June 23, 2018, 06:16:30 PM

Author Topic: Deep Sky Astrophotography  (Read 374544 times)

weixing

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 594
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #45 on: September 26, 2014, 03:59:01 AM »
Awesome shot Jon. Nice work.

Another fantabulous image!  ;)

Thanks, guys. :) Glad you like. One of my best so far. Data on that one was so good.

I'm trying a new technique. I used an Astronomik CLS filter most of the year, but it is making it really hard to get images quickly. I have so few clear nights, and I need to image for several nights to get enough subs to produce the kind of quality I got in the Elephant Trunk...that I'm trying to image without the CLS filter now. It results in more complex work in post, but...if you can work through it, you get stuff like this:



Compare that to my first two attempts at Pleiades from the original post of this thread. :D One thing I really do love about the 5D III? It's huge full frame...has a really wide field, which is just awesome for images like this.
Hi,
    I assume this is taken by 5D3... Did you mod your 5D3??

    Have a nice day.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #45 on: September 26, 2014, 03:59:01 AM »

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #46 on: September 26, 2014, 04:22:09 AM »
Unmodded Canon 5D III, with 600mm f/4 L II lens. A big part of getting this kind of result is the software I use to process: PixInsight. Powerful, powerful tool.

I use an Atlas EQ-G tracking mount, along with a specific set of rings and dovetails to hold the lens onto the mount. I'll post some photos of my current setup in another thread, so those of you interested in getting started can get an idea of where I'm at, and what options there are at a lower cost.

weixing

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 594
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #47 on: September 26, 2014, 08:57:20 AM »
Unmodded Canon 5D III, with 600mm f/4 L II lens. A big part of getting this kind of result is the software I use to process: PixInsight. Powerful, powerful tool.

I use an Atlas EQ-G tracking mount, along with a specific set of rings and dovetails to hold the lens onto the mount. I'll post some photos of my current setup in another thread, so those of you interested in getting started can get an idea of where I'm at, and what options there are at a lower cost.
Hi,
    Your sky must be very good to get that result...  :)

By the way, you said you previously use the Astronomik CLS filter, how to you solve the colour shift issue?? Last time I use the CLS filter as my area light pollution is very serious, but had big problem solving the colour shift issue...  :-[

    Have a nice day.

niteclicks

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #48 on: September 26, 2014, 11:17:43 AM »
Jrista,One of the best I have seen of this area (you should submit it for the astronomy picture of the day). There is so much more blue in this area compared to the rest of the sky I could see how the cls might interfere with the fainter stuff. I use an IDAS and will have to try without it (if I ever get a clear night). Weixing, just set a custom white balance with the filter in place during the daytime, you can also use this time to take your flats , if you use them. 

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #49 on: October 21, 2014, 11:51:10 PM »
Jrista,One of the best I have seen of this area (you should submit it for the astronomy picture of the day). There is so much more blue in this area compared to the rest of the sky I could see how the cls might interfere with the fainter stuff. I use an IDAS and will have to try without it (if I ever get a clear night). Weixing, just set a custom white balance with the filter in place during the daytime, you can also use this time to take your flats , if you use them.


Hmm, I hadn't thought of that, APOD. I gathered some more subs for the Pleiades image. I think I want to get one or two sessions more, to get better control over noise and maybe improve the quality of the dust, then I'll submit to APOD.


The blue is just those stars. All blue giants. :) A little ways down towards the eastern horizon you find Taurus, which has a giant orange star. The faint dust is in that region as well, so the whole area takes on a whole different tone. (I don't think I could pick up the IFN in Taurus...I should try some time, see what I get.)

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #50 on: October 21, 2014, 11:59:12 PM »
Unmodded Canon 5D III, with 600mm f/4 L II lens. A big part of getting this kind of result is the software I use to process: PixInsight. Powerful, powerful tool.

I use an Atlas EQ-G tracking mount, along with a specific set of rings and dovetails to hold the lens onto the mount. I'll post some photos of my current setup in another thread, so those of you interested in getting started can get an idea of where I'm at, and what options there are at a lower cost.
Hi,
    Your sky must be very good to get that result...  :)


Actually, it's pretty bad. :\ I'm on the border between a red and orange zone. Sometimes the skies are really bad, sometimes they are fairly decent and I can just barely, faintly see the milky way.


I just integrate like a nutcase. :P And I think the brightness of the Pleiades stars brightens the nearby dust enough for me to pick it up. Man, it would be so amazing to image this under blue zone skies.

By the way, you said you previously use the Astronomik CLS filter, how to you solve the colour shift issue?? Last time I use the CLS filter as my area light pollution is very serious, but had big problem solving the colour shift issue...  :-[


The CLS doesn't necessarily cause a color shift. It blocks certain frequencies of light, so they simply are not in the data to start with. Color in astrophotography is a rather fluid thing. There are all kinds of light sources out there, not just stars, but various kinds of gasses, each of which emit light in different very narrow bands.


I use the CLS when I'm imaging nebula. Most nebula, gaseous emission nebula, emit light in several primary narrow bands, depending on the composition of the nebular clouds. There is Hydrogen, Oxygen, Sulfur, Nitrogen, and a few other gasses. Hydrogen and Oxygen are the most prominent, Hydrogen by far the most prevalent in the skies overall. When you use a CLS filter, or an IDAS filter, or something like that, your blocking out the frequency bands that include light pollution (primarily, sodium and mercury vapor lamps), and passing the blue and red ranges that include H-alpha, H-beta, O-II O-III, N-II & S-II. That lets you pick up the nebula, and when your imaging nebula, that's what you want.


I imaged the Pleiades without the filter, because the nebula around those stars is a reflection nebula. It's not emitting light, it's reflecting light. The CLS filter would have blocked out a good chunk of that light in the greens, which would have resulted in a "color shift". I was able to get away with not using a filter thanks to some of the advanced processing features of PixInsight. It has background extraction capabilities, which I can use to identify any excess light introduced by light pollution, and remove it. It can be extremely difficult to do, especially on an image like my Pleiades...you have to make sure you sample true "background sky", and not any nebula, otherwise that part of the nebula will be factored into the extraction and likely eliminated. It took me a couple days of fiddling to finally extract the background sky well enough for the dust to show...and I'm still not happy with it. :P

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #51 on: October 22, 2014, 12:03:01 AM »
Another image, again without the Astronomik CLS filter. This one was an easier target than the Pleiades: Andromeda Galaxy, actually the full complex of M31, M32, and M110. Processing on this was a little easier, however getting color into the core is a challenge (still working on it):




Integration of 74x150s (3hrs) sub frames. Stacked with DSS, processed with PixInsight and Photoshop.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #51 on: October 22, 2014, 12:03:01 AM »

msm

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #52 on: October 22, 2014, 01:42:31 AM »
Another image, again without the Astronomik CLS filter. This one was an easier target than the Pleiades: Andromeda Galaxy, actually the full complex of M31, M32, and M110. Processing on this was a little easier, however getting color into the core is a challenge (still working on it):




Integration of 74x150s (3hrs) sub frames. Stacked with DSS, processed with PixInsight and Photoshop.

That and the Pleiades photo are really impressive pictures, what sort of lens you need for that?

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #53 on: October 22, 2014, 01:44:33 AM »
That and the Pleiades photo are really impressive pictures, what sort of lens you need for that?


Thanks. :) I use my EF 600mm f/4 L II right now, which doubles as a very high end telescope. It's similar in IQ to the Officina Stellare Hiper APO 150mm, which is about $11,500.

Mickat

  • EOS Rebel 300D
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #54 on: October 22, 2014, 05:58:09 AM »
hey Jrista,

How do you find the Orion ST80ED and camera for tracking? Is the 400mm focal length enough?

I need to bite the bullet on something for tracking but in terms of the camera, I am looking towards more the Lodestar X2 but in terms of ED80's for guidescope there's a few to choose from.

Skywatcher Synguider is a standalone guider that a few people I know have them and have had some good results in tracking. I've seen some guys doing 15min exposure with it and a Canon Dslr, I couldn't say much about image quality as I didn't really look too hard at their final results.

I've got 2 telescopes, a Celestron EdgeHD 11" CGEM DX and a Celestron CPC 9.25.

The edgeHD will be used for imaging once I pull my finger out and buy stuff for it. I will most likely end up getting a Fastar adaptor at some point for the front of the scope bringing it down to an F2, microfocuser and dovetails for the guidescope. At this stage I will just use my 5D3 for imaging.
I make the worst astronomer as I am a night shift worker.  :(

Have you ever considered a high end refractor telescope?

meywd

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 792
    • About Me
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #55 on: October 22, 2014, 06:09:04 AM »
Amazing photos jrista, i am only starting astrophotography with hope of learning the sky while shooting the milky way, don't have a telescope, but a friend took this photo with his using my 600D.

Current Gear: Canon 5D Mark III | EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM EF 135mm f/2.0 | EF 24-105 F/4.0 | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | EF 50mm f/1.8 II | 430EX II | Canon EF 2x II

Maximilian

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1993
  • The dark side - I've been there
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #56 on: October 22, 2014, 06:42:55 AM »
Another image, again without the Astronomik CLS filter. This one was an easier target than the Pleiades: Andromeda Galaxy, actually the full complex of M31, M32, and M110.
Really Beautiful. Congrats.
I love those astro pictures that start to become three dimensional.
sometimes you have to close your eyes to see properly.

kkelis

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 37
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #57 on: October 22, 2014, 07:59:49 AM »
I did a timelapse video which features Andomeda and Orion. Skip to 5:25 if you care to watch it.
Not bad i believe for 5 sec exposures. 6 seconds for Orion but there is a bit of star trailing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDv7laP1G54

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #57 on: October 22, 2014, 07:59:49 AM »

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #58 on: October 23, 2014, 09:17:59 PM »
hey Jrista,

How do you find the Orion ST80ED and camera for tracking? Is the 400mm focal length enough?


I don't actually use the ST80ED, I just use the basic ST80, the real cheap one. For guiding, all I care about are the stars, and once the ST80 is focused, they are good enough for guiding.

I need to bite the bullet on something for tracking but in terms of the camera, I am looking towards more the Lodestar X2 but in terms of ED80's for guidescope there's a few to choose from.


Skywatcher Synguider is a standalone guider that a few people I know have them and have had some good results in tracking. I've seen some guys doing 15min exposure with it and a Canon Dslr, I couldn't say much about image quality as I didn't really look too hard at their final results.


The Lodestar X2 is real nice, at 77% Q.E. My recommendation for a guide camera, however, is the QHY5L-II. The Lodestar uses a Sony sensor, the QHY5L-II uses an Aptina sensor, and it has 74% Q.E. I recommend the QHY instead of the Starlite guider because it can be used for planetary imaging as well. It's got a nice high sensitivity, high resolution mono sensor that is capable of imaging up to a couple hundred frames a second with the central 320x240 pixel area (which, when your imaging planets, is often all your going to be able to use anyway, even with pretty high magnification.) The Lodestar's cannot be used as planetary imagers. They are better guiders, I think, but less versatile. I use the QHY myself, and I'll be getting an RC-type scope soon here to do planetary (and lunar) imaging with it.


As for the Synguider, that's like Celestron's Nexguide. It might even be the same technology in a different package. Those are fully self contained guiders. Personally, I try to steer people away from those. If you absolutely do not have the option of using a laptop, ever, then a Synguide or Nexguide is probably the only guiding option. Everyone images with a laptop at the very least these days (I use a 40' USB booster cable and powered USB hub to image from my desktop that I'm using right now.) Using PHD2 with a standard guider is vastly superior to using something like a Synguider IMO. Far more control, which you will really need if you ever want to image at a higher resolution, or at narrower apertures.


I've got 2 telescopes, a Celestron EdgeHD 11" CGEM DX and a Celestron CPC 9.25.

The edgeHD will be used for imaging once I pull my finger out and buy stuff for it. I will most likely end up getting a Fastar adaptor at some point for the front of the scope bringing it down to an F2, microfocuser and dovetails for the guidescope. At this stage I will just use my 5D3 for imaging.
I make the worst astronomer as I am a night shift worker.  :( 

The EdgeHD 11" is a very nice scope. It's going to be difficult to use, though. To do imaging with it, you are going to need a very hefty mount. The ones that Celestron sells it with are barely adequate. Skilled imagers have made do, and can produce some great images, but it's very challenging. You will definitely need to use OAG (off-axis guiding), so read up on how to get the right spacing in the imaging train. SCTs have certain issues that make them less than ideal for deep sky imaging, such as mirror flop. They can be superb for planetary imaging, and something like the 11" is going to resolve a TON of detail, and with a high mag barlow, you could get close to 10,000mm for some serious magnification.


I'd recommend starting with the CPC 9.25. The smaller scope is easier to manage, easier to guide, just easier to deal with overall. It will give you a chance to get the hang of things without all the frustrations that come with getting good enough tracking for an 11" aperture scope. It will be more forgiving of seeing (you'll need very very good to excellent seeing conditions to use the 11" effectively, otherwise your just throwing away any potential increase in resolving power that the larger aperture offers because seeing will be limiting you.) The 9.25 is also going to be lighter weight, so you can get away with using a lesser mount. I wouldn't recommend anything less than a mount with a capacity of at least 60lb for imaging with the 11", 100lb would be better. You just need the stability to actually benefit from that kind of resolving power.


The Orion HDX110 is, IMO, the best option for using scopes 11" and larger...but it's decidedly not very portable. The next best option, if you can scrounge up the money, would be the Astro-Physics Mach1 GTO. That's a true high end mount, and with proper PEC could be used unguided for shorter subs (maybe up to 10 minutes). It's got a 45lb rated capacity, however unlike most lower end mounts, that capacity is an imaging capacity, not a visual observing capacity. The Mach1 is very highly portable, I think it may even be lighter (when broken down, lightest part) than my Atlas EQ-G, which makes it pretty much top dog if your plan to visit dark sites on a frequent basis.

Have you ever considered a high end refractor telescope?


I have a high end refractor. ;) The 600mm f/4 L II has one of the flattest fields with excellent corner performance. I've looked at the quality from a lot of refractors, a whole lot, and very few achieve the IQ that my 600mm lens does, and most do it at a slower f-ratio. For those that achieve similar IQ at around an f/4 f-ratio, you have to spend about as much, or even significantly more, than I did on the 600mm, so it's a wash. I also have some versatility that you don't generally get with a normal refracting telescope...I can attach the 1.4x or 2x TCs and increase my focal length/imaging scale if I need to.


I actually recommend the Canon 300mm and 600mm L series lenses a lot. I think they are some of the best "telescopes" you can get for the price, given how fast they are. You lack some flexibility when using Canon lenses...you cannot use standard focusers, you don't have any backfocus, so you cannot use things like OAG for better guiding. But for the most part, at the image scales you normally have with these lenses, guiding with an independent guide scope is fine up to around 15 minutes.


If I was ever to buy a "real" refractor, it would probably be the Takahashi FSQ106. That puppy is one of the few that has a similarly flat field, however it has it because it has an 88mm image circle. For most dedicated astro CCD imagers, you use a TINY portion of that giant image circle, so the field is exceptionally flat. The large image circle allows you to use either a reducer or extender, which reduces the image circle to 44mm. You lose corner performance when doing that, however, but it's still quite usable. The large 88mm image circle is also compatible with big imagers, like the 56mm diagonal square KAF-16803 based CCD cameras. (There aren't many scopes that can handle those huge imagers...RCOS and PlaneWave make some, but they are exceptionally expensive. I think AstroTech has one or two new Ritchey-Chretien Truss scopes that have 65-70mm image circles, but even those are some seven grand or so.)


I will probably be getting the AstroTech 8" RC telescope soon here. I want something with a longer focal length for galaxy imaging and planetary imaging, and the AT8RC is only $895.




jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #59 on: October 23, 2014, 09:19:46 PM »
Amazing photos jrista, i am only starting astrophotography with hope of learning the sky while shooting the milky way, don't have a telescope, but a friend took this photo with his using my 600D.


Looks great! Slap that telescope on an equatorial tracking mount, and you'll be amazed what you can do (although Orion is a deceptively challenging subject, due to it's massive dynamic range...the core around Trap blows out entirely well before you even begin to start getting any useful detail on the surrounding dust detail.) Andromeda is probably an easier target, still bright but not quite nearly as bright as Orion nebula.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Reply #59 on: October 23, 2014, 09:19:46 PM »