*lol* ;D ;D ;DDon Haines said:and on a less serious note...... Nasa releases the first detailed images of Pluto.....
da-da-da, da-dada, da-dada (trying to intonate "The Imperial March")
Upvote
0
*lol* ;D ;D ;DDon Haines said:and on a less serious note...... Nasa releases the first detailed images of Pluto.....
Maximilian said:*lol* ;D ;D ;DDon Haines said:and on a less serious note...... Nasa releases the first detailed images of Pluto.....
da-da-da, da-dada, da-dada (trying to intonate "The Imperial March")![]()
Don Haines said:and on a less serious note...... Nasa releases the first detailed images of Pluto.....
jrista said:Here are some more (including a further enhanced version of the Lagoon one):
M20 & M8 (Lagoon and Trifid):
Milky Way (bit of interference from light clouds):
Snake Nebula and region:
Blue Horsehead:
Eagle and Omega (Swan) Nebulas (M16 and M17):
Also reprocessed my old Andromeda data, whole new (and much more realistic) look:
A guy on Cloudy Nights shared his Trifid data, which turned out to be pretty good:
And my latest, Veil Nebula, which is still a WIP...only got half the data I wanted, plus there were light high clouds moving earlier in the night that left brown muck throughout a lot of the field:
Don Haines said:jrista said:Here are some more (including a further enhanced version of the Lagoon one):
M20 & M8 (Lagoon and Trifid):
Milky Way (bit of interference from light clouds):
Snake Nebula and region:
Blue Horsehead:
Eagle and Omega (Swan) Nebulas (M16 and M17):
Also reprocessed my old Andromeda data, whole new (and much more realistic) look:
A guy on Cloudy Nights shared his Trifid data, which turned out to be pretty good:
And my latest, Veil Nebula, which is still a WIP...only got half the data I wanted, plus there were light high clouds moving earlier in the night that left brown muck throughout a lot of the field:
WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, and WOW
These are inspirational!!!!!
Fantastic!!!!!!!
Absolutely fantastic!meywd said:Don Haines said:jrista said:Here are some more (including a further enhanced version of the Lagoon one):
M20 & M8 (Lagoon and Trifid):
Milky Way (bit of interference from light clouds):
Snake Nebula and region:
Blue Horsehead:
Eagle and Omega (Swan) Nebulas (M16 and M17):
Also reprocessed my old Andromeda data, whole new (and much more realistic) look:
A guy on Cloudy Nights shared his Trifid data, which turned out to be pretty good:
And my latest, Veil Nebula, which is still a WIP...only got half the data I wanted, plus there were light high clouds moving earlier in the night that left brown muck throughout a lot of the field:
WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, and WOW
These are inspirational!!!!!
Fantastic!!!!!!!
+1 stunning
jrista said:While you can barely fit a 600/4L and 5D III on the Star Adventurer, it is not recommended. The rule of thumb for imaging is to use only half the rated capacity. More than that, and your tracking accuracy will suffer, which will affect your stars. You shouldn't put more than 5-6 lb on the Star Adventurer for best results. You might get away with 7-8lb, but with longer lenses your star profiles will suffer (you'll have bloated stars, and you'll lose the benefits of the increased resolution of a large lens like the 600mm f/4).
Alejandro said:jrista said:While you can barely fit a 600/4L and 5D III on the Star Adventurer, it is not recommended. The rule of thumb for imaging is to use only half the rated capacity. More than that, and your tracking accuracy will suffer, which will affect your stars. You shouldn't put more than 5-6 lb on the Star Adventurer for best results. You might get away with 7-8lb, but with longer lenses your star profiles will suffer (you'll have bloated stars, and you'll lose the benefits of the increased resolution of a large lens like the 600mm f/4).
I'm sorry to be asking this... so is the Star Adventurar an extremely well designed barn door tracker? I mean, you can't track the stars in exposures longer than 2-5 minutes @ 200mm or something like 30 seconds on 600mm, correct?
jrista said:There isn't a whole lot of excitement in the astro community for Canon cameras these days. A couple guys promote them a lot, like Roger Clark, but most people are much more interested in the newer entry-level Nikon DSLRs, like the D5300 and D5500. They have lower dark current, higher resolution, lower noise at low ISO. Canon cameras are rarely used ISO 800 and heavily clipped stars are fairly common, but people are using Nikon's as low as ISO 200 (and in a few cases ISO 100) for the increased DR.
The D800, D810, and D810a, with black point clipping hacks and astro modding on the former two, have garnered FAR more interest among higher end DSLR imagers than the 5Ds. The guys I know who image with them produce some of the most amazing astro images I've ever seen.
If there was any field where read noise and dynamic range mattered more than landscape photography, astrophotography is it. By a long shot.