors I've got already as some of these step down to 1.25". I've also got a smaller Newtonian it will work on, so no immediate loss if it doesn't.
I have an Evolux 62ED and a Canon 60D. I dont have a flattener yet. So the DSLR connects on a T-ring, and the T-rong connects to an 2inch 70mm extension tube, to get most things in focus. When i try to get the moon in focus, i have enough travel (my travels goes to 65mm). Somewhere at 35mm i have the moon where it tries get in focus. Except i cant never get the moon perfect in focus, even with the 1:11 pinion rack focusser and the small increments knob. Either i go past focus or before, i never get it really in focus. It always stays a bit blurry. When checking focus on church-tower on 600 meters, it works perfect. Can these blurryness be caused because i dont use an flattener yet?
You have a maximum magnification limit of 228x. Your setup doesn’t exceed that number. There’s several reasons you may not be reaching infinity focus. Let me ask you an additional two questions and I think I can solve it. 1) Is the Starblast a Bird Jones optical design? You can determine this by gently pressing a pencil eraser into the focuser. What I’m wondering is if there is a corrective lens in the focuser between the secondary mirror and the focus draw tube. 2) Can you focus on closer objects with the same setup?
I don’t believe I have a Bird Jones telescope. There wasn’t anything in between the focus tube and secondary mirror, and I didn’t see anything online saying it way a Bird Jones design. It can focus on closer objects, but not as close as what you would be able to do with prime focus. So about 10-20 feet away.
You either lack sufficient in focus or back focus. It’s the eyepiece position relative to the telescope. If you’re racked all the way in there’s not a lot you can do. If all the way out you should be able to use an extension. I’m guessing it’s inward focus. If you have tried other eyepieces with success, especially higher powers, it could in a rare case be the optical design of the eyepiece being used.
Hi, When i try to use eyepiece projection with my Canon T5i the image is always completely dark, EXCEPT for the moon. Everything else is complete darkness. Any idea on what is wrong? thank you
Maksutov 127 from Orion is funny : it allows for low height eyepieces to be inserted right under the Prime connection point. In other words, itallows for both Eyepiece Projection and Prime connection at the same time 😂
Yes. Dissembling fixed lens cameras is tricky but it can be done. Most all camera sensors have a filter for red eye. Some use a digital color balance programmed. Make sure it’s not one of those
You can’t achieve the same object magnification with a barlow. I also prefer projection because the cost of quality barlows. A standard eyepiece will retain higher quality than a standard barlow which reduces it greatly. I haven’t tried DSOs with this method. I’m running a non-pc guided system and work from drift. There is a slight oscillation on my setup that is forgiving on planetary but destructive on dso. It can be done however but I believe purchasing a higher focal length instrument for more distant dso is more effective. This is a difficult technique to master but very effective for planetary work when framing small and bright objects like planets. Great questions. Clear skies.
You can but oscillation is bad. You have to take a considerably lower percentage of frames. Drift isn’t as crucial. Aperture, focal ratio, and good seeing are the best attributes. Consider the rotation period of the object in question also. Dropping lots of frames on say Jupiter is devastating because you’re limited on exposure time.
ruclips.net/video/7VAuW6GoTnM/видео.html Try that video. It’s possible you might find it more useful. Good luck regardless. Thanks for watching and clear skies.
Hi, I am very new to Astrophotography and has not been able to capture anything except moon. I have Celestron C8-SGT telescope. What type of tele-extender I should buy? Variable length as shown here or fixed length? Will I face focusing problem?
That’s 2032mm correct? F10. I can’t imagine you needing to use eyepiece projection. A good quality planetary camera is what I’d hook to it. Alternatively you might consider a focal reducer and shoot galaxies. That’s a really nice setup you have.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks for a reply. U R right, it is 2032mm & F10. I have Canon 60 D that I connect as prime. I wanted to click Saturn and Jupiter but could not get a decent pic. Unable to achieve tracking yet so could not try deep space photography. Do you suggest that I try that first?
Planetary is easier to start. Your Canon 60D should pair well because it has “video crop mode”. Typically you’d use a webcam or ccd planetary cam because the smaller sensor is advantageous for detail and framing. In the case of the 60D it can utilize a smaller cropped area of the sensor to achieve really good framing. To start I’d use a really high ISO to locate the planets. Then back it off to get the correct exposure. I made a video about planetary photography using video crop mode. As far as your tracking you can actually video a planet as it passes thru a frame. It doesn’t have to be perfectly centered. Programs like PIPP can be used to center the frames on your target. At F10, and without accurate tracking, I wouldn’t suggest deep sky object acquisition. If you can get your tracking issues ironed out you’ll definitely benefit from a focal reducer. More so unfortunately you’ll benifit from a wide field telescope with a much more forgiving focal length. 1000mm and up is very demanding and definitely not a good place to start for anyone. It could easily discourage you even on a good mount. If you do pursue it I’d recommend galaxies in RGB. You have a planetary killer of a scope but not the best setup for deep sky targeting.
Just got the kit. Is it normal that with eyepiece projection the image is upside down? If I take the eyepiece out, it normal again. Do you know if there’s a way to fix this? Thanks
Sir can you help me i too want to buy those high frequency levels of telescopes and camera but i don't have any ideas, i try from shops but can't get satisfaction answer from them, until now i have seen only moon craters and surfaces but actually i like to see roads and buildings from telescopes which are very high level of systems of frequency used, so can you give me advice how long or how high frequency level of telescope and with cameras can be seen very clearly images of the moon surfaces very clearly as we take photographs here, pls let me know,,, thank you
If it’s Lunar, Solar, and planetary details you want then you need a large aperture Telescope. A Skywatcher 10” dobsonian would give you amazing detail. You could use it in combination with a smart phone, dslr, or a planetary camera. If you’re looking for something tracking consider a Celestron C11 with a minimal of a Skywatcher EQ6-R. That’s very costly tho. If you have a budget you might consider one of Orions package deals with either a 90mm Maksutov or the 127mm. Both of those are reasonably priced and have enough focal length to get you fantastic views. For me personally I like the 127 Maksutov as my travel planetary scope. It’s very compact. You’ll likely outgrow the aperture tho. Aperture is key to detail. It’s for that reason a big Dobsonian is hard to replace. If you have lots of money to invest the Celestron C8 or C11 are both absolutely beasts. Try to keep your aperture above 8”. If you can’t then don’t accept anything less than a 90mm Maksutov, preferably the 127mm. They both out perform most all scopes at their aperture and price range equivalent.
Please help! I'm fairly new to astrophotography, and I'm having some trouble with focusing. I started off by using a simple mobile phone mount which held my phone camera upto the eye piece, this worked well but I've recently upgraded to a DSLR to get higher quality images. I've been using eyepiece projection with my DLSR camera and it's not going well. I'm able to get a nice image on my camera display. However, when I take the photo it appears out of focus / blurred and I have no idea why?! I'm beginning to think it might be down to the fact the camera is shaking the telescope which the shutter snaps to take the photo? But I think it's more complicated than that. For example, when I take pic of the moon some craters that are central to the pic are in focus, while craters at the edge of the pic are not? Almost like a fish eye lens effect? Any info you have will be greatly appreciated. I useNikon D5200 cameraSky watcher 130 EQ225mm Super Wide Angle Eyepiece.
+Nick Crowther Wow. There’s a lot of possibilities but let’s start with in focus/out. Are you using mirror lockup? In most cameras you can set mirror lock so the mirror flips up and there’s a delay before the sensor fires. That eliminates vibration caused by the mirror actuation. As far as ep projection and live view, rarely have I seen a time when my image matched the live view. I’m using a very top end low light Canon 6D and my live view never matches my final image. Take a test shot and adjust from there but don’t trust the camera for exposure metering. As far as the corners of the image that’s common. Even APS-C sensors are vignetted heavily by 1.25” focus draws. With my full frame parts of the image are actually clipped off. Another thing to consider is the optics in the eyepiece you project from. Ultra wide eyepieces have the same optical characteristics as wide angle camera lenses. If you use a Newtonian telescope you will also get coma without a field flattener. It’s worse in faster systems. The physical nature of a parabolic mirror is curved along the edges and so the light received is not reflected back at a perfectly flat plane. Conclusion: 1) don’t trust your cameras live view- push the exposure time 2) experiment with different eyepieces. Orthoscopics are designed for planetary and Plossls seem to work well for me 3) definitely invest in a corrective filter. If you plan to take this seriously you need a good quality field flattener. I hope this helped. I hate to see people struggle. You are not alone. This is a science. It’s a very technical art-form. Eyepiece projection is one of the hardest forms of it so if you get it licked the rest should be a cakewalk. Clear skies.
Firsly, thank you for the quick and in depth response. I've recently purchased a 40mm plossl eye piece. Which, when arrives, will hopefully solve this problem! Its just incredibly frustrating knowing that I can take better shots with my camera phone than my dslr. I know the camera works really well, I know the telescope works really well, but I can't quite get them to work well together!! I'll also look into purchasing a field flattened.
+Nick Crowther Baader mark 3 flattener is really good. Check out Galactic Hunter. They use it. It is frustrating but you will learn the correct spacing and equipment for your camera/telescope. I think the plossl will solve your projection problems. The phone is easier because it’s thin. The sensor in a dslr resides deep in its body from its face and that distance has to be accounted for. With a refractor it often requires extension tubes and with reflectors often you can’t get enough inward travel. You’re always battling an issue wether it’s CA, coma, clipping, tracking, etc. I know it’s frustrating because I’ve had a lot of equipment over the years. Astrophotography will certainly test your will and your patience. You embark on a scientific mission and you are often capturing light that has been traveling millions of light years to get here. It’s beautiful but also difficult. Don’t hesitate to drop me questions. If I can help I’m more than happy to. If I cannot I likely know someone who can. Good luck on your journey. Clear skies.
Mirror lock on that Camera is issue . .turn off Live View and see if shuuter is still vibrating ..my advice is sell the 5200 and get a Mirror camera . . sick of Nikon ! ? I am
No. The eyepiece functions as normal. The device is designed to record off of it directly. Wherever you can achieve clear focus for visual will be the position
@@GarnettLeary Thank you will surely give it a try I have Meade Infinity 80-400mm and I want to use this method for moon & Sun photography (Sunspots) by handholding the set up.
Yes. You’re Newtonian likely, as most, doesn’t have enough inward focus. Eyepieces work fine because the first optical element seats low inside the focuser. Your dslr is mounted outside and additionally there is a distance between the face of the camera to the internal sensor. Eyepiece projection will work yes. Alternatively you could place a barlow between the scope and the dslr. I have a full video about your very problem. I think it would help you to watch it. It’s “Newtonian Telescope, How to Find Focus”. Let me know if you need help further and clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary I don't really want to use barlow, because i wanna take photos of deep sky objects and barlow makes it alot dimmer and bigger. Will eyepeace projection have same effect if i use let's say 26mm eyepiece or even larger mm?
Unfortunately yes. Anything you add will effectively magnify the image in the frame. There are ways to move your primary mirror closer to the secondary to allow focus but typically you will get coma aberration from doing that. I’m sorry to give you the bad news. Most Newtonian Reflectors are tuned for visual use. Typically they are labeled as “astrographs” when they are immediately suitable for imaging.
@@GarnettLeary i will modify my focuser then. Telescope is skywatcher 150/750 star discovery and i can cut like 1cm of my focuser so the camera can get closer to the focus point.
@@GarnettLeary celestron astromaster 76. I know it's not a great telescope for astrophotography but I've had it a while. I've got a pentax k110d and so figured ide have a go anyway. I bought a t mount. It focuses just blury but really tiny. I put a 2x Barlow lens in but everything is still blury but still tiny. I read about an eyepeice projection adapter so bought one. Even at shortest focus, no change. Still blury.
I believe your scope is the 76mm Newtonian. I also think it’s a Bird Jones telescope. Is there an optical element inside of the focus tube? You can check by gently lowering a #2 pencil, eraser first, down the focuser. If it’s obstructed before it passes thru to the secondary then you have a spherical mirror. If so it explains why you can’t use the device. I have a video on this if you’re interested. If it’s not a Bird Jones let me know. I’ll suggest some tests. I have a strong feeling it is tho.
That’s interesting. So it’s a parabolic, not spherical, and you say the image projected is blurry and small. I checked the Pentax model and it has a very similar sensor depth as Canon and Nikon so adapter spacing shouldn’t be the issue. Have you attempted this with multiple eyepieces? If it’s possible also try to get the eyepiece closer to the telescope. With the eyepiece cup off can you get the eyepiece further towards the bottom of the adapter?
Sir i have my nikon d5600 and a reflector telescope. When i doing prime focusing it's a problem for me. I can't go deeper into the focuser to get the focus. Sir if i do lens projection then will i gonna face the same problem?
No. The reason prime astrophotography doesn’t work for you is because lack of in-focus. The distance from the flange of the camera to the camera sensor is too deep. Eyepiece projection will work because the telescope is tuned to reach focus at an eyepiece. Look at the construction of most any eyepiece. The first set of glass is at the very bottom. When inserted into the scope no “in-focus” is required. The same is true of eyepiece projection because the position of the eyepiece being used. It absolutely will work for you. Clear skies friend.
When I add a eye piece in the tube I can't pull focus. I need like 20cm extension tube? Is there any way around it? Why do they make it so difficult to use your dslr with eyepieces!
Every individual system and combination will vary. The trouble everyone has is the budget end of telescopes doesn’t consider an imaging device and is geared toward visual use. Any time you add glass or take it away you are changing the focal point or plane. It’s a tiresome battle as the sensor depth of various devices spans so variable in measurement. Eyepiece projection is by far the most difficult of all forms of astrophotography so if you are successful you should be proud. There are a set of complicated mathematical expressions which can solve for your personal equipment but I find a shot at the Moon your best option. It’s like the go to test of tests. If you lack the outward back travel use a toilet tissue tube. I’m not even joking. You need something steady to rest your optical train against and something you can change in length easily. It’s a battle from day one astrophotography. There’s always continuously something you’ll need or want to push things a little further or make things a little easier. EP projection truly is an effective technique but one that will test your willpower. Stay vigilant. Clear skies.
Thanks for the reply. I Have Skywatcher Black Diamond ED80 x 600mm FL. It has amazing clarity of the moon and I even saw Jupiter and Saturn last night with my eye only. I live in Australia btw. Anyway, When I added the Nikon DSLR I had about 15cm of extension tubes just to focus on the moon. When I added the eye piece I had to back up more but I didn't achieve focus. Ordering more extension tubes so I don't have to back up the telescopes focuser all the way and cause it strain. I also have to consider vibrations when taking photos with that much extension tube. I use a remote to take photos and a 5 second delay to allow vibrations to stop. I'll let you know how I go. Frustrating for sure.
I found oscillation to be my biggest enemy with refractors as well. All that back focus makes it evil to locate targets as well unless you tether to pc. I found it a whole lot more relaxed a process with a fast newtonian. Keep at it and I’m sure the reward will be worth the punishment. Clear skies.
Garnett Leary I may purchase a 6 or 8 inch reflector one day. Will that may be a better choice for astrophotography you think? I'll play around with the refractor for now. Thanks
@@GarnettLeary The adapter uses a 1-1/4 nose piece to replace the normal eyepiece. Then the eyepiece is inserted above that. That makes the distance from the eyepiece to the objective longer. I ran into this problem years ago when putting an erecting prism and projection adapter. In that case it was a terrestrial refraction scope and I was able to shorten the main tube. Now I am looking at doing it again but I have limited focus room and cutting the tube is not an option this time. I wish that they made erecting prisms with T2 mounts.
Sorry I misunderstood you. I’ll measure it once home. If guessing immediately I’d say the eyepiece is over 1/2” out from normal where it rests due to that configuration. SvBony might be interested in making the erecting prism you mentioned. That’s the most innovative bunch that’s been on the parts market in years in my opinion.
@@GarnettLeary I just figured out that all my 1-1/4 eyepieces will fit inside a M42 36-90 mm helical focusing extension tube.The OD of the top of eyepiece hold of my Orion erecting prism is 41.1mm in diameter. I am going to attach a 10mm long M42 extension tube to it. Worse case scenario it adds 4.4mm to the tube length. If I need any addition length beyond the 90mm I can use standard M42 extension tubes :-) FYI: I am building a Macroscope that will accept M42/M39 lenses or Microscope objectives. The 1-1/4 eyepieces provide a larger image than standard 23mm Microscope Eyepieces.
Depends on a few factors. Prime DSLR vs EP projected would lose because magnification. Prime method ultimately yields cleaner results however. Nobody in optics will disagree that the less optical elements the better. The quality of the eyepiece used in projection is very important. You are essentially photographing what the lens “sees”. A high quality plossl or ortho should be used. For magnification go ep projection.
A high focal ratio telescope with the biggest aperture you can afford. Modded webcam or dedicated planetary webcam. If you’re stuck with a DSLR you can get away with prime if you have barlows and at least an F12. The trouble with Mars is it’s small angular size. It’s just a dot in say a NexStar 4SE and it’s F12. You’ve got to get to a really high focal ratio and you need your sampling to be at 1. Smaller sensors are better for that. What equipment do you have? I’ll be happy to make a suggestion based on that.
Garnett Leary thx for taking time to answer to my question so like equipment I have a NextStar 127SLT whit 127mm Aperture and 1500 focal lenght, f12.And like accessories i have X2 barlow, 32mm,25mm,17mm,13mm,9mm,8mm and 6mm and aboute the camera i don t know because in like 4 days i will go to a freinde to borrow from him a camera
Don't throw those AVIs out ! You can import them to REGISTAX 6 Which is free, and do some work with it and pull out some decent photos of those targets. Don't waste anything!
I rather like the music - totally unobtrusive, un-annoying and un-distracting. When compared with the loud clamour of utterly awful music on some Channels, this is skilled and attractive use of background music. Don't listen to the naysayers Garnett!
I saw video of a man do the same thing with same telescope. He took off the 1.25" adapter and then took off the 1.25 inch part on the telescope...it's unscrews. The adapter threads screw onto there and you get a solid connection which is what the complaint here is.
Try it that way. It's still eyepiece projection but connected different.
Great idea. Thank you for sharing.
@@GarnettLearyI now have one in my hands and it works on my meade etx 60AT until I try the 9mm eyepiece. 25 works fine but I can only focus the 9mm on very close objects like 30 feet away. It's like I can't make my tube short enough. I guess stay away from the higher magnifications? I only have two eyepieces. I'll try at night on a star with bahtinov mask but I sort of think that my 9mm eyepiece is useless in this setup.
It is possible to magnify beyond the limit of your scope. Figure the math then check your scopes specs for “Highest useful magnification”.
You've got me convinced.... Always looking for ways to do more with less equipment.
Another neat trick: if you have a point and shoot with filter threads, you can attach an m42 step-up ring, then attach the point and shoot to the projection adapter. A lot more stable than a smartphone and way easier to center.
I have never heard of this technique and this explains how such magnifications work. You have saved me from making a big mistake.
Glad I could help. Thanks for watching.
Garnett. Thank you very much. I've been sitting in a room full of adapters and T rings and Barlows in a haze and never thought to drop the ocular into the adapter. Clear skies.
It’s challenging but opens possibility
Yeah same here, I bought so many aparteres and none of them worked thank u garnett
Thanks for the formula at the end of the video!
CTE = Distance CCD-sensor-to-Eyepiece
FLE = Focal length of Eyepiece
Magnification = (CTE-FLE) / FLE
I wish I had understood this before buying a 40mm eyepiece, which I can't get to focus, and now I know why.
Same here. It hit me like a brick wall. Exactly why I shared it. I hope to help other people avoid my pitfalls. Thanks for watching and clear skies.
I'm not understanding this. How did the formula help you to understand you were unable to obtain focus?
Sometimes the travel limits of the focuser can’t reach critical focus.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks Garnett. But can you tell me how the formula allowed you to understand what was going on? What did the formula tell you? Sorry if that is a dumb question!
No such thing as a dumb question. So basically you punch your numbers into the formula and you can determine wether or not you can focus or if you are exceeding the limits of your optical system. Give me an example and I’ll try to explain it.
So very helpful. I just got my projection adapter in the mail and two Plossl eyepieces. I was going crazy trying to work out how it all went together. Thanks for your help! Craig - Geelong, Ausrtralia
Thanks for watching and I hope you enjoy it. Clear skies.
I tried that route with Celestron what you call EP Adapter that cost me a Celestron price. What it did was mar up my EP and it was NOT secure with my 8SE mount setup. I was afraid of my DSLR falling off. Not only that - it was very long and heavy. Great presentation for reminding me of this sloppy pitfall I experienced. EPA is on shelf collecting dust.
+Jeff Lucas I wouldn’t dare put it on an 8SE. You’re a greedy man Jeff. Lol. You can remove the nose of this one and thread it directly to a visual back.
Thank you very much for this Garnett. I realise there are variables, but judging from these examples I'm opting for prime focus wherever possible. Obviously, with a longer focal length OTA, maybe a good quality barlow for more reach, prime focus covers a lot of situations.
Sounds like you’re targeting planets. You wouldn’t happen to have an IPhone would you? If so I have an awesome app to recommend.
Let me guess, Sky Safari 6 Pro? That's unbelievably sensational!
I just bought the exact same mount and it's very helpful! Thanks a lot!
Thanks for watching. I hope you enjoy it. Clear skies.
You have whole telescope or part of it in resonance with motor that pushes it at frequency at about 5 Hz. Try to move one of the counterweight and observe the difference. Try add weight close to the camera mount, then balance telescope again. What I want to say - your telescope probably having high Q (quality) of resonance at the frequency of motor intervals. Since you can't remove weight from the refracting lens element and the camera, you can add so that it is not symmetric. The key point is mass distribution. While center of the mas can remain the same, moving elements can help re-distributing mass, thus reducing high Q factor of the resonance at certain frequency.
Beautifully put
Great Video. I had a refractor that really didnt do much better than my DSLR with a strong telephoto lens. I switched to Newtonian scope and I havent put it together yet...still waiting for extra parts to come in (focus extender thing). I was hoping I made the right decision switchiing to Newtonian but watching your vid convinced me I will have a better time.
I think so. The chromatic aberration from refractors is bad. You get more aperture per dollar for reflectors and the bigger the scope the more resolution.
Helped avoided a pitfall. Thanks for video.
+tanker1960 clear skies friend.
At 6:15 I can see that it oscillate in horizontal plane. Since your telescope is moved forward to compensate added weight of the camera, try to add more weight near the primary lens element, move telescope back (to achieve balance), and move one of the counter-weight to compensate added weight near the lens element.
Shim the slop out using aluminum tape works great and use it to center eyepieces too opposite the thumb screws, makes a difference.
Great idea
Great video, I use EP projection most of the time, works very well for planetary imaging.
Thank you. I’m checking out your work. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary Thank you so much Garnett, would love to hear your feedback! You have really great content and hope you continue to post :-)
Really nice video. I wonder about your magnification calculation. In my limited experience I always get the same EPP magnification that I would see visually with the same eyepiece without the camera. The EP is always at the end of the holder and the holder in the closed position.
Thank you very much for this. Just bought this gadget, and could not get it to focus. I need to wait for a clear sky and the moon to really test that though. I was very interested in the math at the end of the video, but I think I might be doing it wrong. I have a 35 mm DSLR. Using a 25 mm plossi I calculated from sensor to eyepiece at full extension to be 110 mm. Using your equation I get 3.4 magnification (110 - 25 and then divide by 25). Is that 3.4 times the prime focus?
You need to be in focus. You also need a critical measurement which is the distance between the sensor to the lens adapter of the camera body itself. That varies depending upon the manufacturer. Great question by the way. I should have been more thorough. Do a search for “flange focal distance”. If you’ve already considered that into the equation then you’re on the right path. It is possible to exceed the magnification limits of your equipment however. You definitely need to find the critical focus point first. Without being in focus you can only guess your magnification range to exist within the minimal and maximum range of the extension. Your end result will fall in there somewhere. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary thanks for this comment, helped me lots :)
Wow ! This was highly useful to me. I'm wanting to take pictures with an old 120mm x 1000mm Orion scope. I've been wondering which mount to get. Your video answered a lot of questions for me. It looks like the CG4 I was thinking of buying might be marginal or maybe even useless for pictures with that scope. I'll have to get a short tube if I continue pursuing taking pictures.
Thanks.
+southernexposure123 you might check into a quality focal reducer also. You could effectively half your focal ratio.
Thanks for the tip. I've been thinking about getting a f r anyway. Now I have a better excuse. ((-:
I am using HQ Picam for basic astrophotography. I can focus using prime focus technique. But I am unable to reach focus using camera projection method.
Good video brother! Congrats
Thank you
Thanks for the video, it really explains a lot! By the way, will it be possible to use usb telescope camera initially designed to replace an eyepiece with this adapter (Celestron Neximage for instance)? The point is that I want to stream a live video on the laptop screen not at prime focus but through the eyepiece. Thanks!
You can do that but you have to discover the correct focus distance from the eyepiece to the camera. It will vary depending on the depth of the sensor to the face of the camera for different devices. Think of how many guidescope cameras are focused. You’ll have the same issue.
@@GarnettLeary oh, I see... since the adapter you showed in the video has a variable length it might be possible to find the correct position between the sensor and the eyepiece inside the adapter. Thank you very much! I've read the comments and it looks like you are working full time astronomy professor here answering us ))
Any tips on focussing? I really struggle to get a sharp image and any help would be much appreciated.
That’s where most people struggle. Two of the easiest targets to acquire proper focus on are the termination line of the Moon and very bright stars such as Vega and Sirius. With the Moon it’s obvious where the sharpest point of focus is. Stars are a little more tricky but you want them as small as possible. Typically an optic will arrive at perfect focus on the inner or outer side more than the other. What I mean is the spot past perfect focus wether it’s going out or in towards it. Every scope and lens I’ve ever used seem to arrive sharp from one side or the other easier. You know how you’re there fiddling with it and it seems right until you take your hand off? If you can’t get to that sweet spot it could be in some cases that the focuser is too sensitive. If it’s a knob, like a Maksutov has, often people will attach a clothes pin or something similar to create a reduction or fine focus. Ultimately the easiest work around is a Batinov mask. So many people have 3D printers now so getting one cheap off Etsy is easy. With a Batinov mask there’s zero doubt that your focus is spot on. Just remember that most all optics will go out of focus under temperature changes. If you setup and say the temperature falls five degrees then you definitely need to check it again. I spent the better part of 15 years manually focusing. It’s something that remains difficult no matter what and ultimately nothing beats a good Batinov mask along side a star test.
Aloha and great job, Garnett! Can you use the EP method with 2" lenses? Thanks!
Need to know this too. I've just brought one for a large Cassigrain telescope with 2" attachment, hoping once I get it I can see how if fits with the other adaptors I've got already as some of these step down to 1.25".
I've also got a smaller Newtonian it will work on, so no immediate loss if it doesn't.
I have an Evolux 62ED and a Canon 60D. I dont have a flattener yet. So the DSLR connects on a T-ring, and the T-rong connects to an 2inch 70mm extension tube, to get most things in focus. When i try to get the moon in focus, i have enough travel (my travels goes to 65mm). Somewhere at 35mm i have the moon where it tries get in focus. Except i cant never get the moon perfect in focus, even with the 1:11 pinion rack focusser and the small increments knob. Either i go past focus or before, i never get it really in focus. It always stays a bit blurry. When checking focus on church-tower on 600 meters, it works perfect. Can these blurryness be caused because i dont use an flattener yet?
It should work. I’m banking on a setting inside the camera that’s not allowing focus. Is there any kind of automatic feature dealing with exposure?
Thank you. Just ordered one.
I hope you enjoy it. Clear skies.
Aloha and great job, Garnett! Can you use EP method with 2" Eyepieces? Thanks!
Yes. 100%
I just got an eyepiece projector for my dslr, but it won’t focus on far away objects. I am using a 17mm lens. Any ideas on why it isn’t focusing?
What is your imaging device?
I am using a Nikon d3500 and an Orion starblast 4.5.
You have a maximum magnification limit of 228x. Your setup doesn’t exceed that number. There’s several reasons you may not be reaching infinity focus. Let me ask you an additional two questions and I think I can solve it. 1) Is the Starblast a Bird Jones optical design? You can determine this by gently pressing a pencil eraser into the focuser. What I’m wondering is if there is a corrective lens in the focuser between the secondary mirror and the focus draw tube. 2) Can you focus on closer objects with the same setup?
I don’t believe I have a Bird Jones telescope. There wasn’t anything in between the focus tube and secondary mirror, and I didn’t see anything online saying it way a Bird Jones design. It can focus on closer objects, but not as close as what you would be able to do with prime focus. So about 10-20 feet away.
You either lack sufficient in focus or back focus. It’s the eyepiece position relative to the telescope. If you’re racked all the way in there’s not a lot you can do. If all the way out you should be able to use an extension. I’m guessing it’s inward focus. If you have tried other eyepieces with success, especially higher powers, it could in a rare case be the optical design of the eyepiece being used.
Hi, When i try to use eyepiece projection with my Canon T5i the image is always completely dark, EXCEPT for the moon. Everything else is complete darkness. Any idea on what is wrong? thank you
What’s the focal ratio and diameter of the scope? It sounds like you’re at too high a magnification.
Great info. Thanks!
Maksutov 127 from Orion is funny : it allows for low height eyepieces to be inserted right under the Prime connection point. In other words, itallows for both Eyepiece Projection and Prime connection at the same time 😂
I only have a digital camera that has a zoom lens that is stuck to it. Can this method still be used?
Yes. Dissembling fixed lens cameras is tricky but it can be done. Most all camera sensors have a filter for red eye. Some use a digital color balance programmed. Make sure it’s not one of those
Hey I’m using a similar kit with a webcam but I’m getting ridiculous amounts of magnification on my low power eyepiece.Any solution to this?
The webcam has a very small sensor. The only work around I know of is a focal reducer. Try one of the threaded 0.5’s like a TPO.
Have you ever tried using this for any deep Sky objects even bright ones like orion? And why not just use a Barlow lens. Thx
You can’t achieve the same object magnification with a barlow. I also prefer projection because the cost of quality barlows. A standard eyepiece will retain higher quality than a standard barlow which reduces it greatly. I haven’t tried DSOs with this method. I’m running a non-pc guided system and work from drift. There is a slight oscillation on my setup that is forgiving on planetary but destructive on dso. It can be done however but I believe purchasing a higher focal length instrument for more distant dso is more effective. This is a difficult technique to master but very effective for planetary work when framing small and bright objects like planets. Great questions. Clear skies.
Baader eye pieces have t2 treads under rubber straight into t2 adapter and don't use heavy cameras go with mirrorless cameras
can't you use the video with vibrations (e.g. like Saturn) in a stacker program that's using individual video frames to stack for a better result?
You can but oscillation is bad. You have to take a considerably lower percentage of frames. Drift isn’t as crucial. Aperture, focal ratio, and good seeing are the best attributes. Consider the rotation period of the object in question also. Dropping lots of frames on say Jupiter is devastating because you’re limited on exposure time.
I think this is the solution to my problem with my 8 in F5 newt and Canon eos 700d. Up until now I only use my phone
ruclips.net/video/7VAuW6GoTnM/видео.html
Try that video. It’s possible you might find it more useful. Good luck regardless. Thanks for watching and clear skies.
Hi, I am very new to Astrophotography and has not been able to capture anything except moon. I have Celestron C8-SGT telescope. What type of tele-extender I should buy? Variable length as shown here or fixed length? Will I face focusing problem?
That’s 2032mm correct? F10. I can’t imagine you needing to use eyepiece projection. A good quality planetary camera is what I’d hook to it. Alternatively you might consider a focal reducer and shoot galaxies. That’s a really nice setup you have.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks for a reply. U R right, it is 2032mm & F10. I have Canon 60 D that I connect as prime. I wanted to click Saturn and Jupiter but could not get a decent pic. Unable to achieve tracking yet so could not try deep space photography. Do you suggest that I try that first?
Planetary is easier to start. Your Canon 60D should pair well because it has “video crop mode”. Typically you’d use a webcam or ccd planetary cam because the smaller sensor is advantageous for detail and framing. In the case of the 60D it can utilize a smaller cropped area of the sensor to achieve really good framing. To start I’d use a really high ISO to locate the planets. Then back it off to get the correct exposure. I made a video about planetary photography using video crop mode. As far as your tracking you can actually video a planet as it passes thru a frame. It doesn’t have to be perfectly centered. Programs like PIPP can be used to center the frames on your target. At F10, and without accurate tracking, I wouldn’t suggest deep sky object acquisition. If you can get your tracking issues ironed out you’ll definitely benefit from a focal reducer. More so unfortunately you’ll benifit from a wide field telescope with a much more forgiving focal length. 1000mm and up is very demanding and definitely not a good place to start for anyone. It could easily discourage you even on a good mount. If you do pursue it I’d recommend galaxies in RGB. You have a planetary killer of a scope but not the best setup for deep sky targeting.
Just got the kit. Is it normal that with eyepiece projection the image is upside down? If I take the eyepiece out, it normal again. Do you know if there’s a way to fix this? Thanks
What scope are you using and are you using a diagonal?
Thanks - very useful video 👌
Thanks for watching. Clear skies
Sir can you help me i too want to buy those high frequency levels of telescopes and camera but i don't have any ideas, i try from shops but can't get satisfaction answer from them, until now i have seen only moon craters and surfaces but actually i like to see roads and buildings from telescopes which are very high level of systems of frequency used, so can you give me advice how long or how high frequency level of telescope and with cameras can be seen very clearly images of the moon surfaces very clearly as we take photographs here, pls let me know,,, thank you
If it’s Lunar, Solar, and planetary details you want then you need a large aperture Telescope. A Skywatcher 10” dobsonian would give you amazing detail. You could use it in combination with a smart phone, dslr, or a planetary camera. If you’re looking for something tracking consider a Celestron C11 with a minimal of a Skywatcher EQ6-R. That’s very costly tho. If you have a budget you might consider one of Orions package deals with either a 90mm Maksutov or the 127mm. Both of those are reasonably priced and have enough focal length to get you fantastic views. For me personally I like the 127 Maksutov as my travel planetary scope. It’s very compact. You’ll likely outgrow the aperture tho. Aperture is key to detail. It’s for that reason a big Dobsonian is hard to replace. If you have lots of money to invest the Celestron C8 or C11 are both absolutely beasts. Try to keep your aperture above 8”. If you can’t then don’t accept anything less than a 90mm Maksutov, preferably the 127mm. They both out perform most all scopes at their aperture and price range equivalent.
@@GarnettLeary thank you sir for your advice, i may be in touch in future with you if you don't mind,, even though,,,
Of course. Anytime. Good luck and I hope you make a decision that will make you very happy. Clear skies.
Focal distance of telescope in mm divide it to focal length eyepiece is the result of the magnification...
Please help! I'm fairly new to astrophotography, and I'm having some trouble with focusing. I started off by using a simple mobile phone mount which held my phone camera upto the eye piece, this worked well but I've recently upgraded to a DSLR to get higher quality images.
I've been using eyepiece projection with my DLSR camera and it's not going well. I'm able to get a nice image on my camera display. However, when I take the photo it appears out of focus / blurred and I have no idea why?!
I'm beginning to think it might be down to the fact the camera is shaking the telescope which the shutter snaps to take the photo? But I think it's more complicated than that. For example, when I take pic of the moon some craters that are central to the pic are in focus, while craters at the edge of the pic are not? Almost like a fish eye lens effect?
Any info you have will be greatly appreciated. I useNikon D5200 cameraSky watcher 130 EQ225mm Super Wide Angle Eyepiece.
+Nick Crowther Wow. There’s a lot of possibilities but let’s start with in focus/out. Are you using mirror lockup? In most cameras you can set mirror lock so the mirror flips up and there’s a delay before the sensor fires. That eliminates vibration caused by the mirror actuation. As far as ep projection and live view, rarely have I seen a time when my image matched the live view. I’m using a very top end low light Canon 6D and my live view never matches my final image. Take a test shot and adjust from there but don’t trust the camera for exposure metering. As far as the corners of the image that’s common. Even APS-C sensors are vignetted heavily by 1.25” focus draws. With my full frame parts of the image are actually clipped off. Another thing to consider is the optics in the eyepiece you project from. Ultra wide eyepieces have the same optical characteristics as wide angle camera lenses. If you use a Newtonian telescope you will also get coma without a field flattener. It’s worse in faster systems. The physical nature of a parabolic mirror is curved along the edges and so the light received is not reflected back at a perfectly flat plane. Conclusion: 1) don’t trust your cameras live view- push the exposure time 2) experiment with different eyepieces. Orthoscopics are designed for planetary and Plossls seem to work well for me 3) definitely invest in a corrective filter. If you plan to take this seriously you need a good quality field flattener. I hope this helped. I hate to see people struggle. You are not alone. This is a science. It’s a very technical art-form. Eyepiece projection is one of the hardest forms of it so if you get it licked the rest should be a cakewalk. Clear skies.
Firsly, thank you for the quick and in depth response. I've recently purchased a 40mm plossl eye piece. Which, when arrives, will hopefully solve this problem! Its just incredibly frustrating knowing that I can take better shots with my camera phone than my dslr. I know the camera works really well, I know the telescope works really well, but I can't quite get them to work well together!! I'll also look into purchasing a field flattened.
+Nick Crowther Baader mark 3 flattener is really good. Check out Galactic Hunter. They use it. It is frustrating but you will learn the correct spacing and equipment for your camera/telescope. I think the plossl will solve your projection problems. The phone is easier because it’s thin. The sensor in a dslr resides deep in its body from its face and that distance has to be accounted for. With a refractor it often requires extension tubes and with reflectors often you can’t get enough inward travel. You’re always battling an issue wether it’s CA, coma, clipping, tracking, etc. I know it’s frustrating because I’ve had a lot of equipment over the years. Astrophotography will certainly test your will and your patience. You embark on a scientific mission and you are often capturing light that has been traveling millions of light years to get here. It’s beautiful but also difficult. Don’t hesitate to drop me questions. If I can help I’m more than happy to. If I cannot I likely know someone who can. Good luck on your journey. Clear skies.
Garnett Leary Thanks again!!!
Mirror lock on that Camera is issue . .turn off Live View and see if shuuter is still vibrating ..my advice is sell the 5200 and get a Mirror camera . . sick of Nikon ! ? I am
Do i need to attach this eyeprojection to star diagonal incase of refractors ?
No. The eyepiece functions as normal. The device is designed to record off of it directly. Wherever you can achieve clear focus for visual will be the position
@@GarnettLeary Got it. Thanks a ton.
Anytime and good luck
@@GarnettLeary Thank you will surely give it a try I have Meade Infinity 80-400mm and I want to use this method for moon & Sun photography (Sunspots) by handholding the set up.
I can't get my dslr to focus on 150/750mm newtonian telescope. Will this eyepiece projection method help with my focal range?
Yes. You’re Newtonian likely, as most, doesn’t have enough inward focus. Eyepieces work fine because the first optical element seats low inside the focuser. Your dslr is mounted outside and additionally there is a distance between the face of the camera to the internal sensor. Eyepiece projection will work yes. Alternatively you could place a barlow between the scope and the dslr. I have a full video about your very problem. I think it would help you to watch it. It’s “Newtonian Telescope, How to Find Focus”. Let me know if you need help further and clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary I don't really want to use barlow, because i wanna take photos of deep sky objects and barlow makes it alot dimmer and bigger. Will eyepeace projection have same effect if i use let's say 26mm eyepiece or even larger mm?
Unfortunately yes. Anything you add will effectively magnify the image in the frame. There are ways to move your primary mirror closer to the secondary to allow focus but typically you will get coma aberration from doing that. I’m sorry to give you the bad news. Most Newtonian Reflectors are tuned for visual use. Typically they are labeled as “astrographs” when they are immediately suitable for imaging.
@@GarnettLeary i will modify my focuser then. Telescope is skywatcher 150/750 star discovery and i can cut like 1cm of my focuser so the camera can get closer to the focus point.
I have one of these with a 24mm eyepeice. Even at the focus at the start...I cannot get focus. Focus out and it blurs more.
What model telescope are you using?
@@GarnettLeary celestron astromaster 76. I know it's not a great telescope for astrophotography but I've had it a while. I've got a pentax k110d and so figured ide have a go anyway. I bought a t mount. It focuses just blury but really tiny. I put a 2x Barlow lens in but everything is still blury but still tiny. I read about an eyepeice projection adapter so bought one. Even at shortest focus, no change. Still blury.
I believe your scope is the 76mm Newtonian. I also think it’s a Bird Jones telescope. Is there an optical element inside of the focus tube? You can check by gently lowering a #2 pencil, eraser first, down the focuser. If it’s obstructed before it passes thru to the secondary then you have a spherical mirror. If so it explains why you can’t use the device. I have a video on this if you’re interested. If it’s not a Bird Jones let me know. I’ll suggest some tests. I have a strong feeling it is tho.
@@GarnettLeary hi...I've checked and there is no lens. The tube goes straight to the tiny mirror. Nothing in the tube.
That’s interesting. So it’s a parabolic, not spherical, and you say the image projected is blurry and small. I checked the Pentax model and it has a very similar sensor depth as Canon and Nikon so adapter spacing shouldn’t be the issue. Have you attempted this with multiple eyepieces? If it’s possible also try to get the eyepiece closer to the telescope. With the eyepiece cup off can you get the eyepiece further towards the bottom of the adapter?
Sir i have my nikon d5600 and a reflector telescope.
When i doing prime focusing it's a problem for me.
I can't go deeper into the focuser to get the focus.
Sir if i do lens projection then will i gonna face the same problem?
No. The reason prime astrophotography doesn’t work for you is because lack of in-focus. The distance from the flange of the camera to the camera sensor is too deep. Eyepiece projection will work because the telescope is tuned to reach focus at an eyepiece. Look at the construction of most any eyepiece. The first set of glass is at the very bottom. When inserted into the scope no “in-focus” is required. The same is true of eyepiece projection because the position of the eyepiece being used. It absolutely will work for you. Clear skies friend.
When I add a eye piece in the tube I can't pull focus. I need like 20cm extension tube? Is there any way around it? Why do they make it so difficult to use your dslr with eyepieces!
Every individual system and combination will vary. The trouble everyone has is the budget end of telescopes doesn’t consider an imaging device and is geared toward visual use. Any time you add glass or take it away you are changing the focal point or plane. It’s a tiresome battle as the sensor depth of various devices spans so variable in measurement. Eyepiece projection is by far the most difficult of all forms of astrophotography so if you are successful you should be proud. There are a set of complicated mathematical expressions which can solve for your personal equipment but I find a shot at the Moon your best option. It’s like the go to test of tests. If you lack the outward back travel use a toilet tissue tube. I’m not even joking. You need something steady to rest your optical train against and something you can change in length easily. It’s a battle from day one astrophotography. There’s always continuously something you’ll need or want to push things a little further or make things a little easier. EP projection truly is an effective technique but one that will test your willpower. Stay vigilant. Clear skies.
Thanks for the reply. I Have Skywatcher Black Diamond ED80 x 600mm FL. It has amazing clarity of the moon and I even saw Jupiter and Saturn last night with my eye only. I live in Australia btw. Anyway, When I added the Nikon DSLR I had about 15cm of extension tubes just to focus on the moon. When I added the eye piece I had to back up more but I didn't achieve focus. Ordering more extension tubes so I don't have to back up the telescopes focuser all the way and cause it strain. I also have to consider vibrations when taking photos with that much extension tube. I use a remote to take photos and a 5 second delay to allow vibrations to stop. I'll let you know how I go. Frustrating for sure.
ruclips.net/video/ijUfXYGNWq0/видео.html
I found oscillation to be my biggest enemy with refractors as well. All that back focus makes it evil to locate targets as well unless you tether to pc. I found it a whole lot more relaxed a process with a fast newtonian. Keep at it and I’m sure the reward will be worth the punishment. Clear skies.
Garnett Leary I may purchase a 6 or 8 inch reflector one day. Will that may be a better choice for astrophotography you think? I'll play around with the refractor for now. Thanks
How much extra 'back focus' required ?
For what in particular?
@@GarnettLeary The adapter uses a 1-1/4 nose piece to replace the normal eyepiece. Then the eyepiece is inserted above that. That makes the distance from the eyepiece to the objective longer. I ran into this problem years ago when putting an erecting prism and projection adapter. In that case it was a terrestrial refraction scope and I was able to shorten the main tube. Now I am looking at doing it again but I have limited focus room and cutting the tube is not an option this time. I wish that they made erecting prisms with T2 mounts.
Sorry I misunderstood you. I’ll measure it once home. If guessing immediately I’d say the eyepiece is over 1/2” out from normal where it rests due to that configuration. SvBony might be interested in making the erecting prism you mentioned. That’s the most innovative bunch that’s been on the parts market in years in my opinion.
@@GarnettLeary I just figured out that all my 1-1/4 eyepieces will fit inside a M42 36-90 mm helical focusing extension tube.The OD of the top of eyepiece hold of my Orion erecting prism is 41.1mm in diameter. I am going to attach a 10mm long M42 extension tube to it. Worse case scenario it adds 4.4mm to the tube length. If I need any addition length beyond the 90mm I can use standard M42 extension tubes :-)
FYI: I am building a Macroscope that will accept M42/M39 lenses or Microscope objectives. The 1-1/4 eyepieces provide a larger image than standard 23mm Microscope Eyepieces.
That’s awesome. Do you have a channel or website where you’ll demonstrate it?
I got a question what method is better the prime one or the eyepiece projection?
Depends on a few factors. Prime DSLR vs EP projected would lose because magnification. Prime method ultimately yields cleaner results however. Nobody in optics will disagree that the less optical elements the better. The quality of the eyepiece used in projection is very important. You are essentially photographing what the lens “sees”. A high quality plossl or ortho should be used. For magnification go ep projection.
Garnett Leary Let say that i want to take a picture of Mars. What shoudl i use ?
A high focal ratio telescope with the biggest aperture you can afford. Modded webcam or dedicated planetary webcam. If you’re stuck with a DSLR you can get away with prime if you have barlows and at least an F12. The trouble with Mars is it’s small angular size. It’s just a dot in say a NexStar 4SE and it’s F12. You’ve got to get to a really high focal ratio and you need your sampling to be at 1. Smaller sensors are better for that. What equipment do you have? I’ll be happy to make a suggestion based on that.
You’re going to be using video files to make photos. Video is the key.
Garnett Leary thx for taking time to answer to my question so like equipment I have a NextStar 127SLT whit 127mm Aperture and 1500 focal lenght, f12.And like accessories i have X2 barlow, 32mm,25mm,17mm,13mm,9mm,8mm and 6mm and aboute the camera i don t know because in like 4 days i will go to a freinde to borrow from him a camera
What is the adapter
The one I’m using in the video is SvBony eyepiece projection adapter.
Thank you, it was helpful
Don't throw those AVIs out ! You can import them to REGISTAX 6 Which is free, and do some work with it and pull out some decent photos of those targets. Don't waste anything!
great video!
Thank you
I use a Nikon p900 camera 24-2000 mm f2.8/f8 $400
It’s awesome too. Zoom is insane.
The eye piece came lose and bust the sensor of the camera
How is that possible?
nervous dude good video
Thank you
Sir why so serious ???
Good question. I honestly don’t know.
Why the music? It’s distracting, annoying and totally unnecessary.
I rather like the music - totally unobtrusive, un-annoying and un-distracting. When compared with the loud clamour of utterly awful music on some Channels, this is skilled and attractive use of background music. Don't listen to the naysayers Garnett!
Everyone has an opinion and they will never match 100%. I like ambient. Most don’t. There’s a mute button after all. :).
Dead right.
Stop naysaying...he's here to help