Messages

1

Software & Accessories / Re: question for RRS/Acratech (high-end) ballhead users

« on: May 22, 2013, 06:03:31 PM »

For visual use it may work with your C6 but you might want to consider something better suited for your application.  AP is definitely out of the question.  What is the weight of the largest EP you will be using with the C6?

It's just for visual.  At the same time I have a 60D and C8 on a CG5 shooting fuzzies and galaxies.  I put a 40mm or 25mm in the C6 for folks that want to see the moon or Saturn or whatever.  If it's a very clear night I'll put a 4inch f/5 refractor on there instead.  I was using a Mini-Hitch but sold it and bought the Acratech GP, which is more useful for non-astro photography.  Public stargazes are about the only time the C6 comes out, it was a package deal with the CG5 but otherwise, although it's a fine scope, I just don't have a tremendous amount of use for it.  The small refractor works quite well, I'll probably end up sticking with that and sell the C6.

2

Software & Accessories / Re: question for RRS/Acratech (high-end) ballhead users

« on: May 22, 2013, 12:58:58 PM »

Seemed like an appropriate thread in which to ask this....

Acratech GP owners - what is the heaviest weight you would be comfortable using in the gimbal position?  I plan to use a C6 telescope on it for views of the the moon and planets during public stargazes.  The scope weighs in at 10-11 lbs and the center of gravity is farther from the ball than a camera/lens combo would be, but the ballhead does not seem to be straining with the weight.  It's a featherweight ballhead but I think that may be deceptive.

3

Software & Accessories / Re: Flickr is now 1 Terabytes!! For everyone!!

« on: May 21, 2013, 01:22:18 PM »

I've used Pbase for years....no complaints.  Strictly a hobbyist, though.

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What equipment to bring to get the stars

« on: May 17, 2013, 03:02:32 PM »

I've used a 40D for night sky time lapse a number of times, I spent years doing astrophotograpy with film and do NOT miss film AT ALL.

Tokina 11-16/2.8 (usually set to 3.5).  RokSamBow 14 would be a nice substitute.
ISO 1600 (3200 is noisy), Raw. 
WB either daylight or custom, gets tweaked in PP anyway.      The kinda brownish tinge you can see from long exposures in non-light polluted areas is really the color of the night sky, it seems jet black to our eyes because we can't detect the color and our brain expects it to be black.  The camera doesn't lie.  Incandescent WB can counteract that but affects star colors.

15 seconds exposure, 5 seconds off, yielding 3 exposures per minute
25 seconds exposure, 5 seconds off, yielding 2 exposures per minute
   Off times allow for image saving to card and help a bit to keep sensor heating down
17mm f4 should let you get away with 25 second exposures easily, I'd be more concerned with the IQ of the lens wide open
PP in Lightroom.  A free program that can also be used is Startrails....but you're shots will have to be good, it doesn't do any tweaking, just generates a video or a startrail shot

Hands down, the single toughest issue I have is dew on the lens, it has ruined more sequences than anything else.  Have fun, but understand it can be a gateway to motorized mounts, telescopes and other appurtenances that will suck the life out or your wallet and nights.  Sure is enjoyable, though.....

5

Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?

« on: May 16, 2013, 09:37:37 AM »

I suppose another answer to the question could be....."When Sigma or Tamron release one".   At which time that 'amazing clip' of sales could slow. 
</sarcasm (not directed toward CR)>
<coffee>

6

Lenses / Re: One lens for vacation

« on: May 12, 2013, 02:43:50 AM »

None of the above.  Bring a Pentax Optio WG-2.  You could let the kids use it also with no worries.

7

Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software

« on: May 07, 2013, 09:48:13 AM »

As a hobbyist, I use GIMP but prefer Photoshop.  PS will no longer run on my laptop for unknown reasons, but both PS7 (10+ years old?) and CS2 run fine on my desktop.  I've only started using Lightroom (3.2) in the past year and will purchase LR4, but it looks like my Photoshop days will be drawing to a close.  Frankly, I'll miss it.  Adobe is not the 900lb gorilla in the room....it's the only gorilla, but it is soon to be priced beyond practicality for me.  For pro's and artists, it is the cost of doing business and may make more sense.  I would pay $10/mo. for LR but would prefer an annual subscription for less than 120/yr.  Guess we'll see how things work out, but without any real competition Adobe can do what they want for now.

8

Reviews / Re: Review - Google Glass

« on: May 04, 2013, 01:52:38 AM »

So here's another thought - this may be the fantastic street camera..

Along those lines...I often find myself wondering how a particular scene was shot in a film and enjoy watching a documentary showing how it was done.  I'm not talking special effects type scenes, just those that make you wonder "How did they do that?"  Glass would seem to be a useful tool for that type of work.

9

Reviews / Re: Review - Google Glass

« on: May 03, 2013, 05:08:35 PM »

.....but how well does it take a 1.4xIII extender? 

10

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 compatibility with future canon cameras

« on: May 03, 2013, 05:06:35 PM »

I'm reminded of the videotape recording development days.  IIRC, many manufacturers had agreed on the 8mm format, then Sony jumped the gun with Betamax.  JVC's VHS format was technically inferior to Beta, but JVC had the sense to license other manufacturers to use the VHS format for a small royalty/licensing fee.  Sony did not follow that business model with Beta and it died rather quickly.  As my income and demands change, I buy L lenses if I can and the best 3rd party lenses when I can't justify the expense - even if I can afford it (hobbyist, not pro).  I'm not certain Canon would lose a significant amount of sales if they set up a royalty/licensing arrangement with Sigma/Tamron/Tokina for autofocus/aperture control in lenses.  AF on my old Sigma 400/5.6 works fine but not aperture.  For the limited amount of use it sees I'm content to be stuck at 5.6, I just don't use it often enough to warrant replacement with the Canon, though in that case it has little to do with price.  If price was not a factor, I'd be shooting Zeiss anyway.

11

Lighting / Re: Knockoff Speedlights

« on: April 30, 2013, 04:00:09 PM »

I have a pair of Neewer TT560's and an old Vivitar 283.  Cowboy Studio wireless triggers for the TT560's and an add-on optical trigger for the 283.  Works fine, wallet impact minimal.  I'm a hobbyist, would probably spring for PWs and higher end speedlights otherwise, but at this price if they last a year or two I'll replace them when they die. 

12

Lenses / Re: How about a new 28-135mm?

« on: April 30, 2013, 09:21:10 AM »

'twas the kit lens with my old 40D and I've hardly used it.  The times I have, I realized it was not as horrible as I originally thought, but a great lens it definitely is not and I'm glad I didn't pay full price for the lens alone.  I keep thinking of replacing it with a 24-105 and just haven't done it.  I shudder to think what Canon would charge for a 28-135II.  It's a nice walkabout range, daytime lens, adequate for the task if uninspiring.

13

Canon General / Re: That's my money you are profiting from Canon!!!

« on: April 24, 2013, 01:00:56 PM »

Now you've done it, J.R.  You smacked that fire ant mound with a shovel.

14

Technical Support / Re: Request for advice: Nightsky Picture Stacking and PS techniques

« on: April 22, 2013, 02:11:45 PM »

Mr. Bean, what hemisphere was that top photo of the Milky Way shot from? 

Yeah, I noticed that also and checked Mr. Bean's profile real quick - Melbourne.  I had the pleasure of visiting Perth 30+ years ago, seeing Scorpius and the heart of the Milky Way overhead is something I'll never forget, back when I was in the navy and after a long cruise through dark skies on the Indian Ocean.  I know you're a night sky fan Carl.....you should treat yourself to a southern hemisphere trip sometime.  Milky Way, Coal Sack, Magellanic Clouds, Omega Centauri, all just spectacular.  Check out the Southern Skies Star Party at Lake Titicaca.

15

Technical Support / Re: Request for advice: Nightsky Picture Stacking and PS techniques

« on: April 22, 2013, 10:41:30 AM »

I don't dispute the simplicity of the '600 rule', but it is just that - simplistic.  A more rigorous calculation can be made and set up in a spreadsheet to determine maximum recommended imaging times for each lens/camera combination you might use.  A thorough explanation is at:

http://www.astrosurf.com/vdesnoux/virtualeq/virtualeq.htm