Second shot at astrophotography

[Mike Jordan]

Toruonu, you are making your life harder by using a 300mm lens. With the 300mm (not even considering the teleconverter) your lens is only seeing a small part of the sky. Because of this, the stars are shooting by that much faster, causing you to take shorter pictures to keep the movement down, which reduces the amount of light that hits your sensor, reducing the number of stars you will capture. Plus, you are going to have to pin point exactly where you want to shoot each time, as a lot of the really deep space stuff isn't very viewable with the necked eye with any amount of light polution around.

If you want to shoot with a long lens, buy a telescope and put a CCD camera on it and get some of the really fantastic shots you see.

But honestly, if you shoot with a 50mm or wider, you will find you will get a lot better images than you will with the 300mm. You will be able to take longer shots with no movement, allowing you to get deeper shots.

Another consideration, the motorized mounts that will take a heavier telescope or a camera with a heavier lens, are going to cost more than those that will take a lighter setup.

Mike

 

[Mike Jordan]

Oh, I shoot all raw as well. There is stacking software that will do all the work. Remember that the stars don't just move, the also rotate around the Polar Star. So to line them up you have to slide and rotate the images. With a narrower field of vision of a 300mm lens, you won't have as much room to play with as you will with a wider field of vision of a 50mm or so.

Mike

 

[toruonu]

Mike: Well I do shoot also with 18-55mm lens But with that lens Andromeda would look like a small blurry spot These two techniques are not mutually exclusive, I just have to change lenses depending on which mood I'm in

I do know about the motion of the stars as I'm actually a physicist and teach astrophysics at a local university But at the moment I'm just experimenting around with my photo equipment. I can always go to the local observatory with great telescope and CCD-s, but I also like to experiment with home made techniques to see what I can squeeze out of it

Thanks all for your answers, I will investigate into the stacking softwares as I did take a number of series shots that night.

PS! Mike, what stacking software will take Canon camera RAW files and stack them?

 

[Mike Jordan]

My apologies, Toruonu. From the posts I read, it seemed like you were someone just starting out and hadn't done this very long. I can see that you are way beyound any help I can give you.

I don't know of any software that will stack raw images directly. AstroStack is the one that seems to be used a lot. It will do video and individual jpeg images (and a couple of other formats). I've not used it yet and just done my stacking in Photoshop using the layering method. If I get to the point of trying to stack a bunch of images I plan on getting the program and using it. Here is the link to it: http://www.astrostack.com/

Mike

 

[PlasticSpanner]

I do know about the motion of the stars as I'm actually a physicist and teach astrophysics at a local university But at the moment I'm just experimenting around with my photo equipment. I can always go to the local observatory with great telescope and CCD-s, but I also like to experiment with home made techniques to see what I can squeeze out of it

You're very welcome here!

I think astrophotography is a seperate field from astronomy and normal photography and even more differnt from CCD imaging through a telescope! There is still a lot of room for initiative and innovation to produce both interesting, composed shots and scientificly accurate shots (photo observation records)

Let us know how you get on with your Haig Mount! I must get the axe out and make myself one before winter nights really set in!:thumbup:

 

[PlasticSpanner]

I can see that you are way beyound any help I can give you.

I wouldn't say that!

Your point about the tele lens is quite valid and unless you apply the same criteria to the lens as you would a refracting telescope you'd be spending a hell of a lot of money! :shock: Digital may also be the limiting factor here as I use a 50mm (sometimes 70mm) with film and scan at a painfully high resolution so I can crop and zoom in if I want to!

Also even as soon as you say the above quote you mention a software package I had completely forgoten about! Is there one called AstroArt as well?:thumbup:

 

[toruonu]

Mike: Sorry if my post seemed offensive It wasn't ment so You can all help me as there is a lot different in using ordinary camera versus a telescope with tracking and CCD

And of course all the software tricks in PS or in any other software packages to get the best composed images It's one thing messing with FITS images and it's a totally different thing messing with RAW and JPEG images

But yeah, astrophysics isn't my main subject I'm actually working as a research scientist in the field of high energy physics (particle colliders)

 

[PlasticSpanner]

But yeah, astrophysics isn't my main subject I'm actually working as a research scientist in the field of high energy physics (particle colliders)

I kinda do that too! Ever noticed that when you strike a real stone slab with a steel hammer it smells like the dentists!

Back on topic now!