Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Torbjörn Tapani on October 05, 2014, 07:54:27 am
-
Nice article!
I have the same iOptron Skytracker v2 which I use with my D800E. One thing that bugs me that I havent resolved yet is the ballhead mounted on the Skytracker. I think the ballhead would be better turned upside down. You almost always end up wanting to point the camera in a direction where the dropslot will be in the wrong orientation. You will want to have the pan base under the quick release. I think a Novoflex Magic ball could work better than a regular ballhead as well. This problem is made worse for me at a highter latitude (65-67 degrees north!). Ballheads are just not designed to be mounted almost vertically :)
-
The drop-slot on the Acratech can rotate 180 degrees, so this isn't a problem with that head.
Michael
Show us some of your AstraTrack images.
-
Not much to show. First thing I tried last year was a stack of the Andromeda galaxy. 70-200/2.8 at f/4, 30 seconds ISO 800.
But my main use would be astroscapes like in the second image. One exposure with foreground and one with tracker for the sky.
-
Andromeda is high on my list. Regrettably we've now have had 10 cloudy nights in a row, and a full moon for the next little while.
Damn moon.
Michael
-
The andromeda galaxy is good to play with on a dark night. This one was 15 stacked images plus dark images. A really dark sky would also be nice. This was taken and around 9:00 PM and Andromeda was still fairly low in the sky and competing with the lights of Kelowna. The image was processed in image stacker from raw files (D90) and the resulting 32 bit file processed in PS. Night time photography brings out the worst in your lenses, hence the haze.
When using my star tracker I try to ensure that the tripod base is as level as possible. I use the bubble level on the smart phone to level it. There is also a program called polarfinder that helps you locate polaris in the polar scope according to the time of day. This makes tracking much more accurate. So with an 80-200@200mm, with 25 second exposures, there was little movement between frames
The other image is best taken with a fast lens 4000 ISO 14mm 2.8 20 sec with a D7100. Not as good as a full frame but not bad compared to other cameras. A judicious use of a gradient filter in lightroom keeps the campfire in the foreground in check.
-
Hi,
I find this market is served with many options for entry level tracking systems in that price range. Personally, I would find it difficult to make a choice here.
Here are just a few examples starting with the iOPtron Sky Tracker.:
https://www.ioptron.com/index.cfm?select=productdetails&phid=6b0da2fb-2294-4805-bdcb-e534af12c1e2 (https://www.ioptron.com/index.cfm?select=productdetails&phid=6b0da2fb-2294-4805-bdcb-e534af12c1e2)
http://www.astrotrac.com/Default.aspx?p=tt320x-ag (http://www.astrotrac.com/Default.aspx?p=tt320x-ag)
http://www.losmandy.com/starlapse.html (http://www.losmandy.com/starlapse.html)
http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html (http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html)
-
When I got my tracker I compared the same systems. The first really compact tracker was the Vixen Polarie and it is very similar to the iOptron Skytracker in shape and design but require an additional head and polar scope is optional (more $$$). With the Skytracker you have the geared wedge built in and it comes with polar scope. The Skytracker has only one speed (two directions for north and south hemisphere). The Vixen Polarie has some extra settings for tracking sky, moon, sun and so on. This could be useful if you plan on using it as a simple pan head for a timelapse.
The Astrotrac is probably more sturdy with higher load capacity and very accurate tracking. You have to reset the screw that turns the arm after 2 hours and it seemed a little less compact to me.
The Losmandy starlapse is basically half a equatorial mount with the same part as their telescope mounts. Weight goes up but it can be operated like a GOTO bascially and if you buy the other half it is a complete mount. Too heavy and cumbersome to bring along all the time. I think you would be better served getting a complete mount for a small telescope, probably cheaper as well.
Edit: actually the SkyTracker has two speed settings. Sidereal rate and 1/2 sidereal if you accept some smearing of both sky and ground objects. Maybe good for 30 sec on a very wide lens. I don't use it.
-
The Astrotac seems to be a pretty appealing option as well. The learning curve seems a bit steeper from a quick read of comments online though.
All that is very tempting... just need to find clera and dark skies. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Astrotrac is bulky, but if you are diligent about setting up, you can get reasonably good results with a 400mm lens at 1 minute the very first time I set up the Astrotrac - I was floored. I hadn't really meant to do anything seriously at 400mm but I wanted to see what the Astrotrac could do, and was impressed to get "round stars". Admittedly, I was very fussy about setting declination as best I could, and setting up Polaris within the Astrotrac sight accessory (highly recommended - setting up by eye could be a PITA).
-
I feel Michael's pain concerning clear dark skies. We have good dark skies about 2.5 hours away in the middle of the National Forests and Wilderness Areas in the Ozarks, but we don't have great weather in Missouri. Here's a low-res photo for a screen show, non-tracked, stars layer at 21mm f/2.8 20 sec ISO3200, from an ancient volcanic elevation about 300 feet above its surroundings - good dark sky for 90 min drive from town. The rocks were light-painted and layers merged. The rocks are igneous and are about 1.6 billion years old, the cracking makes the "mountain" look like a big brickyard, once called "Devil's Honeycomb" (see "Devil's Causeway" in Ireland for same phenomenon of cracking while cooling down).
-
I feel Michael's pain concerning clear dark skies. We have good dark skies about 2.5 hours away in the middle of the National Forests and Wilderness Areas in the Ozarks, but we don't have great weather in Missouri. Here's a low-res photo for a screen show, non-tracked, stars layer at 21mm f/2.8 20 sec ISO3200, from an ancient volcanic elevation about 300 feet above its surroundings - good dark sky for 90 min drive from town. The rocks were light-painted and layers merged. The rocks are igneous and are about 1.6 billion years old, the cracking makes the "mountain" look like a big brickyard, once called "Devil's Honeycomb" (see "Devil's Causeway" in Ireland for same phenomenon of cracking while cooling down).
I have just opted for the Astrotrac. We'll see what we get.
Your (otherwise very nice) image tells me that merging the sky with the landscape below it is probably one of the 2 major challenges here. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yep, my first attempt at layers in Photoshop, so it's crude, to say the least. ::) I have to get out of the Lightroom rut someday.... I figure that this image pair will be good for some more learning - which is why I love photography, something new to learn every day.
http://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/places-go/natural-areas/hughes-mountain
-
Yep, my first attempt at layers in Photoshop, so it's crude, to say the least. ::) I have to get out of the Lightroom rut someday.... I figure that this image pair will be good for some more learning - which is why I love photography, something new to learn every day.
Indeed, photography is a moving target. The scope of the images that be created is pretty much limited only by our own mind.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I lean towards the astrotrack as well. Of course all these entry level systems have several limitations, but for nightscapes they seem to work just fine.
Achieving stars without the "egg look" at 400mm sounds very good Nancy!
As for clear skies, and for you folks in Canada/US and Mexico this tool here looks useful.
http://cleardarksky.com/csk/index.html#chart_list (http://cleardarksky.com/csk/index.html#chart_list)
Plenty of data available, such as Algonquin Michael. :)
http://cleardarksky.com/c/AROONkey.html?1 (http://cleardarksky.com/c/AROONkey.html?1)
-
I have just opted for the Astrotrac. We'll see what we get.
Hi Bernard,
Looking forward to your findings.
I have had my eye on that one as well, for a long time. It's just that the local seeing conditions are terrible in one of the most light polluted countries in the world, and that's where I happen to be located.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi Bernard,
Looking forward to your findings.
I have had my eye on that one as well, for a long time. It's just that the local seeing conditions are terrible in one of the most light polluted countries in the world, and that's where I happen to be located.
That's indeed going to be the problem.
There are places in Japan with very little light pollution, but winter time is probably the best and those get pretty cold at night (rarely warmer than -10C).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
cleardarksky is invaluable for sites in North America. I would think that the astronomical societies in Japan would have good local information about sites with astronomical seeing reports.
-
Some of the user reviews for the iOptron SkyTracker are less than laudatory on the vendor sites. Folks complain mainly about sub-par built quality and lack of attention to detail requiring user modifications to gain stability. How do the users here feel about this? I am trying to make a decision between the Vixen Polarie and the Skytracker. Thanks...
-
Another option with these small tracking mounts is to purchase an astro camera and couple to a camera lens.
The advantage being you had record H-alpha light more efficiently and the camera is cooled.
The attached image is of the Rho Ophiuchi comples around Antares.
Camera: QHY 8L running at -30C. Stacked 8 exposures @ 5minutes each plus calibration images (flats, darks and bias)
I was using my Zeiss 135mm APO @ f2.8.
-
Another option with these small tracking mounts is to purchase an astro camera and couple to a camera lens.
The advantage being you had record H-alpha light more efficiently and the camera is cooled.
The attached image is of the Rho Ophiuchi comples around Antares.
Camera: QHY 8L running at -30C. Stacked 8 exposures @ 5minutes each plus calibration images (flats, darks and bias)
I was using my Zeiss 135mm APO @ f2.8.
Beautiful Dave! That is really an interesting option you shared here.
Did you use a narrow band 12nm filter?
-
Beautiful Dave! That is really an interesting option you shared here.
Did you use a narrow band 12nm filter?
No filters used. The QHY 8pro is a colour camera APS-C ccd and no filters used with this image. Similar results can be obtained with a modified DSLR.
My next camera will be a astro mono with a computerised 8 filter wheel so I can shoot LRGB and 5nm narrow band. Well that's the plan :D
I use PixInsight to do the processing to the .fits files.
Dave
-
Andromeda is high on my list. Regrettably we've now have had 10 cloudy nights in a row
Feels like 10 months in a row here. Ironically I moved to Sheffield to study Astronomy.
-
There are places in Japan with very little light pollution, but winter time is probably the best and those get pretty cold at night (rarely warmer than -10C).
Warmth and good shooting conditions tend to be mutually exclusive. :-\
-
This coming evening is the first really clear night here in a couple of weeks. There is also no moon, at least until moonrise at 9:50pm. Astro darkness begins at about 8:30pm. It's not even that cold yet.
So, I should have near perfect conditions for deep sky shooting for about 90 minutes. We'll see.
Michael
-
Good luck with that. Astro photography requires even more patience that normal photography.
-
Very true. Not at all uncommon to have one shot at capturing an event. Then you find that you somehow nudged the focus ever so slightly. Then when you are all set again frost on the bulbous front element... Oh well. I can try the Geminids again this year. But then it's a very bright moon... Sigh.
-
Another really useful article on LuLa.
I have been doing mostly the moon with a 10" dob. An option is to take many short exposure shots then use software to grade then stack the best images. The software can compensate for rotation as well as tracking.
You still need a solid mount.
You still need a good (preferably FF) chip.
The free registax is worth trying out. You can always move up the software food chain later if you really enjoy being out at night.
The camera in the article is obviously top of the line for this work. You can also use a smaller chip if you rely on a big scope to gather the light. For example I can shoot the moon on APSC ISO100 at 1/500th ETTR (Sony A55 with mirror flipped up) or the same 1/500th with the Nikon D600. Of course the 10" mirror is gathering the light.
Using a regular lens, you already know what exposure you need for the black sky. With a big scope, the Milky way, ISO1600 which is very clean on D600; you can shoot 1/100 to 1/25th (whatever you like really) then let the software super sample the frames to take you to ETTR. A good tracking mount for a big scope gets pricy.
Whatever gear you try, the limitation will likely be your tolerance for cold nights or hot summer mosquito nights.
Edit: link to registax align page - http://www.astronomie.be/registax/previewv6-1.html
-
That is really wonderful, Dave.
-
I really like Michael's Andromeda galaxy photo, taken with the relatively simple Pentax Z + 120/4 lens + SkyTracker outfit. This is one good way to get started with astrophotography IMO. I'm seriously thinking about getting a SkyTracker myself and doing some longer-exposure astro stuff this winter with an A7r + Zeiss 100/2 (Y/C mount) combo. Keep it compact & light.
-Dave-
-
Dave,
You beat me to mention that I just published a Phlog entry today titled Andromeda (http://www.luminous-endowment.org/pages/phog17.html).
It includes a downloadable 3MB version of the image that people can print for themselves.
Michael
-
Dave,
You beat me to mention that I just published a Phlog entry today titled Andromeda (http://www.luminous-endowment.org/pages/phog17.html).
It includes a downloadable 3MB version of the image that people can print for themselves.
Michael
Thanks, Michael! It'll be interesting to print this.
-
There is a happy medium ISO that does analog gain but don't decrease dynamic range so much. You want to be able to differentiate between values in dim objects (andromeda) without saturating bright objects (stars) so much. With a D800 there is little point going above ISO1600, you can do the rest of the scaling in post. It would be interesting to see what the 645Z sensor does with increasing ISO. With stacking you can increase S/N ratio in dim parts without saturating stars so much or at all. Then it is possible to push the resulting 32-bit file a lot more in post.
-
I've downloaded Nebulosity (I use Mac) and as soon as I have clear skies again will experiment with stacking. Unfortunately, the forecast here is for 5 straight days of rain.
Michael
-
I've downloaded Nebulosity (I use Mac) and as soon as I have clear skies again will experiment with stacking. Unfortunately, the forecast here is for 5 straight days of rain.
Michael
I just spent two days standing in the damn stuff and discovered my waterproof socks are not what they claim. :-\
Currently looking for waterproof shoes and 3/4 shorts for biking and they are mostly not in stock yet. Apparently not quite the season!!?? ???
A bit dumb as it can rain so much it floods at just about any month of the year in the UK, July being particularly bad in recent years and October is usually when it's both cold and wet and when you would expect Winter ear to have been in for a while.
Though we did just have the driest September ever, preceded by the wettest Jan-July ever.
-
First attempt this Sunday with the Astrotrac TT-320X-AG.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5611/15583505405_bc0e509b4a_o.jpg)
I found locating Polaris easier than I thought it would be thanks to the iPhone app Starmap Pro. It did validate what I thought was Polaris and made the whole experience less "stressful".
I found it a bit challenging to adjust the position of Polaris in the Polar scope with my RRS large ball head, but it can be done.
I used the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art at 2.8 on the D810. With a 4 mins exposure at ISO 1600 I don't see much of a trail behind stars, so things seem to work fairly well. Beginner's luck I guess.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
First attempt this Sunday with the Astrotrac TT-320X-AG.
Looks good. How are the overall seeing conditions where you're at? I can get away from the worst of the Detroit area's light pollution with a 30-mile drive northwest, but from my backyard—where I'd prefer to set up in colder weather—there's an annoying amount of "base fog" to contend with.
-Dave-
-
First attempt this Sunday with the Astrotrac TT-320X-AG.
[...]
I found it a bit challenging to adjust the position of Polaris in the Polar scope with my RRS large ball head, but it can be done.
Hi Bernard,
That's why a geared head is often used for polar alignment, and another (ball-)head for camera positioning. But the image seems to look good. So that part of the challenge seems to be covered, now comes the challenge to practice on locations with interesting landscapes.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Looks good. How are the overall seeing conditions where you're at? I can get away from the worst of the Detroit area's light pollution with a 30-mile drive northwest, but from my backyard—where I'd prefer to set up in colder weather—there's an annoying amount of "base fog" to contend with.
Dave,
Tokyo is totally useless. I was up north and it seems excellent. I was very tired after an intensive day of shooting and settle for an easily accessible location accessible on foot from the lodge with some lights in the vicinity, but a 1 km drive would have taken me to an apparently totally dark location. Even where I was the milky way was visible with the naked eye.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That's why a geared head is often used for polar alignment, and another (ball-)head for camera positioning. But the image seems to look good. So that part of the challenge seems to be covered, now comes the challenge to practice on locations with interesting landscapes.
Bart,
Yes, I was aware it was not the perfect head, but I use the ball head for my general shooting with pano gear. After all these years of hesitating, I may have to finally invest in an Arca cube C1 I guess. ;)
You are totally right, I need to improve on 2 axis:
- Identification of suitable landscape spots. There was a great one nearby I was considering, but a day light recon revealed that trees obstruct Polaris...
- Better knowledge of the sky (what to look for, seasonal aspects,...).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bart,
Yes, I was aware it was not the perfect head, but I use the ball head for my general shooting with pano gear. After all these years of hesitating, I may have to finally invest in an Arca cube C1 I guess. ;)
While nice engineering, it's probably overkill for the purpose. Many people who use the Astrotac report success with a Manfrotto 410 Junior Geared Head (rated for a 5kg payload). I have a Manfrotto 405 Geared Head (rated for a 7.5 kg payload) with a Heynar Arca Swiss Clamp replacement, which may be overkill for lighter camera/lens combinations but still very much more affordable than a 'cube'.
You are totally right, I need to improve on 2 axis:
- Identification of suitable landscape spots. There was a great one nearby I was considering, but a day light recotrees obstruct Polaris...
- Better knowledge of the sky (what to look for, seasonal aspects,...).
I agree there is a learning curve involved, and practice makes perfect, but there will remain to be challenges. No visibility on Polaris is a big issue, but then we may also combine/composite two images. One image with attractive foreground, and one with unobstructed sky (from a nearby location if we want to stay true to the truth).
Actually getting the images in the first place is obviously the first step of creating beautiful final images, it's a process.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I agree there is a learning curve involved, and practice makes perfect, but there will remain to be challenges. No visibility on Polaris is a big issue, but then we may also combine/composite two images. One image with attractive foreground, and one with unobstructed sky (from a nearby location if we want to stay true to the truth).
Actually getting the images in the first place is obviously the first step of creating beautiful final images, it's a process.
Bart,
Thanks, I am starting to get a feel for the kind of commitment it requires. ;)
It can definitely not be an after thought. The logistics of the whole trip must be managed taking into account the additional opportunity to capture such night images and the identification of shooting locales must take into account that extra constraint which is clear view to the North.
Sounds like fun! :P
You raise an interesting philosophical point about the truthness of such image assembling techniques. Being a stitcher, I have no morale problems with composing images from sub frames, but assembling 2 parts of an image captured from different locations (albeit possibly close) is something I have never considered doing. But the again, why not indeed?
Regards,
Bernard
-
Though I haven't written anything about it yet, I have become immersed the passed few weeks in astrophotography. While the iOptron is great for travel, I got the hots for something more substantial. I've since bought a Vixen SXD2 German Equatorial mount with Skybook 10 (http://www.optcorp.com/vixen-sxd2-w-starbook-10-and-tripod.html).
A week of overcast skies and rain has prevented any serious work, but today promises the beginning of several days and nights of clear skies.
By the way, the learning curve on doing serious astronomic photography is very steep. But I'm enjoying climbing the hill.
I'll be writing all about it eventually.
Michael
-
Though I haven't written anything about it yet, I have become immersed the passed few weeks in astrophotography. While the iOptron is great for travel, I got the hots for something more substantial. I've since bought a Vixen SXD2 German Equatorial mount with Skybook 10 (http://www.optcorp.com/vixen-sxd2-w-starbook-10-and-tripod.html).
Wow, that's really something else than simply convenient for travel... On the other hand, with a load capacity of up to 50 pounds (including counterweights), you can use several cameras at the same time ..., as in stitched starry skies. A good stitcher can handle different focal lengths, so you do not need to match lenses (or even cameras) and parallax is not an issue at infinity.
A week of overcast skies and rain has prevented any serious work, but today promises the beginning of several days and nights of clear skies.
I hope you have clear skies and pleasant temperatures (also to avoid condensation).
By the way, the learning curve on doing serious astronomic photography is very steep. But I'm enjoying climbing the hill.
I'll be writing all about it eventually.
Enjoy the climb, I'm sure you will. Looking forward to reading about your findings.
It's one of those wonderful photographic subjects that allow us to better record things that we can hardly observe real time with our eyes. Pupil dilation will bring out the worst aberrations that our eyes have to offer, and sensitivity shifts to mostly luminance and color gets shifted to shorter wavelengths for the limited colors that we can still see.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Re: dew - first, use your lens hood. Next purchase, Michael, might be an anti-dew heater of some sort. There are ready-made solutions, essentially strips of modestly resistive covered wiring ("electric blanket") that wrap around the optical tube assembly and attach to a regulator and battery. You can make your own from plans on the internet and some odds and ends from Radio Shack. For camera lenses, you can improvise by wrapping one of those chemical hand-warmer packets around your lens - I haven't tried this yet, but plan to, because this is a really portable solution.
http://www.optcorp.com/telescope-accessories/dew-solutions-telescope-cooling/dew-controllers-heater-straps.html (for example)
-
While you're at Optcorp just get one of these http://www.optcorp.com/asa-800mm-ritchey-chretien-alt-az-telescope-nasmyth-focus-image-rotator.html :D
-
As someone who has done a lot of astrophotography over the years and also led several workshops, especially for beginners. It is the most difficult and frustrating type of photography to do. Also the equipment needed to do it well is also quite expensive. Michael will start on the madness of guiding soon, and that will lead to a large learning curve. Then cooled astronomy cameras are the next thing..... Setup needs to be done very accurately and signals are very low, compared to daylight photography.
Here is an image of mine from about 5 years ago, taken with a refractor at 420mm focal length f3.9, taken with an 11mp cooled ccd full frame camera, cooled to -20C, about 12.5 hours of exposure time, using 10 minute sub exposures through luminance, red, green, and blue filters, took 3 nights to get the full 12.5 hours of exposure time.
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090211.html
Each frame has to be downloaded after exposure, that takes about 50secs per image, resulting in a 16bit fits files, which then needs dark, bias, and flat frames subtracted. Then it all needs to be aligned, data rejection needs to be done(removal of spurious signals, like gamma ray hits, satellites, planes, etc.) then stacked and then processed as a color image and then edited.
The Orion nebula area has a large number of geosynchronous satellites that streak through the image, along with planes, etc.
A frustrating hobby but can be rewarding when everything works. Best advice, stay widefield, tracking requirements are lot less.
Alan
-
That's a very nice image Alan. It got me thinking. Has the field changed much in the last 5 years since that image? Meaning for the same level of investment in gear can you get different results today?
-
That's a very nice image Alan. It got me thinking. Has the field changed much in the last 5 years since that image? Meaning for the same level of investment in gear can you get different results today?
Thanks, the field has not changed a lot. There are some better high end mounts, but the prices are up there. Prices have gone up a lot. Some of the top of the line mounts are bordering on $15K and higher, scopes are higher because production costs are higher. I used a 5" refractor on that image, that I still use, and for a apochromatic is still north of $5k. As for cameras, there are bigger sensors but then few scopes have corrected image circles large enough and the ones that do are in the $10-30K and higher. You still face bigger problems with seeing conditions, the atmosphere is a huge issue, some nights the seeing is really bad and some nights it is good. Filter technology has not really changed, but bigger sensors require much larger filters. Narrow band filters are really expensive especially in large sizes. The two cameras I have, one is an 11mp full frame, and the other is a 8.3mp apsc sized sensor. There are some AO type devices on the market but they do not correct for seeing, they will correct of mount imperfections. Until we can generate our own guide stars and have truly bendable optics AO type devices are not really worth it except for cleaning up the mount.
The reality is there is not a tremendous amount that has changed in the last 5 years. Some change but not a lot and gotten more expensive.
It is a hobby that can make medium format photography seem inexpensive..... ;D
Alan
-
Ok thanks. So basically we are limited by seeing. So one could get used gear and still be doing OK. Something I'm interested in, someday.
-
While you're at Optcorp just get one of these http://www.optcorp.com/asa-800mm-ritchey-chretien-alt-az-telescope-nasmyth-focus-image-rotator.html :D
Looks like just the thing, except in won't fit inside the rear hatch of my Jeep. :)
Michael
-
Alan,
Thanks for your comments. Really lovely image in your link by the way. Congratulations!
I had a complete astro imaging setup about 15 years ago, when I had a cottage at a dark sky site in Northern Ontario. An 8" SCT, and SBIG CCD camera, filter wheel etc, all the toys.
But, ultimately I gave up. These were the days before DSLRs and GOTO scopes, and between the long set up times, need for a computer, mosquitoes, cold etc, etc I called it quits.
Now I have a country site, that while not as dark as Muskoka, still shows the Milky Way from almost the horizon to almost the horizon. There are two large towns about 20 miles to the north and 30 miles to the east which do cause some light pollution, but it's still pretty good.
There are almost no mosquitoes here because it is farm land, not forest...so much more tolerable.
The Vixen SXD2 with Starbook 10 is turning out to be a great choice for me. Light enough to carry outside if I feel like working for a few hours, yet rated to carry up to 50lbs. I'm mainly working with my Pentax 645z and lenses, and doing deep sky work, so that's not really an issue.
I'm doing 30 to 40 30-second stacks and getting excellent tracking. I have yet to do a PEC, though will the next good night.
I'm using Nebulosity3, which works well, though it has a bit of a learning curve (what doesn't)? I chose it because I'm on a Mac, and most other astro stacking programs are Windows only.
Yes, I have been bitten by the auto-guider bug. Again, there is an accessory board for the Starbook that takes an input from a guide scope / CCD, and so a computer isn't needed. The board and the guide scope/camera come to a bit over $1K, but I'm sorely tempted. First I have to get an external intervalometer (this week), because the Pentax 645z only allows automatic sequence shooting of 30 seconds max. My tracking at the moment is good enough for about 1 minute exposures at 400mm and obviously much longer at shorter focal lengths.
What's nice about stacking is that I can get a sequence going and then go in for dinner while it does its thing. I do my darks at the end of the evening while I'm tearing down, and the flats the next morning.
Lots of fun, and lots to learn, which is one of the things that I enjoy very much.
I'm working on an article that will describe my journey to date, and hope to have it online in a week or two.
Michael
-
First attempt this Sunday with the Astrotrac TT-320X-AG.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5611/15583505405_bc0e509b4a_o.jpg)
I found locating Polaris easier than I thought it would be thanks to the iPhone app Starmap Pro. It did validate what I thought was Polaris and made the whole experience less "stressful".
I found it a bit challenging to adjust the position of Polaris in the Polar scope with my RRS large ball head, but it can be done.
I used the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art at 2.8 on the D800. With a 4 mins exposure at ISO 1600 I don't see much of a trail behind stars, so things seem to work fairly well. Beginner's luck I guess.
Cheers,
Bernard
It looks good.
You might find a conditions chart like the following handy, even for regular photography.
http://cleardarksky.com/c/Calgarykey.html?1
The seeing conditions also impact far off mountains. I usually check the chart for the region I am shooting in. I try to go when conditions are good.
-
Alan,
Thanks for your comments. Really lovely image in your link by the way. Congratulations!
I had a complete astro imaging setup about 15 years ago, when I had a cottage at a dark sky site in Northern Ontario. An 8" SCT, and SBIG CCD camera, filter wheel etc, all the toys.
...
Lots of fun, and lots to learn, which is one of the things that I enjoy very much.
I'm working on an article that will describe my journey to date, and hope to have it online in a week or two.
Michael
Thanks a lot Michael, sounds like you are having fun and I look forward to reading about your exploits. I am lucky in that I belong to a club that has a dark sky site about 80 miles from where I live. I have an observatory and warming room there, so my equipment is setup on a permanent pier, all I have to do is roll the roof off and turn everything on. I can control it all from my warming room and have a place to stay warm during the winter and sleep and have a/c during the summer. It is at an altitude of 5000feet in the high desert environment, near Mt. Palomar, we get hot summer rains with lighting and an occasional bit of snow in the winter.
I have an Astrotrac, and a Vixen Polarie and I have used the Ioptron tracker. The Astrotrac I have their portable pier system and everything fits inside the pier for easy transport, it has by far the best tracking of the small portable units. The next best is the Polarie, the Ioptron had the worst periodic error of any of them. But is sounds like you are well on your way to more madness. ;D
Best of luck for your future astrophotography adventures.
Alan
-
I am lucky in that I belong to a club that has a dark sky site about 80 miles from where I live. I have an observatory and warming room there, so my equipment is setup on a permanent pier, all I have to do is roll the roof off and turn everything on. I can control it all from my warming room and have a place to stay warm during the winter and sleep and have a/c during the summer. It is at an altitude of 5000feet in the high desert environment...
Way cool Alan, I am jalous!
I would guess you have one of those high end Italian espresso machines as well? ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Way cool Alan, I am jalous!
I would guess you have one of those high end Italian espresso machines as well? ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
Ha! I can't afford it after the astronomy gear...... ;D
Alan
-
And then there are the UNFORESEEN problems...... ::)
I went to a likely site to do some astrolandscape shooting, also to experiment with some light painting. Hour and a half drive, perfect clear no-moon night, somewhat picky hike in, and I hiked the whole loop and backtracked to the best site around sunset. Found one person sitting there, I quietly set up tripod a few rocks away, he got up in a huff and moved off. Fine. Well, I am hanging around for about an hour waiting for the true dark, and just about the time that it is dark enough to start seeing decent number of stars, I hear someone yelling help, and noone else responding. So after a bit of yelling back and forth to find out what was up, it turns out that Grumpy had gotten himself lost. Because this location is a forest with complicated slot canyon and trees growing to the edge of the dropoff in a few places, I was concerned that he could make a disastrous mis-step, so I packed up and went down the trail towards the voice. I found an apologetic Grumpy at the edge of a safely descendable slope, and walked back to the parking lot with him. I didn't go back to the light-painting venue due to having found that my second light source had failed and I didn't have spare batteries on hand, just the single headlamp, so I just settled in a somewhat boring pine glade close to the parking lot, skipped the light painting (trees? meh), and had fun photographing. I think that the site is "green" on a Bortle dark scale, so I will be back with a large handful of extra headlamp and flashlight batteries.
-
I never do astro-pic-taking without also having a pair of binoculars handy. IMO there's at least as much enjoyment to be had from real-time direct observation as from the photos. My suggestion to anyone getting started with this stuff is to not over-complicate it.…keep it simple until you feel compelled to get more in-depth.
-Dave-
-
Yep, I like using my SkySafari phone app in red mode to get better at recognizing constellations quickly, it has a gyro function that aligns the star map in the direction you are pointing your phone. Is it possible to see Andromeda galaxy with the naked eye "straight on"? I tell myself I see something in the place where it ought to be "from the corner of my eye". I am starting big, with naked-eye observation and occasional 7x binocular use. GoTo scopes are all very well, but something in me just wants to start the old-fashioned way.
-
Binoculars are definitely a good start.
Always keep things simple in the beginning. Except if you're me, who dives in with both feet. :)
-
Is it possible to see Andromeda galaxy with the naked eye "straight on"? I tell myself I see something in the place where it ought to be "from the corner of my eye".
Yes it is, but your eyes need to be dark-adapted. :o It might be necessary to put the phone down for a while.
-
The phone app runs in red mode, where all text and images are dark red on black, and I have a red bulb on my headlamp also. I see a fuzzy something where Andromeda ought to be if I look slightly to the side of where it should be.
-
Bright red light can affect your night vision, but averted viewing like you are doing does help. As we get older the pupils shrink a bit so it makes it harder to see things at night then when we were younger.
Alan
-
In my mid 20s, when I lived in areas with good seeing, I could find the Andromeda galaxy quite easily on clear nights after getting acclimated to the dark. More recently, though, I've needed electronic help. A few weeks ago I spotted it from my driveway, light pollution & all, via an Olympus E-M1 EVF and Voigtländer 42.5/0.95 (at ~f/1.2). A very pleasant surprise! At 14x mag. with stabilization I could make out more structure than with my 10x50 binocs.
-Dave-
-
" As we get older the pupils shrink a bit so it makes it harder to see things at night then when we were younger."
I resemble that comment! :D That's probably why the standard 7 x 35 or 8 x 42 binoculars are "good enough" for me for astronomical observing, assuming my pupils reach ~5 mm dilation.