Canon Announces EOS 60Da for Astrophotography

[lol]

The "safe" modification for astrophotography is replacing the standard IR cut filter with one with a much sharper response. The standard filter has a gradual response and attenuates deep reds strongly, where the H-alpha and SII wavelengths lie. The typical modification replaces this with one that has a much sharper cutoff, passing the deep reds, but still cutting IR. You generally don't want IR as it often has a different focus point for optics not corrected for it, which is practically almost every lens. That causes fuzzy stars and can increase the level of otherwise dark areas. I would assume Canon have gone this route, as you can use ordinary photographic lenses to image without additional filters. If you want an IR camera, this is not for you.

The other option of removing the IR block filter totally would not give good results unless you use additional filters.

 

[Neeneko]

I don't think you're understanding the "built in filter" and what it does. Actually, ALL dSLRs have an IR filter to produce "normal" looking skin tones. Without an IR filter, you would get very strange looking photos of people (and many subjects for that matter). Based on my interpretation of the 60DA, it appears as if some type of IR filter still exists, it just has been severely weakened.

I probably should have worded it better. I was comparing the described cut filter to a modified DSLR with a piece of optical glass in place of the filter. If you look through any telescope catalog there are a wide range of filters designed look at different things, and with a clear internal filter you can switch between them. With this body you are stuck with a hydrogen alpha... so no 0III, no UV, no LRGB, no hydrogen beta.. etc.

So for such a niche product it strikes me as very limited. Though as you point out, it keeps its warranty which is nice.

Still, what I would really like to see is someone like Canon produce a body that can compete with Orion's StarShoot... something that can work unteathered and have better resolution would be really sweet.

 

[aldvan]

Too sad that I just sold my Meade LX200, due to light pollution from my point of obdservation... :-(

 

[epsiloneri]

Too sad that I just sold my Meade LX200, due to light pollution from my point of obdservation... :-(

A good way to fight light pollution is to use narrow-band nebula filters, such as H alpha. You'd be amazed the kind of astrophotography you can do from urban areas using OIII, H alpha and SII narrowband filters. A dedicated CCD is probably a better option for this purpose than the 60Da, though.

Edit: Thinking about it, they should have put the OIII, H alpha, and SII narrowband filters in a Bayer pattern on the 60Da, instead of the normal R, G, B.

 

[dr croubie]

Just noticed in the specs that this camera doesn't shoot video... that's actually quite a shock, I've been using video mode on my 7D to shoot little videos of Jupiter etc s

Canon's own specs disagree, as does the B&H preorder page. And then there's this line in the presser:

"Canon has also included an AC adapter kit with the EOS 60Da, allowing the camera to be powered through an AC wall outlet or a battery-powered inverter, ideal for long exposure image or video capture at home or in the field." (emphasis added)

So it appears it does record video.

Pardon my ignorance, for I only ever shoot things closer than 50km, and then only stills.
But (whether the 60Da has video or not), why would you want to? Don't planets and stars move really really slowly? What information can you obtain from 1920x1080 25fps that you can't get from 5184x3456 5fps? or even 1fps? (from what I know about video, the best shutter speed is half the frame rate, so shouldn't 0.5s exposures at 1fps using a TC80N3 make a nice video?)
Or is it just the hassle of taking hundreds/thousands of photos, downsizing them, and jamming them into a movie file?

 

[Neeneko]

Edit: Thinking about it, they should have put the OIII, H alpha, and SII narrowband filters in a Bayer pattern on the 60Da, instead of the normal R, G, B.

That would be really cool ^_^

Though it once again returns me to my gripe that I really wish Canon would put out a monochrome body... then you could do a tri-shot with it. I admit I probably would not gripe so much if dedicated CCDs were not about 1,000$/MP.... though even if they were cheaper you just can't beat the unteathered convenience of a DSLR..

 

[kdsand]

Well this release surprised me.

 

[Neeneko]

Pardon my ignorance, for I only ever shoot things closer than 50km, and then only stills.
But (whether the 60Da has video or not), why would you want to? Don't planets and stars move really really slowly? What information can you obtain from 1920x1080 25fps that you can't get from 5184x3456 5fps? or even 1fps? (from what I know about video, the best shutter speed is half the frame rate, so shouldn't 0.5s exposures at 1fps using a TC80N3 make a nice video?)
Or is it just the hassle of taking hundreds/thousands of photos, downsizing them, and jamming them into a movie file?

Well, they move faster then you might think, but I agree I am a little confused what utility video capture has in this situation since a timer probably does the job better. I admit though I have not tried making videos that way though, only trails.

 

[ers811]

Pardon my ignorance, for I only ever shoot things closer than 50km, and then only stills.
But (whether the 60Da has video or not), why would you want to? Don't planets and stars move really really slowly? What information can you obtain from 1920x1080 25fps that you can't get from 5184x3456 5fps? or even 1fps? (from what I know about video, the best shutter speed is half the frame rate, so shouldn't 0.5s exposures at 1fps using a TC80N3 make a nice video?)
Or is it just the hassle of taking hundreds/thousands of photos, downsizing them, and jamming them into a movie file?

Actually a small portion of the frame at "just" 1000mm moves very quickly.

A lot planetary and moon imaging folks use video to get thousands of frames and stack them to eliminate noise and bring out details you won't get with only maybe a dozen exposures. The benefit of the stacking only increases as the square root of the number of images, so the returns really start to diminish unless you get a ton of frames of data.

Search for "Registax" for some examples. It's free software that does some advanced stacking. It's amazing what people have done with seemingly terrible seeing conditions.

And if you're camera has a crop/zoom video mode, you can get near the same resolution as you would crop out of full res pics anyway!

 

[Stuart]

Prior rumours were for more canon SLR's this year - does this count as one of them? :-(

 

[Marsu42]

Prior rumours were for more canon SLR's this year - does this count as one of them? :-(

Since it's got another designation, I guess that's one of them. And apart from the 650d, there is space left in Canon's cycle so the 70d and 5d2 replacements might be slotted for the end of 2012, see http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html#canon_age_chart

But in the meantime, maybe they'll release a 60db? The "b" is for "bright daylight", so they left out the built-in flash and sell it over a considerable premium over the vanilla 60d

 

[epsiloneri]

But (whether the 60Da has video or not), why would you want to? Don't planets and stars move really really slowly? What information can you obtain from 1920x1080 25fps that you can't get from 5184x3456 5fps?

The astronomical objects may be still, but the atmosphere is not. At high resolutions atmospheric effects are very noticeable and dynamic. By shooting hundreds or thousands of frames you can pick the ones that, quite randomly, are sharper than average, and by stacking only those you can get a sharper end-image than if you used a single longer exposure. In this way, amateurs today can produce images of the planets that rival or even outperform professional planetary images from only a few decades ago. The higher the fps (or rather, the shorter the exposure), the higher the likelihood that you will catch the atmosphere during a particularly still moment.

 

[epsiloneri]

Though it once again returns me to my gripe that I really wish Canon would put out a monochrome body...

I agree, that would be ideal (one usually needs different exposure times for the different narrow-band filters anyway). In addition to astrophotographers, I bet there would be a market among the more artistic photographers who wouldn't mind going back to b/w, and also surveillance etc where they need the best sensitivities. With the colour sensors we are essentially throwing away two thirds of the photons.

 

[whwang]

May I ask where did Canon say the camera can only be used for H alpha?
You won't get L, but you do get RGB.
You won't get UV, but you do get H alpha, SII, OIII, as long as you put the filters in front of the camera.

I don't think you're understanding the "built in filter" and what it does. Actually, ALL dSLRs have an IR filter to produce "normal" looking skin tones. Without an IR filter, you would get very strange looking photos of people (and many subjects for that matter). Based on my interpretation of the 60DA, it appears as if some type of IR filter still exists, it just has been severely weakened.

I probably should have worded it better. I was comparing the described cut filter to a modified DSLR with a piece of optical glass in place of the filter. If you look through any telescope catalog there are a wide range of filters designed look at different things, and with a clear internal filter you can switch between them. With this body you are stuck with a hydrogen alpha... so no 0III, no UV, no LRGB, no hydrogen beta.. etc.

So for such a niche product it strikes me as very limited. Though as you point out, it keeps its warranty which is nice.

Still, what I would really like to see is someone like Canon produce a body that can compete with Orion's StarShoot... something that can work unteathered and have better resolution would be really sweet.

 

[Neeneko]

I agree, that would be ideal (one usually needs different exposure times for the different narrow-band filters anyway). In addition to astrophotographers, I bet there would be a market among the more artistic photographers who wouldn't mind going back to b/w, and also surveillance etc where they need the best sensitivities. With the colour sensors we are essentially throwing away two thirds of the photons.

The conventional wisdom right now is that there is no market for B&W, and that colour images converted to B&W are 'good enough', though yes, there are quite a few people interested in using them for regular photography too. Every time it comes up in a forum there is clamoring for 'sell this at a sane price and I would buy one!'.

It has created a serious self fulfilling prophecy since the only B&W cameras on the market right now are expensive digital backs by MegaVision, AWT, and PhaseOne... MegaVision and AWT because they make scientific cameras and PhaseOne because they listened to people wanting an 'artistic B&W camera'.. though at 40k it makes a poor market tester.

Apparently Leica is planning on releasing a B&W version of the M10, which might give people SOME marketing data.. but their cameras tend to be overpriced/underfeatured status symbols so they make poor examples of what a larger community would actually buy.. not that much better then the digital backs and machine vision ones actually.

Of course there is always Maxmax's converted monochrome Canon cameras, but you are stuck with 500D/550D as your only options there... and of course no Canon repair shop will touch them.

 

[Lee Jay]

I've found from my dabbling that high-ISO really isn't that useful. It's more about a stable, star-tracking base (Astrotrac in my case) and a medium-to-low ISO with long exposures.

A good resource for you:

http://www.samirkharusi.net/sub-exposures.html

 

[Lee Jay]

Now, Canon should recommend a telescope for novices to use...

I'm sure Canon can recommend the 800/5.6 as a small, short-focal-length refractor.

 

[Lee Jay]

For folks asking about "why video", here's why. One frame on the right, over a thousand stacked on the left.

 

[kdsand]

Now, Canon should recommend a telescope for novices to use...

I'm sure Canon can recommend the 800/5.6 as a small, short-focal-length refractor.

I'll snatch one up!

 

[lol]

Though it once again returns me to my gripe that I really wish Canon would put out a monochrome body...

I agree, that would be ideal (one usually needs different exposure times for the different narrow-band filters anyway). In addition to astrophotographers, I bet there would be a market among the more artistic photographers who wouldn't mind going back to b/w, and also surveillance etc where they need the best sensitivities. With the colour sensors we are essentially throwing away two thirds of the photons.

Depends on the wavelength but it can be much worse than 2/3. For example, for the dominant H alpha, and less commonly used SII and NII you only get significant output from the 1 in 4 red filtered sites. OIII and H-beta are better sitting where green and blue sites are sensitive although I've not really found a good way to stick them together yet. I debated replacing H alpha with H beta for the increase in resolution, although that is offset by the lower levels of H beta. So I'd love a "mono" DSLR for this application.