July 24, 2014, 12:29:48 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - nubu

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Yes, its great! I only corrected the MFA for  my 5DIII  with 3 2 0 0 using sigma usb dock. Great lens -  my ef 50/1.2 went the ebay route ...

2
For me, as long time user of the classic dpp most changes are improvements and overall the performance esp. with the dlp modules. Two changes are not positive from my point of view:
- I really liked the old quick separate crop and rotation tool. It was much faster.
- Maybe connected to the loss of a separate crop and rotation tool crop and rotation is now also part
 of a recipe when copied from one pic to another. Meaning that if your pic contains cropping info this is copied to another pic  when coping the correction recipe! Before this was separated - which was much more flexible. Normaly cropping is someting very individual for a pic and not something like a whitbalance or nois reduction setting which typically applies to a sequence of pics...

nubu

PS: ... I had one crash so far with about 1000 pics developed.

3
For pictures of the nightsky without a tracking mount I would suggest to use a wideangle. You can include landscape and expose longer without trailing stars...

5
Waiting for the 35mm -  the 50mm on the 5D3 works perfect (AFMA 5,5,2,2). Very reliable focus und stunning sharpness even in critical astrophotography tests...

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Sigma 50/1.4 ART Astrophotography Test
« on: June 07, 2014, 12:18:10 PM »
I'm quite happy with my new sigma 50/1.4  art  now replacing the canon 50/1.2 in my collection. Use it on my 5D3 and 5D2 (astromod) bodies.

Wanna share my quick and personal test for the best aperture of my new Sigma 50/1.4 ART on my astro-modified canon eos 5D3. The pics are showing stripes (centre and below extreme corner lower right) with apertures from 5.6, 4, 2.8, 2, 1.4 with equivalent exposures between 160-10s. raw developed in DXO with vignetting and distortion switched off! My personal conclusion: vignetting invisible at 2.8, perfect sharpness and aberrations at 4.0 but already very good and quite usable for astro work at 2.8 - this is two stops better than my (now sold) 50/1.2 copy...

(the strange color comes from the UHC clip in filter and the high background)

pic 1: centre (5.6-1.4) , 100%
pic 2: corner (5.6-1.4) , 100%

7
Software & Accessories / Re: Batch process to fix missing EXIF data?
« on: June 02, 2014, 06:46:30 AM »
I use ExifToolGUI (  http://u88.n24.queensu.ca/~bogdan/ )  to run ExifTool in a nice GUI environment. It is quite efficient for mass editing of EXIF data.

For corresponding renaming using e.g. exif info I use: http://www.advancedrenamer.com/

cheers
nubu

8
Lenses / Re: Night Pollution Filter
« on: June 02, 2014, 04:54:39 AM »
It is true that clip in filters cannot be used with EF-s lenses because of their prodruding lens elements entering deeper into the body!

"you do need a longer exposure to get excellent results" I dont understand. That may be true for any filter you put in front or behind your lens and is NOT specific for clip in filters.The clip in filters have exactly the same effect of filters you would screw into your telescope...

One thing to note is for ALL interference filters is that their effect is light angle depending (because of the many layers they consist of and which have the wrong separation when looked at in a tilted manner)!. A consequence of this is their possible unevenness for wideangles when using them in front of the lens and for low focal ratio lenses when used behind the lens. Especially narrow band filters for e.g. Halpha should be bought somewhat broader when used in fast systems! The manufacturers state such limitation in their description!

9
Lenses / Re: Night Pollution Filter
« on: May 31, 2014, 08:08:56 AM »
I think you mean Light Pollution Filters?  The later are interference filters and quite costly in bigger sizes, so typically a good one for 2" is 200US$!  For this very reason Astronomik is producing clip in filters for Canon FF and APS-C bodies: http://www.astronomik.com/en/photographic-filters/cls-ccd-filter.html  They work very well and I use them a lot for all my primes from 14 to 500mm ...

10
Have contacted Canon now and they said that - on my own risk - it is possible to remove it by strong pulling it straight out without bending -> and it worked!!!!  Did not try to put it in again but it was not damaged...

11
To only turn only is not really an option since it does not save space. I really would like to fully remove them without cutting the rubber. If nobody knows an easy way I will have to call the canon service ...

12
Because I have the attach several cables under an L-bracked on a eos 5DII and 5DIII I wonder if I could remove the rubber terminal covers in a nondestructive way (to cut the rubber connectors would be easy) in order to save space...

Thanks for your input!

13
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 08:46:05 AM »
Sorry I forgot to make a note on Sky trackers which you excluded. This is only partly true even for pics including landscape!

 Modern systems have so called half speed modes correcting only have of earths rotation and by this also causing smearing problems in the landscape part later. So by this it is possible to gain some extra photons on both the landscape and the starry sky ... Examples are: http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html or the by me preferred: http://www.ioptron.com/index.cfm?select=productdetails&phid=cffad01a-797c-4cf4-beb8-a64bc8e09b06  (its the more complete package for a better price)

14
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 08:37:50 AM »
... Again I'm looking at the widest aperture possible, because of the noise. ...

Astrophotographers beat noise by exposure time (stacking of many indv. exposures) and not open aperture!
It is much easier and cheaper to double exposure times than to double apertures! Only in special cases (astrophotography incl. landscape or moving phenomena like aurora) one fully opens up to have the shortest exposure times possible....  I fully agree that manual focus is perfectly o.k. since compared to any meaningful exposure time the manual focusing time with e.g. live view in 10x mode is negligible. In the analog times it was much harder with test images or knife edge focusing....

15
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 20, 2013, 08:21:43 AM »
Stars are the hardest test for chromatic abberations, coma and astigmatism. Moreover, in more light polluted areas vignetting is quite obvious. Whereas I will not question the high quality of the Zeiss optics (had many of them in my analog Contax time) wide open is not an option if you want high quality results. This link is somewhat outdated but still valid for its basic message: http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/LENSES.HTM

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5