Astro-Photography

[Earl]

Most Astroimaging software is Canon based, its sort of fallen that way, although it is debatable if there are any benefits manufacturer over manufacturer.

It is a consideration.

 

[MWHCVT]

Most Astroimaging software is Canon based, its sort of fallen that way, although it is debatable if there are any benefits manufacturer over manufacturer.

It is a consideration.

That maybe due to the fact that canon have made a couple of astronomy specific DSLRs notably the current one being the Canon 60Da

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_60Da/

Edit:

Further to your question we don't have a dedicated section for Astro Photography though the question of having one was recently raised in the forum discussion section so who knows what the future may bring...I don't really have sufficient knowledge of the discipline so I'm not really able to guide you further..there are however some simply super Astro photographers on here who hopefully will be able to help you further

 

[Earl]

Yeah the 20da and 60da are a sort of half way house between a DSLR and a filter replaced DSLR, filter replacement giving better sensitivity to Ha.

Of course if you really want to get into it LRGB and mono cooled dedicated CCD's and lots more fun gubbins to get it all working is the way to go... a Black hole for the wallet

 

[mr.si]

Hi all,

I'm going to be getting an SLR in the not too distant future and am going to try my hand at things like the moon, some constellations and the milky way as well as nature photography and try and do macro too.

I'm thinking a useful all rounder would be something like the nikon d5100 as the body of choice

What are your thoughts?

 

[magicolor1]

Have a look at the Pentax Astrotracer. It's a GPS unit that links to certain Pentax DSLRs and uses their built-in sensor movements (normally used for cleaning the dust off) to track star movements over long exposures. Some of the results I've seen on the net look amazing, and if I was starting from scratch I'd be very tempted to give it a try.

 

[arad85]

am going to try my hand at things like the moon, some constellations and the milky way as well as nature photography and try and do macro too.

...

What are your thoughts?

Other than the planets (which require fast video cams and extreme focal lengths) you have mentioned the three areas of astrophotography that require different techniques. The moon is bright enough to just use a very long focal length lens, constellations are typically done with medium length fairly fast telescopes mounted on GEMs (German Equatorial Mount) and the milky way is fast, wide angle lenses, either on a tripod or a GEM.

Long exposure astrophotography is 90% mount, 8% skill and 2% camera. Be prepared to spend many thousands trying to get that great photo (I actually sold my telescope stuff and bought a full frame 5D2 as it was cheaper!!).

Also, http://www.stargazerslounge.com/ is the best resource for amateur astrophotography (or it was when I was doing it 3-5 years ago).

 

[mpe]

The choice of camera is not that important. For start you certainly don't need any specialised DSLRs (20Da, 60Da). In fact a very few astrophotographers, even the advanced ones actually use them. It is easier to modify generic camera by removing the filter (you'll typically lost correct day colours and also sensor cleaning functionality by doing so though, so better to sacrifice an older camera). However, strictly speaking H-alpha sensitivity is not that important for beginners, as there are still a lot of subjects that can be shoot by conventional unmodified camera. And when you reach the certain level, you'll probably want specialised non-bayer mono CCD chip rather than any DSLR...

As mentioned, the sturdy tripod and/or mount is essential and that's the key. HQ precise mounts can be way more expensive than DSLR bodies and lenses. An the next important point are post-processing skills and software. Canon users have advantage, but Nikon can be used as well with some caveats.

I use this simple kit from astrotrac (with conventional photo tripod, heads and Nikon gear)

 

[mr.si]

Thanks everyone for your replies. Yes they are quite different things I want to have a go at. I'm not interested, yet, in having a CCD cam as they are quite a step up from my current ability!

I like the idea of a flip out screen because it could prove handy, but as long as there's a decent live view I don't mind.

Software isn't much of a worry as I am a linux user and use gimp for post.

I will just stick an intervalometer on it and shoot in bulb mode and get a variety of lenses.

I will need to save up for an astrotrac or polarie.

But I will be using the camera for daytime photography stuff too. So as long as the noise performance isn't so bad in the dark, I will probably be happy!

 

[mpe]

Software isn't much of a worry as I am a linux user and use gimp for post.

You'll see, but you'll probably have to switch to something else.

In astrophotography, you need to process (stack, normalise, remove hotpixels, subtract dark/flat/offset images) in RAW format (eg. before RAW demosaicing). Only the very final part of the post-processing is being done in RGB editor. Therefore you need a specialised software, not just standard RAW converter and pixel editor. I am not sure if there is any working Linux/Gimp workflow.

Also, I have experimented with Gimp and have found UFRAW/dcRAW conversion lagging behind ACR/Lighroom or Apple RAW even for day pictures.

 

[Earl]

All image processing I have done for some time is with Pix Insight.

 

[Steve W]

Don't know about Nikon, but the Canon software to control the camera is brilliant.

I use my 450D attached to a refractor telescope on a mortised GEM mount. When taking photos of galaxies and other DSO's (deep sky objects) you need to take lots of photos of the same object.

I have an old laptop which has the Canon software on so I use the software to set exposure length and quantity of exposures. Once I start it off, I go inside and come back in a few hours when it's done.