September 16, 2014, 01:51:25 PM

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 - wearle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 28, 2014, 01:02:28 AM »
Amazing.  Do you have a website?  I'd love to see more of your work.  TFS.
Thanks! 

I have two websites.  One is old, and I haven't updated it in a long time; however, it does allow viewing of higher resolution versions of my astrophotography images.

http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/

My new site has the most up-to-date images and includes the older material, but you can't view any images higher than 960 pixels in the long dimension.

http://thomaswearlephotography.smugmug.com/

Wade

17
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 28, 2014, 12:55:59 AM »
How do you like PixInsight? I'm getting into deep sky AP now, and am in the process of buying a mount and software. I was planning to use something like Nebulosity or maybe BackyardEOS for control software, PHD for guiding, and Photoshop for processing. But Pixinsight seems pretty popular these days.
I believe PixInsight is one of the best astrophotography processing software packages out there.  I've been using it since the PixInsight LE days.  There is a steep learning curve; however, the PixInsight Forum is an awesome place to learn it and support is second to none. 

Wade

18
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 27, 2014, 08:49:14 PM »
To all,

Here's a wide-field image of the North America Nebula.  This was taken with a modified Canon 5D2 and a Canon 200mm f/2.0L stopped down to f/4.0.  It is an integration of 24 four-minute exposures.  It was calibrated using six dark frames, twenty biases, and twenty flats.  All calibration and processing was done in PixInsight.

Thanks for looking,

Wade

19
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 27, 2014, 04:36:19 PM »
Thanks very much, that is mind-blowing!!  Do you mind if I print one for myself?

Thanks, there is definitely enough stars in the image to be mind-blowing.  :)

I would prefer you not to make a print from my image.  If you would like a print, I can make you one at a very reasonable cost, and it would look a lot better than what could be achieved with the jpeg version.  You can contact me privately if you like.

Wade

20
Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: January 27, 2014, 12:17:43 PM »
Nice job!  I see the sun dogs but not a sun halo...

I've never seen double sundogs on a setting sun before...this is very interesting!
Thanks!

The Sun halo is almost hidden.  You can see the inner darkening of the circle below the sun with only a hint of a "brighter" circle.  It is definitely marginal.

Wade

21
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 27, 2014, 12:14:36 PM »

Wonderful! It just blows me away how many stars there are near and in the galactic core. The density is stunning!

So, with a modified 5D2, I assume that means the UV/IR cutoff filter (and maybe low pass filter) were removed?
Thanks!

You should check out the link to the higher resolution version I just posted.

I purchased the camera from Astro Hutech with Option T.  It includes a more astro-friendly bandpass filter.  It works very well for astrophotography.  You can still use it as a regular camera too if you create a custom white balance.

Wade

22
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 27, 2014, 12:09:13 PM »

Lovely, makes me wonder what a higher rez version of your image (or part of it) would look like...
Thanks!

Here's a link to a higher resolution image of the Galactic Dark Horse Nebula.

http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/deepsky/wide-field/big_E_5d2_200mm_1600x2400.jpg

Wade

23
Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: January 27, 2014, 02:09:33 AM »
To all,

Here's an image I took near sunset on Emigrant Hill, east of Pendleton, Oregon.  I noticed the Sundogs while taking the images, but did not see the Sun halo until after processing.  Fog and low cloud had already enveloped much of the foothills.  This is an HDR image combining four separate images.  Hopefully, it doesn't look too unnatural.  :)

Thanks for looking,

Wade

24
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 27, 2014, 02:04:15 AM »
To all,

Here's a wide-field image of the Galactic Dark Horse Nebula.  Numerous dark nebula come together to form a horse if rotate clock-wise 90 degrees.  This was taken with a modified Canon 5D2 and a Canon 200mm f/2.0L stopped down to f/4.0.  It is an integration of 25 four-minute exposures.  It was calibrated using six dark frames, twenty biases, and twenty flats.  All calibration and processing was done in PixInsight.

Thanks for looking,

Wade

25
Lenses / Re: TS-E 24mm Poor Performance - Take 2
« on: January 17, 2014, 10:03:59 PM »
To all,

I would like to include one more image.  This was stopped down to f/8.0 which is supposed to be the sweet spot of the lens.  The left side is still really soft (i.e. out of focus).

http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_non-shifted_f8.jpg

Thanks for looking,

Wade

26
Lenses / TS-E 24mm Poor Performance - Take 2
« on: January 17, 2014, 09:56:25 PM »
To all,

I appreciate all your comments in the last post.   

I went back to the hill and took some daylight images.  Please, take a close look at the image below, especially the left-hand side.  I focused on the road near the center.  This would be considered infinity which is what the lens was indicating.  The lens has both the tilt and shift at the zero position.    There was no wind.  I used a sturdy tripod and a remote release.  Thoroughly looking over the image, I would have to say this is the worst performing lens I've ever seen.  Only a small area around the center is focused.  The left had side is horrendously out of focus.  At these distances, everything should be in sharp focus, except perhaps the closest few feet.  As mentioned before, focusing at infinity at f/4.0 with a 24mm should yield a plane of sharp focus from 16 feet to infinity.

I would love to here your comments based on this new image.

Emigrant hill non-shifted TS-E 24mm
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_non-shifted2.jpg

Perhaps a lens element or two is out of alignment.  I don't know, but something is definitely wrong with it.

Thanks,

Wade

27
Lenses / Re: TS-E 24mm Poor Performance
« on: January 17, 2014, 03:15:21 PM »
To all,

Thanks, I appreciate all your comments. 

I don't have a problem with the coma, it seems well corrected.  The problem I have is the softness (i.e. lack of sharp focus) outside the "sweet spot".  This lens' sweet spot seems to only be about a 20mm circle at best.  I would figure a lens that covers 67mm should do significantly better.  If you look closely at the ts-e_24mm_non-shifted_purchased_fixed.jpg image (i.e. the fourth link from the top), you will find almost the whole image is soft, except in a very small area near the center.  I focused at infinity so the image should be quite sharp from 16 feet to infinity using a 24mm lens.  The picture quality in the foreground (i.e. the hill side) is horrible.  It just seems very strange this lens is so soft.  I'll take more examples over the weekend, including star pictures to send to the Canon repair center in the Northeast.  Hopefully, they will look at them.  :)

Thanks,

Wade

28
Lenses / TS-E 24mm Poor Performance
« on: January 16, 2014, 10:35:51 PM »
To all,

I rented this lens before I purchased it new.  The rental appears to be an excellent copy so I was hoping the one I purchased would be too; unfortunately, it was a disappointment compared to the rental.

I tested this lens using stars.  Stars are the toughest test for a lens, but they really show the lens' aberrations quite easily.  I would like your thoughts and opinions on this lens.  For example, is it a poor copy?  If so, what do you think is wrong with the lens (e.g. De-centered, field curvature, etc.)?  I have sent this lens to Canon for repair.  I felt it had a De-centering problem.  Upon return, the De-centering problem seems fixed, but now it seems to have a very bad field curvature problem.  I'm no optics expert so perhaps something else may be wrong with lens.   I plan on sending the lens back again with more data showing the problem I'm experiencing.  I have included several links showing the rental lens and how it compares to my lens at each stage.  The images are approximately 1.5 MB each.

I focused using LiveView with a 10X loupe using the belt stars of Orion near the center of the frame.  The stars are trailing slightly due to using a fixed tripod.

As mentioned before, I just can't imagine how a $2200 lens can perform so poorly, especially since it is designed to cover 67mm.  My TS-E 17mm is substantially better wide-open (see the last link).  It is possible I have too high of expectations for the TS-E 24mm or just have a very bad copy.  :-[

Rental non-shifted
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_non-shifted_rental.jpg

Rental shifted 10 degrees
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_shifted_10_degrees_rental.jpg

Purchased non-shifted
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_non-shifted_purchased.jpg

Purchased shifted 10 degrees
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_shifted_10_degrees_purchased.jpg

Purchased non-shifted "fixed"
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_non-shifted_purchased_fixed.jpg

Purchased shifted 10 degrees "fixed"
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_24mm_shifted_10_degrees_purchased_fixed.jpg

Purchased TS-E 17mm for comparison
http://www.northwest-landscapes.com/images/testing/ts-e_17mm_non-shifted.jpg

Thanks,

Wade

29
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: January 02, 2014, 03:56:56 PM »
To all,

I just rented and star tested the Rokinon 14mm T/3.1.  I'm very impressed.  It can be used wide-open on FF with little, if any, aberrations in the corners.  It is a little bit difficult to focus; otherwise, it is a stellar performer in the world of astrophotography.  I immediately purchased it from LensRentals.com.  This way I know I have an excellent copy since I already tested it.  :)

Although the Zeiss 15mm shows better micro-contrast, it is not as well corrected and for 8X the cost, probably not worth it if only used for taking nighttime photos.

Wade

30
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 27, 2013, 01:18:01 AM »
Wade - have you tried the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower options? For a tenth of the cost, you can live the dream today!  8)

I haven't tried them yet.  I plan on renting the 14mm and 24mm in the future to see how they compare to the Zeiss. Although the Zeiss 15mm is very expensive, the micro-contrast and look are second to none.  :)  If I were rich, I would go with the Zeiss 15mm, but since I'm not, I'll likely get the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower lens.

Wade

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4