A1 with Telescope at DVinfo.net

Larry Huntington · January 29th, 2007, 07:57 PM

I have the A1 and a Meade telescope. I want to adapt the two together through the eyepiece of the scope. I tried aiming the A1 into the eye piece, but without a macro function on the A1 lens, I will need to make or find glass that might make this possible. I never was able to get a clear image. Anyone out there have any tricks up their sleeves? I want to get a really close moon picture in HD.

Chris Hurd · January 29th, 2007, 08:35 PM

Reflector or refractor?

By the way the Canon XH camcorders do in fact have a macro mode. It's built in and automatic. Simply remove the lens hood and zoom out to full wide... bingo, you're in macro mode. You can focus right up to the front of the XL lens.

Your biggest challenge is going to involve how to mount the camcorder to the telescope eyepiece. Not an easy thing to do considering how fast the moon appears to move through the telescope's field of view. I think you're better off using a digital still camera for this purpose; three megapixels will more than equal HD resolution.

Unless your goal is to get moving images... in which case, it's going to be a huge challenge!

Estebe Verde · January 29th, 2007, 10:20 PM

Digital SLR is going to be your best bet. It is very common to capture telescopic images with in this manner and many adapters have been specifically created for this purpose.

Best of Luck!

Larry Huntington · January 29th, 2007, 10:51 PM

"Reflector or refractor?"

Not sure Chris. It's a short, fat telescope with computer control. I actually want to fabricate a mount that will allow the A1 to sit with the telescope and track with it.
I guess a still SLR would be an easy alternative, but with a still image, you can tell- no heat waves- no sense of movement. Plus it just might be cool to try this during the day for nature shots. It's just a little experiment I might be trying. Film maker Ron Fricke has made some amazing things happen with tracking devices and timelapse 70mm cameras, i.e the film "Baraka". That has inspired me to try this telescope experiment.

In the focusing section in the Canon Manual, there is no mention of auto macro. I have not been able to get it to work either. I'll keep trying....
Chris, you have any more tips on using the macro feature? How close can the lense get to an object for macro to kick in?

thanks!

Larry Huntington · January 29th, 2007, 10:59 PM

Chris, I just tried the macro with the hood off and it worked fine. Just held up my cell phone right in front of it and it's in perfect focus. Nice! This is good to know! I think I have that covered now....just adapting the lense to the eye piece will be the challenge.

Steve Leverich · January 29th, 2007, 11:27 PM

Larry, short fat telescopes are almost always reflectors - refractors are like the old time pirate telescopes, where everything done to magnify the image is done with glass lenses - a reflector scope can be short because the light path is "folded" at least once by the use of a concave mirror at the very back of the scope, which acts in place of some of the lens elements. These will usually have their eyepiece closer to the front of the scope, although some scopes (Questar, for example) use ANOTHER mirror centered near the front opening of the scope that gathers the light from the rear mirror and reflects it back through a small hole in the center of the rear mirror (usually called a Schmidt system for its inventor) where the eyepiece is located -

Anyway, on to the mechanical problems of mounting a camera on your scope and still having it track - I think this may be harder than you hoped; when you add the weight of the camera to one end of the scope, it seems to me like it will unbalance things quite a bit. This may cause undue stress (or even failure) of the tracking system.

Not knowing any more about your scope than has been mentioned so far, I could be totally wrong (like, that's never happened before :=) but just thought I'd warn you in case you've not already considered that possibility... Steve

Edited to change convex to concave- sorry... Steve

Larry Huntington · January 30th, 2007, 12:54 PM

Thanks for the tidbits Steve. I never knew the difference between those 2 types of telescopes.

I agree on the weight issue- the weight of the camera might or will strain the motor on the telescope. Plus, figuring out that computer on the scope is a little daunting. I am going to just try getting the moon moving through the eyepiece without tracking it (for now), escecially now since I figured out the macro focus...thanks to Chris.

Thanks again for all the great info lads!

January 29th, 2007, 07:57 PM	#1
Larry Huntington Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Grass Valley, California Posts: 350	A1 with Telescope I have the A1 and a Meade telescope. I want to adapt the two together through the eyepiece of the scope. I tried aiming the A1 into the eye piece, but without a macro function on the A1 lens, I will need to make or find glass that might make this possible. I never was able to get a clear image. Anyone out there have any tricks up their sleeves? I want to get a really close moon picture in HD.

January 29th, 2007, 08:35 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Reflector or refractor? By the way the Canon XH camcorders do in fact have a macro mode. It's built in and automatic. Simply remove the lens hood and zoom out to full wide... bingo, you're in macro mode. You can focus right up to the front of the XL lens. Your biggest challenge is going to involve how to mount the camcorder to the telescope eyepiece. Not an easy thing to do considering how fast the moon appears to move through the telescope's field of view. I think you're better off using a digital still camera for this purpose; three megapixels will more than equal HD resolution. Unless your goal is to get moving images... in which case, it's going to be a huge challenge! __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 29th, 2007, 10:20 PM	#3
Estebe Verde Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: SAN FRANCISCO Posts: 29	Dslr Digital SLR is going to be your best bet. It is very common to capture telescopic images with in this manner and many adapters have been specifically created for this purpose. Best of Luck!

January 29th, 2007, 10:59 PM	#5
Larry Huntington Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Grass Valley, California Posts: 350	Macro focus Solved Chris, I just tried the macro with the hood off and it worked fine. Just held up my cell phone right in front of it and it's in perfect focus. Nice! This is good to know! I think I have that covered now....just adapting the lense to the eye piece will be the challenge.

January 29th, 2007, 11:27 PM	#6
Steve Leverich Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Albany Oregon Posts: 173	Larry, short fat telescopes are almost always reflectors - refractors are like the old time pirate telescopes, where everything done to magnify the image is done with glass lenses - a reflector scope can be short because the light path is "folded" at least once by the use of a concave mirror at the very back of the scope, which acts in place of some of the lens elements. These will usually have their eyepiece closer to the front of the scope, although some scopes (Questar, for example) use ANOTHER mirror centered near the front opening of the scope that gathers the light from the rear mirror and reflects it back through a small hole in the center of the rear mirror (usually called a Schmidt system for its inventor) where the eyepiece is located - Anyway, on to the mechanical problems of mounting a camera on your scope and still having it track - I think this may be harder than you hoped; when you add the weight of the camera to one end of the scope, it seems to me like it will unbalance things quite a bit. This may cause undue stress (or even failure) of the tracking system. Not knowing any more about your scope than has been mentioned so far, I could be totally wrong (like, that's never happened before :=) but just thought I'd warn you in case you've not already considered that possibility... Steve Edited to change convex to concave- sorry... Steve Last edited by Steve Leverich; January 30th, 2007 at 10:21 PM.

January 29th, 2007, 10:51 PM	#4
Larry Huntington Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Grass Valley, California Posts: 350	"Reflector or refractor?" Not sure Chris. It's a short, fat telescope with computer control. I actually want to fabricate a mount that will allow the A1 to sit with the telescope and track with it. I guess a still SLR would be an easy alternative, but with a still image, you can tell- no heat waves- no sense of movement. Plus it just might be cool to try this during the day for nature shots. It's just a little experiment I might be trying. Film maker Ron Fricke has made some amazing things happen with tracking devices and timelapse 70mm cameras, i.e the film "Baraka". That has inspired me to try this telescope experiment. In the focusing section in the Canon Manual, there is no mention of auto macro. I have not been able to get it to work either. I'll keep trying.... Chris, you have any more tips on using the macro feature? How close can the lense get to an object for macro to kick in? thanks!

January 30th, 2007, 12:54 PM	#7
Larry Huntington Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Grass Valley, California Posts: 350	Thanks for the tidbits Steve. I never knew the difference between those 2 types of telescopes. I agree on the weight issue- the weight of the camera might or will strain the motor on the telescope. Plus, figuring out that computer on the scope is a little daunting. I am going to just try getting the moon moving through the eyepiece without tracking it (for now), escecially now since I figured out the macro focus...thanks to Chris. Thanks again for all the great info lads!