Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 19-March-2008, 12:07 AM
spaceboy0 spaceboy0 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 169
Default Is a tripod more stable unextended?

I've developed some of my Moon photos and still have some camera jitter. I use a 200 mm with a 2 x lens and the craters along ther terminator still look a bit blurry.

I used ASA 200 film. Am I better off with ASA 100?

I stopped it down to f/8 like suggested and used between 1/60 sec and 1/1000 sec as suggested.

I have a SLIK 5000 tripod. Cost about $ 50. If I just photograph in the tripod's smallest position (legs unextended), will this get rid of the jitter effect?
Is the tripod more stable when it's down on the ground rather than legs extended and up higher?

Or is the difference not noticable?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 19-March-2008, 01:25 AM
JustAFriend JustAFriend is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 750
Default

Yes. Shorter legs (unextended) will help with shake.

You can see this yourself with any optical device, just look at a distant object (daytime may help) and tap on the leg. Look to see how long the shake last.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 19-March-2008, 02:39 AM
ctcoker ctcoker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: A short drive from Orion
Posts: 64
Default

JustAFriend covered your question, but just for an explanation of why this is so, when the tripod's legs are unextended, its center of mass is lower than when the legs are extended. Thus, when the tripod is hit by wind, for example, there is a larger torque on the tripod and camera/scope with legs extended, as for a given amount of force applied to an object, torque increases as the lever arm increases (the tripod feet are the fulcrums).

As for film ISO's (ASA's), the lower the ISO, the less sensitive it is to light. A higher ISO will yield a shorter exposure than a lower ISO, if all other parameters are the same. However, IIRC, the higher the ISO, the grainier the film. I hope that helps.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 19-March-2008, 03:33 AM
fotobits fotobits is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 85
Default

Part of it is the tripod, and part is the 2x convertor. You didn't say what kind of lens you're using either. If it is a zoom, especially a slow zoom, you're only setting yourself up for disappointment.

Quite frankly, Slik tripods are pieces of crap, and 2x convertors will make even the best lens yield soft results under ideal circumstances. Slap a 2x convertor on a typical consumer zoom, then mount it on a cheap tripod and you get blurry photos every time.

Even if you use a Canon 200/2.8L lens and Canon 2x convertor on a monster Bogen tripod you'll get soft photos.
__________________
"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 24-March-2008, 03:54 AM
Mr Q's Avatar
Mr Q Mr Q is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Edgewood, New Mexico
Posts: 175
Default

Spaceboy0 - I agree with the others who posted replies and would like to add one more comment. Once the exposure has started, any movement you make with your feet will set up vibrations in the tripod legs, thus ruining your shot. Silk tripods are junk- I too tried one years ago for nature photography and even with the legs collapsed, most of the shots were bad due to vibrations on the camera. Mr Q
__________________
What goes around, comes around, eventually.

Meade DS-10 (10" newt)
10x50, 10x70 binos
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Y Ellipse more stable orbit than Circle? Rob513264 Questions and Answers 9 20-June-2007 09:18 AM
Can 10x50 binoculars be held steady without a tripod? Tucson_Tim Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories 13 05-May-2007 02:07 AM
Zero G at the centre of the Earth? Sticks General Science 107 14-February-2007 03:51 PM
Would moons of gas giants have stable axes of revolution? Frog march Questions and Answers 1 06-September-2005 03:46 PM
Questions about tripod purchase? offset Astronomy 11 19-August-2004 09:37 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today