Moon shot

[DIW35]

Acquired a half decent telescope a couple of weeks ago, and with a clear sky tonight, I thought I'd have a go at photographing the moon. Obviously need to start somewhere relatively easy and, of course, it's easy to find.

[Blue Meanie]

So you're not going to the moon then?


(Excellent piccy!!)

[4hero]

excellent shot! What scope did you buy?

[F_M-R2]

Kinda echoing 4hero's request....but also what type of equipment do you need to connect your camera to the scope? I'm lucky to live in an area with very low light pollution and wouldnt mind trying my hand to this.

Great shot btw!

[beano500]

Love it when you catch the oblique light giving it all that texture. Nice picture!

[caduceus]

Excellent photo! Look forward to seeing more pics from that setup.

[hilly10]

Super pic

[trackcar]

great pic, on a continuation of the equipment theme : what sort of equipment would you need to be able to pick out any of the landing craft / lunar vehicles etc left behind? has anyone photographed it from earth using relatively normal lens power? (ie not nasa levels of financial investment required ). Apologies for the numpty level post but i've often wondered what would be needed to see at man-size level on the moon.

[Stu247]

trackcar said:

landing craft / lunar vehicles etc left behind?

Landing craft on the moon ???? you are pulling our legs right ?? everyone knows the moon landings were faked

Some reading on the subject:-
http://www.tass-survey.org/richmond/answers/lunar_...

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/missions/apol...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northame...

Edited by Stu247 on Sunday 7th December 12:04

[Holst]

trackcar said:

great pic, on a continuation of the equipment theme : what sort of equipment would you need to be able to pick out any of the landing craft / lunar vehicles etc left behind? has anyone photographed it from earth using relatively normal lens power? (ie not nasa levels of financial investment required ). Apologies for the numpty level post but i've often wondered what would be needed to see at man-size level on the moon.

I think you would need something very expensive.

The moon is 384,403km away.

Lets say that you could see the lunar lander from 5km up using a 35mm lense (this is a big assumption, this may just be a tiny dot on a photo at this range)
So you would need a 76880X lense to see the lander from the earth, which would equate to a 2.7M lense or telescope.
I just did a quick search for a 2.7m telescope and it costs €1700

EDIT - This calculation may be completely wrong!!

Edited by Holst on Sunday 7th December 12:45

[trackcar]

thanks for the links, fascinating reading, especially the VLT - shows what kind of technology is actually required to see the level of detail required on the moon surface!

[DIW35]

I think someone calculated that even Hubble doesn't have the resolving power to image the landers left on the moon. I think it's fair to say that you wouldn't be able to purchase anything from your local astronomy shop that would be up to the job.

[DIW35]

I think someone calculated that even Hubble doesn't have the resolving power to image the landers left on the moon. I think it's fair to say that you wouldn't be able to purchase anything from your local astronomy shop that would be up to the job.