Hi William, an you please explain what are the light frames? How do you get pics of light frames. Thanks..

No problem! Good luck!

No problem!

Its the Celestron Power Tank

No problem! And it can be a bit obtuse sometimes, especially the hitting back to re-input the location info.

It does track on its own after you align it. It does not have autoguiding though so it doesn't know if you bump it or if it slowly moves off course. Disregarding field rotation, I normally get 20-45 minutes at prime focus before I need to re-enter the object in frame.

Glad your finding the video helpful! best of luck with your new camera! As for the settings, there's alot of them in the menu and I actually haen't touched alot of them. The depth of my experience with them is basically just what I describe on my new website: kmcaesium.com/astrophotography-with-the-celestron-130-slt/ It's got a bit of what I've learned and some links to sources I used just starting out. I'm sure that you could improve the user experience a bit with the additional settings but I've been pretty happy with the currently results (which I assume to be the default though I can't say for sure since I bought my telescope used). If I do go deeper into the settings, I'll definitely make a video for it but I wasn't planning on it for now. As for the backlash, it's not so much detection as it is just a natural consequence of the play in the gears. Every time you change directions (vertically/Altitude or Horizontally/Azimuth), the gears in the motors have a tiny rotation that they need to cover before they engage in the opposite direction. So any time you adjust the scope in the opposite direction from the last travel, you'll experience backlash. It's most noticeable when your already imaging. If you adjust the scope into the backlash, the tracking may take several seconds to start tracking properly again. *This isn't your scope messing up this is just it overcoming the backlash. Correcting for it on the 130 SLT is a tricky, you could in theory try to correct for it by just causing it again in an equal but opposite direction but at least for imaging, the best thing is to try and not introduce it in the first place. That said, there is a setting within the menus for backlash correction but from what I read on the forums about it, it kind of helps. It is a static adjustment each time you move, rather than some automatic stuff. You would set the value in the settings to tune it to your telescope specifically. I haven't done this myself as I've gotten used to my current process but I'll make an update if I do try it. Hope that answers you questions. Good luck!

@@kylemccaslin Thanks for getting back to me! Definitely your insight does help. I will let you know how your advice has worked for me. Thanks again!

Correct, it was by moving the primary mirror forwards in the tube towards the secondary. I did it using this guide: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html The only downside is that now I need to use a screw driver to collimate the scope. Not a big deal though. For the record, you aren't losing any effective aperture either, as the secondary mirror is just big enough to cover the whole light path. This is checkable with a laser.

@@kylemccaslin Thank you for your answer. I've watched that video a few times, but never really tried it. I guess you can still use the telescope with any eyepieces, just the focus tube will be further out. Is this the case? The reason is that I mainly use the scope for visual observation, but I'd like to take a picture every now and then... And as far as I reckon my 2x Barlow is s#it since I never really get good focus with it. So using it for pictures is not great (to say the least)

The OTA required a primary mirror position mod for Prime focus. After I moved it though I haven't had any issues with prime focus. I have not tried using the DSLR with a barlow on the telescope. I should be able to achieve focus with it still but there's some cons like having the camera super far out from the OTA and the depth reduction in the image itself. I haven't done it but on the forums, people tend to agree that Astrophotography with a barlow isn't the best idea. I try to atleast get an hour of lights per target. The darks for maybe 20 mins. And somewhere around 20 bias. Not actually sure what CPWI stands for so probably no?

Maybe? It's going to be harder on the 4SE for two reasons: 1.) the smaller Aperture & 2.) the higher focal length. Those in combination are going to be a real killer here. The smaller aperture means you won't have as much light gathering capability form the get-go. This means you would want more time/longer exposures to resolve an object/cluster. But the higher focal length, combined with the OK-ish Tracking, is going to limit how long you can do individual exposures without getting star trails. So atleast with reference to my numbers. You would have to have to take waaaaaaaay more exposures. Granted, your target or Star Clusters is quite a bit easier than Nebulae and Galaxies, but you may still have a hard time. So probably not impossible but not easy...

The exposure limit is basically just a function of how good your mount can track. If the tracking isn't good enough for an exposure length then you start getting star trails. I've tried imaging up to 30s subs but decided to bring it down to 20s to keep me from having to throw out frames. With my alignment method, I can get probably 90% of the images without star trails at 20s. At 30s its more like 30%. As for iso I just keep it at 1600 because I didn't really see much difference in the end stacked final. Aggregate time exposed is king here.

I'm using a Celestron Rechargeable Battery Tank. Haven't tried the AA route.

I am assuming you are referring to while using a DSLR. In order to get Prime Focus with a DSLR, I had to modify the position of the primary mirror (pushing it forward in the tube by ~1 in). There is a nice video on how to do this here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html If you still want to use a DSLR but not use the mod, then you can use a Barlow Lens instead though I wouldn't recommend this if you are going for DSOs. Let me know if that answers your question or if I misunderstood.

Don't recall off the top of my head but the video for the mod has a parts list and goes through the process pretty comprehensively: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html

Its not a bad suggestion. I don't need it to see regularly though, the reason I have the lights is so that the camera can XD. As for the bootloader error. I have actually seen this on a different celestron scope. Doing a firmware update fixed that for me. Astroblender has a video on that if you need a guide.

The telescope works for visual astronomy with eyepieces even after doing the mirror position mod. You can absolutely set up a camera with a laptop and do viewing/imaging that way too. Barlows work on this but if you are doing DSOs, which are faint and big, I wouldn't recommend it. It increases your magnification & resolution but darkens the image and makes the fov more sensitive to tracking errors and vibrations. Haven't tried any 2 inch eyepieces but I think that should work?

Possibly. I haven't tried messing with that setting myself but the forums said it kind of gave mixed results.

@@kylemccaslin I don't believe this scope actually has significant backlash. Instead what seems like backlash is actually micro correction when slewing to an object. When it appears as if the object is moving off center after slewing to it, is actually the scope continuing to GOTO the object to get accurate precision. Problem is that Nexstar is a particularly sub par brand when it comes to accurate alignment.

There isn't a setting for it on the 450d. I use a shutter release that just holds down/toggles. You can definitely go for a computer approach with some software like Backyard EOS but I don't have any experience with that.

An intervalometer is what you're looking for. Most newer dslrs and mirrorless cameras today have interval shooting built in though.

My scope doesn't always get spot on initially either.. sometimes the alignment is just right and its dead center in frame but more often I do need to make some adjustments even when using precise goto. That said,, i can't understate the importance of using far apart stars, preferably opposite to each other in the sky, for alignment. I assume your already doing this but figured I'd reiterate. The 127slt is a higher focal length scope. That means that your going to. Be more zoomed in which means you'll need to shorten exposures accordingly to keep your exposures star trail free. It may make things a little harder to find too. The apertures are about the same and though there is some math associated with that higher focal length your 127slt should do fine. I'd prefer my 130slt but wouldn't go buying a new scope to replace it as I'm pretty sure you can get things working with that scope. Would definitely suggest going for the brightest stuff first though. Orion Nebula, Flame Nebula, Pleiades, Andromeda, etc. Should be easier yo locate and may yield some encouraging results.

Thanks so much for the help :)

I modded my primary mirror position. It's needed for imaging at the native focal length with a DSLR. You could get around this by using a barlow, but increasing the magnification makes the imaging process much more difficult. The mod is easy to do and still allows use with the eyepieces. Video here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html

I wouldn't say it's the best option as it does require some modification and alot of patience. If we're talking just resolving DSOs, then going widefield with a star-tracker is both a way easier and way faster way to get going. On the whole though, I think astrophotography is more accessible than alot of people think, owed to the advancements in digital cameras and image software. It still takes alot of time to learn and acclimate, but it's way easier than it used to be.

La mayoría de los objetos son muy difíciles de ver con el ojo usando este telescopio. Son lo suficientemente débiles como para que puedas decir que algo está allí, pero no muy bien. Pero usando una cámara, puede usar exposiciones largas para resolver muchos objetos. Sepa que es difícil ver objetos con cualquiera de los métodos si está observando desde algún lugar con alta contaminación lumínica. Afortunadamente, los planetas son lo suficientemente brillantes como para verlos desde casi cualquier lugar, aunque hay algunas condiciones ambientales más para verificar si los está buscando. Espero que esto tenga sentido, estoy poniendo mi texto en un traductor ya que no hablo español. ¡Feliz de ayudar!

Did you do the prime focus mod? It is the mod i mention in the videos. Should be a link to it in the description. If you don't want to do the mirror position mod then a barlow can work but isn't optimal for long exposures

Stellarium

If you want to image bright or small things like the planets, then a Barlow Lens is essential. Barlow Lenses multiply your focal length, increasing your magnification. A barlow will also allow you to overcome the backfocus of a DSLR, thus letting you achieve focus. However, if you want to use the DSLR at your telescope's native focal length, then you will need to perform a mirror mod on the scope. I've done this to use the scope for Deep Space, but think it is unnecessary for Planetary.

1.) "so I would need to adjust the positioning of the primary or secondary mirrors." > Correct. The strategy that I use involves shifting the Primary mirror forward slightly in the tube. This mod is relatively simple and should push the focal point just far enough that your focuser should be able to just barely reach it. This doesn't actually prevent eyepiece use too which is great. 2.) "Did you have to do this and can you give me guidance on how I could accomplish this" > Yup. This is called a "Prime Focus Mod", Link to a video of the mod here: (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html) No movement of the secondary mirror is required* 3.) For the record, you can still do astrophotography without the mod but it requires a Barlow (ex. 2x). However, I don't recommend this route as Barlows increase the zoom/magnification of the scope. Doing this limits you to even shorter exposure times and the whole thing becomes a big mess. It is particularly difficult for people new to astrophotography. I can however elaborate if you want me to. If you have questions, check out my other guide-style videos and check out my website where I go through some of the more verbose aspects: (kmcaesium.com/) Also, feel free to shoot me an email. My email is found on my site and I should be more consistent responding to that. Sometimes, I don't get the KZfaq notification.

Thanks Kyle! I will check out the other video.

I'd still probably prefer the 130slt, but that is primarily because I can only attest to it working for this set up. I don't know if certain other setups are as moddable for the specific approach that I took. This primarily concerns aspects of the OTA. The 130slt has a 2" diameter focusser with an adapter to go to 1.25" where as the Orion starseeker ones are soley 1.25". I theorize that this could still work but you may be loosing some edge sensor space. But, the more concerning thing here for me is that I don't know how this would interact with a Primary Mirror Position mod. The Orion OTAs with their different focussers may need to be displaced further and don't want to advise someone to put down a bunch of money on something that I can't confirm would work. Hope that helps?

@@kylemccaslin thank you for advice. What are the accessories do you use frequently with this scope?

@@rajubalami9016 1.) The Celestron Power tank - for power since I go out to a nearby location to shoot 2.) Vibration Foot Pads - for the telescope legs though I'm not entirely sure how effective they are so don't know if I should recommend them or not. 3.) The camera is a Canon Rebel Xsi/450d. I've astromodded it to get the near-infrared wavelengths. 4.) A remote Shutter Release - for triggering the shutter on the camera (toggle) 5.) CLS Light suppression filter - Generally don't use it but when under city lights, it helps. These are in addition to the regular cords and adapters for the telescope and optical train.

It gets stuck at 50% for a while on my laptop too (also 4 gb RAM). Its still working, it just takes forever since the file is so large. I'd just start it and let it sit if you can.

@@kylemccaslin how large was your file size and how long did it take so I can have an idea. Mine was 816 MB and it took a long time and the status bar didn’t move after 50%

@@deepskychaser5707 my files have ranged from ~200 MB to ~1.3 GB. I'd say yours is slightly above my median. I seldom do the processing on my laptop but I think it was 30 < x < 60 minutes? I don't exactly recall but it should be in that range, maybe near the higher end. Either way, leaving it running overnight should cover it if you have that option.

@@kylemccaslin Thanks! I will try that

I'd say this is probably a better scope for a lower budget yes and can work for both viewing and photographing. Do keep in mind though that I did have to mod it in order to get prime focus with my DSLR. But as always, make sure you do your research and check out all of your options!

@@kylemccaslin thanks, and me personally I'm jjst using my phone for astrophotography attached to my dobsonian telescope so im not using a camera yet. So thanks I think I'll probably buy this one.

Yeah! Thanks!

No, not at all. I'd say that only the 20s subs are representative of looking through the scope. You need a really big aperture in really dark skies to see most DSOs in real time.

It means DSS can't identify that stars in your image. It is specifically looking for solid round circles. The non-roundness of a star in an image is most often due to star trailing. The "non-solidness" that I am refering to could be that you are out of focus and that the stars are little hoops/halos instead of dots. Vignetting and Chromatic Aberration shouldn't greatly effect DSS's ability to stack but coma might. If your Barlow introduces coma, then it may reduce the number of stars that are circular, particularly those away from the center. But, as long as those in the center are still circular, DSS should be able to stack just fine. There is a setting in DSS called the "Star Detection Threshold" under the Register Settings. Since we don't have a 100% flawless setup, you want this to be set as low as possible (2%) so DSS is very liberal with what it defines as a star. Unfortunately, if the Star Detection Threshold setting doesn't fix the problem, then DSS won't be able to help stack the images. What I assume is happening based on your description of your set up, is that you have some level of star trailing. Using a 5x barlow on this mount zooms in the image massively which makes the image more prone to insufficient tracking or interference. Thus you would have to massively increase you shutter speed to compensate. Normally at the native focal length, I do 20s subs. But with a 5x barlow, I would imagine that you may only be able to get maybe 2s subs consistently without trailing. This is in part why I recommend the mod so hard, it makes it way easier to avoid trails and get bigger targets. Fewer longer exposures also means fewer files which is less storage and computational load on the program when it can indeed stack. I would say try 2s subs and try to stack them just as a proof of concept, but I would also seriously consider either moving down to a 2x barlow and using 8s subs, or doing the mod and using 20s subs. That's a big wall of text but hopefully that helps with your issue. Let me know if you get it working.

Yup! After you align it, it will track deep space or planetary objects. The tracking is open loop though so it doesn't know if you bump it or if it drifts off course. Realignment is necessary if bumped, but it can just be slightly adjusted to recenter things if it is just drifting off course. The scope actually tracks a celestial coordinate system that the objects can be found on. You can use the coordinates to run the go-to part of the system for the best accuracy. Things that have rapidly changing coordinates though like Low Earth Orbit Satellites or the ISS move too fast to track though.

@@kylemccaslin Thanks Kyle! Really helpful

I believe it was counter clockwise, though it's been a little while lol. Essentially the goal is to maintain the framing.

gratitude@@kylemccaslin

I've used a Celestron Power Tank for a while, though I think its finally reaching the end of its life. I've also used some AAs and a different portable 12V power station. If your planning on going out alot, I think a rechargeable is worth it. Of the trips are few and far between, AAs should be enough.

The app is called Stellarium. You can zoom by adding a Barlow Lens. Barlow Lenses multiply your focal length, thus increasing magnification. e.g. a 2x Barlow will 2x your Magnification. If you are doing Planetary, then a barlow lens or two is essential. You can use multiple Barlows at one time, but I wouldn't go further than a total multiple of 4x. Do be aware that it can be harder to focus & keep your FOV steady when using Barlows. Never use Barlows for DSOs as it dilutes your light per pixel.

Right Ascension (RA) and Declination (Dec) is a celestial coordinate system that is independent of your position. Think of it as a map of the stars with all of them given a fixed position. Though it isn't as intuitive as Altitude (Alt) - Azimuth (Az)'s up-down-left-right, it let's astronomers across the globe to work together. I use RA Dec because it helps locate targets that are too dim to identify by just slewing. There may also be comets or other targets that may not be within your hand controller's Catalog, so knowing that positions and telling the telescope to slew to it can be helpful. The backlash is a natural problem with using gears. Backlash occurs because gears do not perfectly mesh together. When you reverse direction, there will be this brief delay before the gears re-engage. This results in a small error between where the telescope is pointing and where it thinks it is pointing. This can build up over time depending in how you move your telescope. If you are having your telescope tracking a target for hours, then this error matters. Also remember that you need the Mirror Mod to get Prime Focus with many DSLRs!

Thanks man. That makes sense. I can see how it would eventually become a problem with tracking. I finally got my hardware for the mod of the telescope so I'll be doing it tonight. Also, I have that same cannon camera you have in this video, any recommendations on where I can look on what settings are best for astrophotography?

@@mdaddy4ev i have historically used Manual Mode with 20s exposures and an ISO of 1600. I trigger the camera with a cheap little toggleable remote shutter release so I don't touch the scope while its going. I also AstroModded my Camera itself by removing the near-IR filter inside it. The mod let's you catch the Hydrogren Alpha wavelength which is the strongest emission most Nebula.

Hello I know this is long but I just found out from someone online they said that if I were to do the mod it would let my camera get focus but if I wanted to do visuals and look through any eyepiece I would have to lock the eyepiece a little further and not let it completely fall into the eyepiece adapter to get focus on it and it’s not worth it cause the quality would not be as good as without the mod, is this true?

The mod shouldn't have an impact on the quality of eyepiece views, but will change the position of the focusser/eyepieces when you are doing visual. Instead of being near the center of the range of the focusser, you would instead be at the outer limit of the focusser when getting focus with the included eyepieces (I haven't tested other ones). I believe for one of the eyepieces, you technically had to not-fully insert it to get focus with it. Something like 85% inserted instead of 100%. Not something that prevents usage, but a quirk for sure.

@@kylemccaslin Thank you so much 🙏🙏

@SH1L0H I will say. If you want to do planetary/lunar/solar and not DSOs, then the mod is not necessary as you need to be using barlow(s) for that anyways*

@@kylemccaslin Hey im sorry to be a bother but quick question like I said im planning on getting a DSLR, most likely going to get a used one off ebay and I was looking and the one that you used in this video (Canon EOS 450D) goes for around $60 - $70 on ebay lightly used for only the body. Would I need the lens or can I just get the body as it's very cheap and I don't really see any use for the lens, just trying to get into this astrophotography thing as it's pretty cool :)

The field rotates slow enough that you can just rotate the camera on the mount every 15 minutes or so and get a mostly rectangular stack. The exposure time without star trails is all a matter of alignment quality and zoom. The more zoomed in the more sensitive the scope is to movement so the better the tracking required. This is why I recommend the mirror mod to get prime focus (atleast for DSLRs) rather than using a barlow since a barlow increases magnification. Following all the alignment steps perfectly though is absolutely key to enabling those longer exposures. Have to be correct on all the time and location data, have to be meticulous about the bubble level, have to pick super far apart preferably opposite stars and have to have them dead center in the scope (digital zoom helps). I assume you are also using a 130SLT? What is your camera setup like?

@@kylemccaslin I have a celestron nexstar 6se and I use prime focus on my Sony a6000 to take my pictures. After reading your comment I think the reason why I can only get 2 sec subs is because the focal length of my scope is f/10. I'll be sure to try the alignment steps you mentioned when I get clear skies again. Do you physically rotate your camera for field rotation? Which direction do you rotate it?

@@vicng4571 with a nexstar se6 i would imagine you could still get atleast 10s exposures. Yeah definitely give those alignments your all, especially the super far apart stars for alignment, that is less talked about but is critical. And yes i mean physically rotate the camera. Counterclockwise*

@@kylemccaslin ok thank you for the advice. I've only been able to get 4 second exposures on cassiopeia before any star trails show up. So ill be sure to check the alignment. Thanks once again

@@vicng4571 Actually th rotation depends on th direction. Looking south it should be clockwise, and looking north it should be counterclockwise

There is a piece called a T-Ring which, in combination with either a T-Adapter or 2"-1.25" adapter, will allow you to mount a DSLR. Obviously you'd need the Canon version. Do be aware though that I use a Primary Mirror Position Mod that allows me to get Prime Focus. That is HIGHLY desirable for DSOs with this scope as it enables you to get focus with a DSLR at F/5 w/ 650mm Focal Length. If you instead opt to not do the mod here and go with a Barlow Lense, you will be at F/10 and 1300mm which makes the process much harder.

@@kylemccaslin thank you for the reply. I will try and do the mod

@@kylemccaslin also where can I find out how to do the primary mirror position mod?

@@nimster64 This is the video that I followed: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html It has a parts list as well in the description.

@@kylemccaslin thank you so much

OK so let's tear into this bullet by bullet: "is a camera required to see all types of objects through this telescope or specifically deep space objects?" > The deep space stuff is mostly restricted to Stacking or Long Exposure-based Astrophotography. Deep Space isn't really visible in real time to the eye or to a camera (except for the brightest objects which are mostly hazy blurs, UNLESS you have a telescope much much larger than this). You can however see bright things like planets in this telescope quite easily with your eye or camera. "Would i be able to do planetary photography with a regular iphone..." > You will be able to do it yes, though using phone cameras for this can be a bit tricky. If you are going to use your smartphone, you should take the "eyepiece projection" route. That being using an eyepiece like normal as if you were visually observing, but just using your camera instead of your eye. If the magnification isn't sufficient with the eyepieces you have, you can multiply it with a Barlow Lens. These increase the zoom by a specified multiple; 2X for example. Eyepiece Projection is tricky for imaging because cameras are alot less flexible and hard to position compared to your eye. " ...or even just seeing it in real time or would a camera be better?" > For what you are doing, the just seeing it in real time is probably going to be better. Visual Astronomy for planets is fairly good as our brains/eyes kind of do some of the processing that we would on a computer. Visual Real Time will nearly always exceed Camera Real-Time. BUT. if you do Video Frame Analysis & Stacking with a reasonable setup, that final result will beat out what you see with your eye. "and if a camera is better which camera do you recommend?" > For the Planets: If you have the money for it, I have really taken to the ZWO Cameras. I personally have an old ZWO ASI 120MC and it is performing excellently. DSLRs are OK for the planets, but they aren't really built for this kind of application like the aforementioned cameras are. SvBony is a budget option, but I can't attest to the quality as I don't have much experience with their cameras. The SvBonys might be worth some researching though. > For Deep Space: DSLRs are a highly accessible cheap option. I own two Canon EOS Rebel Xsi/450d Cameras and they have performed for Deep Space. I would like to add though that this can be a daunting task, since you need alot of time aggregated for your images to be good and not too noisy. "(note i would like to do astrophotography with this telescope but just experiencing it would be incredible)" > For Deep Space Astrophotography, I MUST recommend that you do a Prime Focus Mod to the scope. This moves the Focus Range forward so that you can get focus with a DSLR. If you try to capture DSOs without this, it becomes a huge challenge that may turn you away. HOWEVER. There are a few objects that you can see just a tiny smidge of in real time. You should be able to see the blue glow of the Core of the Great Orion Nebula in real time, though it's only a fraction of the whole thing. Same with Andromeda, though that may appear as a faint, hazy oval. I would check out Orion, It's suuuuper easy to find too. > For the Planets the mod is not needed, but it's hard to gauge expectations. With this scope you should be able to see the Spot and Bands on Jupiter, even the shadow of a Moon if you happen to time it correctly. You should be able to see Saturn with it's Rings, and probably the Cassini Division. For Mars, the big dark areas should be distinguishable, but more details beyond that may be out of reach. And you can certianly see Uranus and Neptune, identifiable by their colors, but no surface detail. "im having a hard time seeing planets/stars just regularly with the eyepieces. I dont know if im focusing wrong or if the eyepieces are the issue or if im just such a beginner its making me very confused." > The included Eyepieces should be perfectly serviceable. It could be the way you are focussing. It could also be the Collimation of your scope. If you aren't doing that consistently, then it could be that the optics have fallen out of alignment. I'd check that first just to be sure. If it is a focussing thing though I'm sure you can figure it out, should be simple enough. >One Word on Observing though. Astronomy, just like everything else, not only depends on your equipment, but also on environmental conditions. For the planets, "Seeing" matters. In the best seeing, the planets will look still and detail rich. In the worst seeing, the planets will look blurred, as if you are looking at them through turbulent water. I don't think this is the thing blocking you at the moment, but be aware that there will be nights that are amazing for planets and others that are not, even if they are all clear of clouds. Check out Astronomical Seeing Forecasts if you get the previous issue solved and really want to see more detail. That was alot of text... But hopefully that helps! Let me know if you have any additional questions and I'll try and answer them. But it probably won't be as fast as this time. I typically try to get to comments within a week. Btw, nice Xiao Picture :)

@@kylemccaslin thank you so much! i will definitely try out some of the things you suggested. probably will end up getting a camera since ive wanted one regardless! i appreciate the response!

hey sorry again but I have a couple more questions. I'm still having issues with my telescope with how it focuses. I have a Barlow lens now but I don't think its helping, I see a more of a zoomed in view of planets / stars but otherwise it still looks relatively the same (I was looking at Jupiter with a 2x Barlow lens and my 9mm and could kind of tell the shape but it was so blurred that you couldn't see any details, also tried with my 25mm and the 2x Barlow lens and it just looked like a bright star) I don't know if the exposure goes for planets as well or if planets should be visible to the naked eye? I know the telescope is in collimation because I just did it and from what I can tell it is aligned with the finder scope. (based on every tutorial I could find to do the above things) it also could just be a bad environment tonight specifically.(and note this is all without any type of camera or mod to the telescope, I couldn't figure out the prime focus mod to save my life :| ) If you have any more advice it would be appreciated ! thank you

" I know the telescope is in collimation because I just did it and from what I can tell it is aligned with the finder scope. (based on every tutorial I could find to do the above things)" > Let's make sure we're talking about the same thing here: Collimation is different from the alignment of the finder's scope. Collimation is the position of the mirrors such that you don't get any distortion which could make the targets non-circular. I have a video on how I do mine: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hNNjksuSnLuwdn0.html Could you confirm that we are talking about the same thing and that this is correct on your scope? "(and note this is all without any type of camera or mod to the telescope, I couldn't figure out the prime focus mod to save my life :| )" > Yeah we want to figure this focus thing before any cameras are added to the mix.

@@kylemccaslin ​ ah ok sorry for the confusion- i know the finder scope is in alignment but with your other video ill buy a laser for collimating and try again that way. and ill attempt the mod again. thanks (sorry for all the confusion again 😭)

Is it slewing or is it slipping?

It is slewing, it moves vertically until the tube is facing down and the motor still making noise but it is not moving.

@nkgabisengmafatshe3038 slewing quickly or slowly over the course of minutes? If it's slow, then it may be the way you're performing the alignment. If it's fast then I have no clue...

@@kylemccaslin Slewing slowly without my inputs.

@nkgabisengmafatshe3038 what kind of alignment are you using? Solar system? Or are you doing a multi-Star alignment? If it's just a one-star/planet thing, then it may be doing that because your Date, Time, or Location setting is very wrong. Can you confirm that those inputs are correct?

Stellarium

The camera battery lasts 3 or so hours for me when I'm imaging. Since I usually do a bit more than that I do swap the battery once yes. Do bear in mind that I moved my primary mirror up in the tube a bit. I couldn't achieve prime focus without that.

Definitely. Its looks way better than my camera (Canon 450d aka Canon Rebel Xsi). You will need a nikon T-ring though to interface with the telescope instead of the Canon one I have for example. Canon and Nikon are the two main camera companies that I hear are good for this kind of stuff. Do bear in mind that you will likely need to mod the position of the primary mirror in order to achieve focus with your DSLR through the telescope. More on that on my other videos, website (kmcaesium.com), and from the guy who actually did the mod: Chris Jones. Links to his video on it should be in the descriptions of some of my videos.

@@kylemccaslin good to know thanks! also once you modified the 130 SLT mirror, can you still use it for regular viewing without the DSLR?

@@allanmariano1437 for the included lenses yes but you start to push how far put your focuser can go. That is also with some of the lenses not fully seated in their slots.

@@kylemccaslin i see, so if you do the mod, you will be limited to the stock lenses

@@allanmariano1437 Not necessarily, those are just the ones that I had to test it with lol.

It may seem overwhelming at first, but should become fairly intuitive if you get a grasp of why exactly specific steps are taken. Like how... The inputs during the alignment process are to get the computerized mount to understand both where it is and where it is looking. The parts about backlash mitigation/avoidance being because there is a little gap in between gears such that there is a little error incurred every time you switch directions. The different types of images are all to accomplish different things: The lights capture both the target data, but also alot of noise data. So we use Dark frames to remove the noise the camera generates over the course of an exposure. And Bias frames to remove the read noise that all exposures will have regardless of the duration of the exposure. If you can manage to pick up on the meaning behind the steps, it can make alot of the decisions less nebulous. And on an individual level, I think the bits should be pretty processeable? Hopefully?

Thats a great question that I don't have the answer to... I have heard that planetary cameras don't need the mod so maybe a mirror less could work if the sensor is shallow enough?

@@kylemccaslin Thanks for the reply

Yes you can see the rings, see my recent planetary videos if you want to get an idea of how it looks. The scope is good but if your planing on using it for AP and have a bigger budget, there are plenty of options that would require less work. That said, telescope mirror mod is pretty simple. And yes you can still use the included eyepieces with the mirror position molded. They are at a far end of the focusing range though with one only working if not 100% seated. Telescopes are pretty expensive here in the states though with everything going on.

​@@kylemccaslin Thanks for the brilliant info. Im new to telescopes, never used one before. Got deeply interested in it when the Saturn and Jupiter came close by this month. Im an experienced landscapes photographer but just getting started with astro photography, and its a completely different game. I'm gonna spend lots of time watching more videos to learn before I dip my toes into buying anything. Btw, you say there are plenty of options requiring less work.. can you hint a few names. Thanks again.

​@@FarazAzhar So there are a few general types of astrophotography: Planetary, Lunar&Solar, and Deep Sky/Space. There are different preferences for equipment between each of these. Planetary requires high magnifications as the objects are bright but tiny in the field of view. The primary thing you need to overcome to get a good picture is the disturbance in the atmosphere. People get around this by taking videos of the planets, then combining the best of the frames (with the least disturbance) into a final image. Lunar and Solar are similar to planetary in that the atmosphere is an issue, but the subjects are of course very large. These require filters since they are so bright. It's dangerous to even look at the moon directly through most telescopes. Deep Sky Objects (DSOs) are things like nebulae and galaxies. They are very faint but vary significantly in size. Since they are so dim, they require LONG exposures to resolve details. Traditionally, you would need a Equatorial mount capable of allowing exposures that last for minutes at a time. I, however, have been working with an Altitude (up/down) Azimuth (Left/Right) style mount. They were not designed with long exposures in mind so there is some work one can do to compensate. *Since they are so dim, many people imaging from light polluted areas also use certain filters. What kind of telescope you are looking for should probably be influenced by what exactly your targets are. Generally speaking, a bigger aperture is better but beyond that, it kind of depends. Also, I mentioned that using this scope is more complicated because I have modded it for use on DSOs. The mod enables prime focus. Ordinarily, you could use the scope for planetary so long as you have a barlow lens (a lens that multiplies, usually doubles, the apparent focal length) I have more info on my website (kmcaesium.com) but yes, definitely check out all of the resources here on youtube and elsewhere before you make a decision. Good Luck!

@@kylemccaslin thanks for the detailed info Kyle. I think I'm interested in the deep space photography. But let me check out what telescopes are available here in my country. :)

I assume you're referring to the phone app, that one is Stellarium.

I did a Primary Mirror Position Mod to my scope that lets me focus with a DSLR without any lenses. Here is the guide video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oKqghruBs6nSg2Q.html The mod is mostly used for DSOs, but you could use it for for the moon as well. Argueably, if its specifically image quality your looking for, doing a composite of more zoomed in images would work better (If your target is big AND bright, like the moon). And using Lucky Imaging would also work better (primarily talking about the planets on this point*). But yes, for tiiiiiiny objects like the planets, a barlow will be your best bet. It would decrease the Brightness of the image, but should not decrease the quality. If anything, Barlows should increase the quality up to the optical limit of the Telescope's Optics (This is normally around 4x the native focal length)(But the math can get pretty complex with eyepieces).

@@kylemccaslin thanks man. That was quick ngl. I have another question: if I mod the mirror, will it effect the visual focusing when I look to the objects from an eyepiece?

@@_0NesEc the included eyepieces still work, but if I recall correctly, one only worked when partially inserted. So instead of inserting it all the way until its flush, you would put it in maybe 85% and tighten a locking screw to hold it there.

@@kylemccaslin thank you. You helped me a lot:)

I am not sure what that means. The secondary mirror is part of the optical train

@@kylemccaslin If you look through your telescope without a oculair you can see the second mirror. And it gets in the way of the vision. But than if you put a oculair in the telescope you have a clear view. I'm just a bit afraid that with the camera I'll see the second mirror.

@@stefandrost7823 an eyepiece is not required to properly use a scope. If you have enough range in your focuser, you should be able to get a clear image. This doesn't mean that all telescopes are designed to be able to focus a camera at the native focal length though. The one I am using for example required a mod or a barlow. Which OTA and mount do you have?

@@kylemccaslin I don't know, it came with my second hand telescope, it does say "Crawford Style Focuser" if that helps anything. But it does have a extension piece of 35 mm. And I also own a 2x Barlow.

@@stefandrost7823 Crayford is a good sign but I would suggest you find the specifics of the scope and mount. There are several things that you need for DSO astrophotography. Planetary is much less intensive if that is the aim. *Generally, for DSOs you need a mount that can track

It does track, though there is no feedback, it is open-loop. So it tends to drift off targets as it is unable to correct and also doesn't know if it gets bumped. There is also alot of slosh/backlash in the gears so it may take a moment for thr tracking to engage after alignment.

Thanks

I actually bought used, but it was in stock condition except for the finder's scope - that was an after market piece. Once I got it, I did a Prime Focus Mod, which re-positions the Primary Mirror, in order to allow me to get Prime Focus with a DSLR.

Thank you

Your referring to "Go-To". You can use either precise goto where you input the coordinates of the object or just regular goto where you pick a listed object in the database

Once it's aligned, hit the menu button and these two options should be in there as "Precise Goto" and "Database" if I am remembering correctly off the top of my head

Kyle McCaslin Thank you Kyle, your video of Astrography with the celestron nexstar 130slt is awesome, I try to follow the steps. I have a question when you align the telescope and then you pick a object the mount automatically show you the object and for example I making a video there for 1 minute, the image start to move and go out of the place, this mount have a option to keep follow the object by self or the only way to follow the object is touching the directional on the control to maintain the object in place?

@@danielricardo3916 the goto feature should keep the object in view. If it isn't there are two possibilities. The first is that the alignment isn't very good. Make sure you are using the furthest apart stars that you can find. The second possibility is that your experiencing a lot of gear backlash. Since there is some play/space inbetween the gears, it may take a minute for it to start tracking depending on if the telescope was most recently moving in the direction that the object is in the sky. Does that make sense?

If you are just starting to use the scope (130 SLT) do not go into all the details. Just make sure it's aligned. Many times I use 3 star align or solar system align (use the moon). After it's aligned it's already tracking. In my case, after alignment I use the scope's database to browse for objects, or even the sky tour. If you select Andromeda, the scope should slew to that, and follow it. One good thing to do is to align (make sure that the selected object is in the center of the eyepiece) every now and then. This is simple. After going to an object, press back a few times so there is no option on the screem, and then press "Align", go down, select "Sync" and press "enter", "enter" again to skip the fast movement, then center the object, and press "Align". This helps the scope to be more accurate as the session progresses.

I assume you mean the 127 slt which is the mak cas version. The big difference with the two deals with the focal length. The 127 has a 1500mm focal length meaning it is way more zoomed in at its native length compared to the 130's 650mm. Which you prefer is going to come down to what you want to do with the scope. If you're going for optical viewing of targets, I'd probably opt for the 127 since most of the things that you can see in real time are tiny, like the planets. The 127 is also a bit easier to transport simply given its lower profile. If you are going after DSOs for astrophotography though, I'd opt for the 130. The 130 is a newtonian which is more open and easier to modify. I've modified mine so that I can use a DSLR at the native 650mm. Emulating what I've gotten on the 130 on the 127 would be terribly hard due to having to operate at the higher focal length. Ultimately, its about your goals/uses for the scope. Hope that helps?

@@kylemccaslin Thank you.

I did not have any issues with weight messing up the tracking. Or atleast nothing that prevented me from taking exposures. I did shift the dovetail backwards in the slot to better balance the added weight though.

@@kylemccaslin thanks for the info! Great video!

@@brandontorralba1170 Thanks! And real quick one thing I forgot to add as a factor: the varying weight of different DSLR models. I specifically have used a Canon EOS Rebel XSi (450d) and a Canon EOS T6 on mine and both of those worked, but I could imagine there are heavier cameras out there.

@@kylemccaslin gotcha. I currently have a Sony a6400 but I’m still very new to camera and stuff like that. Wonder if it will be enough to get some cool pictures of space lol

Ug. Thank you very much for telling me.

You can see only the brightest nebulas and basically only Andromeda's core with just your eyes and a telescope. The Great Orion Nebula is the brightest Nebula so you could start there. It is also really easy to find. Aside from that, the Lagoon Nebula and Eagle Nebula can be seen easily. There are quite a few more that are on the border of seeable but aren't very clear, the Rosette Nebula.

@@kylemccaslin oh i don't have a telescope but I'm so curious about space i know some things I asked because of curious and maybe i will buy a telescope but i want to see real forms from telescope space is my hobby from everything beautiful and mystery new elements new mysterys. Space are the biggest mystery sometimes I research things about space i have much dream but biggest one is being a astronomy guy like astrophysicist and explore new galaxy's and give them name space just my biggest hobby i love it from everything if you read all of this i am sorry to waste your time but i want to share my hobby with everyone i wish i can be like you or better than you!

@@GyroZeppeli_ I see. I feel the same way about space. There are so many mysteries and challenges associated with space. It can be both really beautiful and strange. And I enjoy reading comments like this. It feels awesome to share hobbies with people not only nearby, but around the world. Space kind of connects everyone like that. Stay curious, man.

Stellarium

That was on an old intel system that actually had a slightly modded Xeon for the CPU. Are you asking about processing power?

@@kylemccaslin how many gbs of ram does it have?

@@kylemccaslin because I don’t know how long my computer will take to process all the photos

@@CrazyAsian1 Had 8 GB RAM. As far as I understand it, the primary hardware factors for processing speed are the type of storage (SSD is WAY faster than HDD) and CPU. I normally do the processing on my laptop which had a i5 (from 2015 idk what gen off the top of my head) and a SSD. It takes maybe 4-5 hours for a 3 Hr image. It kind of scales linearly based on aggregate exposure time but will have a initial part for your Dark and Bias frames regardless of aggregate time. Generally it is a overnight thing.

@@kylemccaslin oh thanks

I believe that is the case, but I can not confirm as I have not tried. I am doing some planetary right now with a new camera though and there may be an option in firecapture to do this. But, if that works it is probably only for planetary.

@@kylemccaslin are you using zwo asi224mc pro for planetary?

@@Katzenrads zwo asi120mc, an older color model

@@kylemccaslin I look forward to seeing your end to end videos on planetary imaging.

@@kylemccaslin what tracking mode are you using for planetary?

It's stacking and post processing yes, though all of the data is real. Astrophotography has arguable less photoshop than smartphone cameras now-a days...