Unlocking Your Telescope's Power: Mastering Field of View and Resolution for Astrophotography
🔭 Understanding Field of View, Magnification, and Resolution in Astrophotography 🔭 In this video, I break down the essentials of Field of View, Magnification, and Resolution—key...
Note to self don’t try to follow trig before your 2nd cup of coffee. Great video!
Hola excelente vídeo. Me pregunto si teniendo un buen cielo y una resolución de cielo de 1 o 2 segundos de arco ¿merece la pena tener un telescopio con mucha abertura? ¿Se consigue mayor resolución o detalle en los objetos si un telescopio pequeño aumenta el tiempo de exposición lo suficiente? Gracias
Theoretically you wouldn’t have an advantage in terms of resolution if the seeing is bad. However for the amount of light collected it’s still a clear winner
And i live in the second floor 😅
Yes ! Thank you
This is amazing to easy Understanding ❤
Oh girl, thanks you made it so straight forwards .this vid is a gem for beginners
I’m glad it was helpful!
I wish so hard that i could kiss venus
Personal question. You wear a solitaire ring with a band. However, you switch hands. Why? If you don't care to answer, just ignore. As always, clear skies.
I wear them together as I like how they look and honestly I wear them on either hand depending on the day. I really put no thought into it, a wedding ring is a wedding ring to me :)
@the_space_koalaIn USA the tradition is left hand only for women and men. Did some research and discovered in Europe it's exactly as you said, either or. Thanks for the reply. Is your electronic puppy still around?
haha, yes Luna is still running around annoying people, she's very cute
I remember watching this video last year, no questions only because I wasn't sure what you were trying to say. First time I heard the term FOV. Watched again today, still no questions only because everything you said now makes sense. So, thank you for doing what and how you do it. Don't ever move either, I'll miss the mountains.
Haha thank you and glad to hear you’re back a year later!
Thanks for share this video. I have a redcat 51 and was thinking of changing only the cameras to achieve any possible field of view 😅😅
if you want larger, you could get a larger sensor, otherwise I would just keep the camera and crop :)
Again, I was looking for resources to understand the relation between camera sensor and the scope and how it would make difference by changing other factors. I think most of my questions are answered here, except I wanted to understand how a prime lens for camera and a scope of same focal length have different FoV and resolving capacity.
I think this will help: https://youtu.be/G4zZtKiyVEg
Excelente! Tks
im a beginner and i have discovered that the bigger you go the more accurate your tracking needs to be
Absolutely this is true. Longer focal lengths (or smaller pixels for that matter) will show tracking errors more
Match your gear to your target? Most of us can't afford to buy specialized gear for a specific target. I can't even watch this video. There has to be some setup that you can buy that allows for multiple targets. To be honest im tiring of this hobby. $2000 and i can't even see Jupiter. There's always another piece of equipment needed. And nothing costs less than 500 bucks. And of course for that piece to work well it needs 3 other things.
Barlow lenses and focal reducers can be used to change the focal length which will change your field of view without requiring new sensors and new telescopes to change these parameters.
sorry you feel this way, hope you're not too discouraged. You can say "match your gear to your target", but you could rephrase it as "match your target to your gear". If you have a small refractor, don't get into planetary, and if you have an SCT, don't try to do Milky Way shots. It is not meant to discourage anyone, just to provide better understanding of the gear you have/want to purchase
@RedShiftedDollar I have those
@the_space_koala I bought a new Askar 71f. I also bought a used PMC 8 EQ Mount. Getting the EQ Mount to work is a real pita. Now it seems I have to buy an Asiair to guide the Mount. Yes, I’ve bought a dedicated laptop and have NINA installed. Still no joy. It just seems like there is always going to be another $500 piece of equipment to buy. And as a disabled veteran, money is not unlimited. I’m afraid as much as I’m interested in this hobby, it’s just out of my price range. The sad thing is I have a 5 yr old autistic grandson that is my joy. And he loves the planets. He can name the dwarfs. I’m into this as much for him as for me. And I haven’t been able to show him anything yet. Very discouraging.
Thank You, I have been struggling with the above concepts for many years and you have explained it perfectly so that for the first time I actually understand the relationship between the Telescope and the Camera sensor and Telescope Aperture. I have Subscribed, Thank You again.
Fantastic basic knowledge video, this helped me out a lot! I would love to see a video where you do some planning for shoots and explain your choice of gear options for optimum results, to fully grasp these concepts.
That’s a great idea! Thanks
Yet another question for you. Do you have similar calculations for eyepieces? For example, consider the Tele Vue 31mm Nagler with an 82° apparent field of view and an f/10 Celestron C11 with a focal length of 2800mm (and a diameter of 280mm). The magnification would be 2800 / 31 = 90x. Is there an easy way to use that to compute what my actual field of view would be?
BTW, I've seen the formula that divides the apparent field of view of the eyepiece by the magnification, which seems intuitive, but it can't be quite right. If the magnification is less than 1, this formula could result in impossible fields of view.
Thank you!!! I've only just recently started astrophotography as a hobby. Some of the things people say in forums about sensor pixel size seemed wrong to me. I just didn't know how to prove it without just doing AB comparisons of photos using different sensors on my own... and to be frank, it's going to take me a few years before I have both the skill and equipment to prove what I wanted to prove... but here you are casually explaining the math which confirms what I suspected! And not only that, because of your explanation now I understand WHY they say what they say about pixel size (and why what they say has some merit, even if it's not quite true)! I can't tell you how excited I am to have seen this.
I’m so glad you appreciate it, these concepts are not easy to explain
I hope you have deep pockets. Im all spent out
You have the best and most concise explanations of the theories are facts one needs to know in order to make all these decisions. I don’t think anybody else explains it like this probably cause they don’t think people are gonna look at math anyway I loved it. keep doing great work
thank you! In fact I am even doubting most people look at the math but I am so happy some people do!
very clearly explained with great examples regarding the calculation!
thanks I'm glad you found it easy to follow!