Full Frame Astrophotography DSLR Coming [CR1]

[mnclayshooter]

One thing you don't need is a kick-ass 63 point AF system... but a really really good central point would be great.....

+1

If the central point could be a tightly grouped set of several points with selectable zone size (something like a set of concentric rings of AF points - 1 single, then a ring of 7 including the central one, then a ring of say, 16 or so at the outer-most edge making for effectively a large center point if selected as a "single zone" (for moon/planets etc) it seems it would help both the on-telescope and long tele lens shooters.

 

[rfdesigner]

One thing you don't need is a kick-ass 63 point AF system... but a really really good central point would be great.....

+1

If the central point could be a tightly grouped set of several points with selectable zone size (something like a set of concentric rings of AF points - 1 single, then a ring of 7 including the central one, then a ring of say, 16 or so at the outer-most edge making for effectively a large center point if selected as a "single zone" (for moon/planets etc) it seems it would help both the on-telescope and long tele lens shooters.

why?.. you focus in liveview at max magnification. On a scope you use a Bhatinov Mask, with a big lens you can do the same, on a wide angle you just focus for minimum star size.

But I do agree, you don't need 61 cross points, a 6D -3EV AF point might be of a little use, but I wouldn't use it.

 

[IglooEater]

I'm probably just ignorant, but doesn't the maximum exposure time to avoid star trails have more to do with the final size of the displayed image than the number of megapixels? I mean if all your interested in is pixel-peeping, then yes, you'll have to shorten the exposure, but for actual use, wouldn't one be able to print a 50mp image as large as an 18 mp image? We choose print size based on our needs, not our megapixels, don't we?

 

[tron]

I'm probably just ignorant, but doesn't the maximum exposure time to avoid star trails have more to do with the final size of the displayed image than the number of megapixels? I mean if all your interested in is pixel-peeping, then yes, you'll have to shorten the exposure, but for actual use, wouldn't one be able to print a 50mp image as large as an 18 mp image? We choose print size based on our needs, not our megapixels, don't we?

Yes, you are right. But in that case you wouldn't take advantage of a high megapixel camera and the high megapixel camera would have higher noise ... which I know would seem less ovious if we do not need highest magnification in printing so I guess we revert back to the previous comparison. But whatever suits you.

Anyway as others have pointed out a high megapixel camera would be more useful in Deep Space Object photography.

 

[mnclayshooter]

One thing you don't need is a kick-ass 63 point AF system... but a really really good central point would be great.....

+1

If the central point could be a tightly grouped set of several points with selectable zone size (something like a set of concentric rings of AF points - 1 single, then a ring of 7 including the central one, then a ring of say, 16 or so at the outer-most edge making for effectively a large center point if selected as a "single zone" (for moon/planets etc) it seems it would help both the on-telescope and long tele lens shooters.

why?.. you focus in liveview at max magnification. On a scope you use a Bhatinov Mask, with a big lens you can do the same, on a wide angle you just focus for minimum star size.

But I do agree, you don't need 61 cross points, a 6D -3EV AF point might be of a little use, but I wouldn't use it.

You're right. I had gotten this mixed up in my head as a potentially multi-use camera (From reading other comments on this thread).

 

[emag]

My vote is for a 6Da. I use my 6D wireless with an Android tablet for astro now and have no real complaints, although I do like the articulating LCD on my 60D. If the new camera is essentially similar to the 6D but with a 50% higher price tag I don't see it doing well. Makes more sense to send a 6D off for modification.

 

[StudentOfLight]

After playing around with some of the 5Ds-R RAW files and seeing what Roger Clark did with the 7D Mark-II, I'm really starting to wonder if this rumoured camera could turn out to use the 50MP sensor. Perhaps Canon would launch a new "6D gen-II platform" with improved build quality but different ergonomics to the 5D-series. The 6D Mark-II might for example use a 20-24MP sensor with improved PDAF while a potential 6Da would use a 50MP sensor with dumbed down PDAF array but instead has better near-IR transmission as well as improved circuitry and shielding.

 

[rocketride]

Maybe the 6Da? Cheap with a great sensor. I feel the AF of the 5d series would increase the price and is not really needed on what is a pretty specialist tool.

I think a 6Da would make a lot more sense. Neither the teeny-tiny pixels nor the elaborate AF system of the 5DR(s) would helpful on an astrophotography camera. And burst rate, and stuff like that are completely irrelevant.
So make it a 6Da.

 

[tomrukh]

Should i wait for that camera or go for modified 6d? I'm using 60da right now but need better noise performance :/

 

[rfdesigner]

Should i wait for that camera or go for modified 6d? I'm using 60da right now but need better noise performance :/

what sort of images are you taking/trying to take.

Deep Sky or wide field?

 

[tomrukh]

Both. As an astronomy student I can get both from observatory.

 

[rfdesigner]

Both. As an astronomy student I can get both from observatory.

For wide field.. full frame is a clear winner.. you can use a longer wider lens and capture many more photons... improvements in readout noise are unlikely to help much if you can track. Quantum efficiciency, dark current and skyglow are far more important. The existing 6D is already one of the best DSLRs for astronomy, I'd be suprised if a 6DII could make any meaningful difference to a tracked shot.

For attaching to a telescope it's less clear. What is the size of the corrected field of view?, how much vignetting? What is the sky glow you're fighting? i.e. how short an image can you get away with where the glow still outweighs the readout noise? What is your optimum pixel pitch (i.e how good is your seeing and what focal length are you using and how good is the tracking, excessively fine pixels are bad news for sensitivity), what are your targets.. planetary nebula?, intergalactic flux?, exoplanets? you might need different sensor scales.. or barlows/focal reducers.

Put simply do you need breadth or depth?.. better smaller sensor or worse wider sensor. A 6D will set you back roughly the same as a dedicated CCD astro camera.

Do you want to conduct astrometry?.. in which case having a linear sensor is an advantage so ABG might be bad news.

For reference I have a 12"f5 with a KAF8300 mono camera & filter wheel, this gives me ~0.7arc sec pixel pitch which is roughly optimal for maximum resolution under 2" seeing conditions. (though not optimal for maximum sensitiivty.. if I want that then I use binning) The weakness in my system is the lack of an observatory.. which I'm currently working on. (I'm also over 40.. what you lose in looks you get back in toys, when I was a student I'd only tried star trails on film.. and was very happy just to identify star colours)

I'm sure you know but I'll say it anyway.. if you're thinking more long term and will want a scope of your own in due course.. spend as much as you possibly can on the mount, then make do for the scope and camera... the mount is all.

 

[pedro]

Maybe the 6Da? Cheap with a great sensor. I feel the AF of the 5d series would increase the price and is not really needed on what is a pretty specialist tool.

this would be great. count me in!

 

[axtstern]

Any further Information on this Topic ?

 

[tomrukh]

still waiting :/

 

[tron]

still waiting :/

It's CR1 what did you expect? A thread merely to increase posts...

 

[BeenThere]

I was wondering if the FF Canon high ISO/low noise Champ Camera has changed lately. The Digital Picture has a tool where one can qualitatively compare the noise in Canon Cameras:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=819&Test=0&ISO=3200&CameraComp=1041&TestComp=0&ISOComp=3200

I was comparing at ISO 3200 and 6400 where most of the interest lies for wide field astrophotography. It appears to my eye that the 6D is still the best with 1DXII very close (maybe equal). One interesting thing is that the 1DXII noise appears to be slightly smoothed relative to that on the 6D. The methodology on the web site states that all in-camera noise removal was turned off, but I am wondering if there is still a bit of Canon noise smoothing going on in the 1DXII samples.

I guess we will soon get to see how the 5Div stacks up against the current champ. I expect it will still fall short due to the smaller pixel pitch.

 

[tron]

I was wondering if the FF Canon high ISO/low noise Champ Camera has changed lately. The Digital Picture has a tool where one can qualitatively compare the noise in Canon Cameras:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=819&Test=0&ISO=3200&CameraComp=1041&TestComp=0&ISOComp=3200

I was comparing at ISO 3200 and 6400 where most of the interest lies for wide field astrophotography. It appears to my eye that the 6D is still the best with 1DXII very close (maybe equal). One interesting thing is that the 1DXII noise appears to be slightly smoothed relative to that on the 6D. The methodology on the web site states that all in-camera noise removal was turned off, but I am wondering if there is still a bit of Canon noise smoothing going on in the 1DXII samples.

I guess we will soon get to see how the 5Div stacks up against the current champ. I expect it will still fall short due to the smaller pixel pitch.

That's interesting so you say that for astrophotography ( I assume wide field = landscape astrophotography otherwise there are devices that counter earth movement and allow us to shoot more seconds so we can lower the iso) a 6D sensor is more or less equal to a 1DxII sensor ? I am interested in this kind of photography. For now I use 5D3 for this.

 

[rpt]

One thing you don't need is a kick-ass 63 point AF system... but a really really good central point would be great.....

+1
Very valid point! So 6Da?

 

[niels123]

Ha stands for H-Alpha, one of the primary emission band of the Hydrogen.
It's a deep red that's pretty much invisible to human eyes and so the filters before the sensor tend to cut it out.
But in the Astro-photo domain, that's the principal band of light since most of the universe is Hydrogen (emmission nebula emits mostly in that band (M42, California, Laguna, etc...) It's not that important for galaxies or stellar cluster which emits light in pretty much every band).
So conventionnal Canon DSLRs cut out something like 60-70% of your most useful frequency in Astro..

That's mostly why there's a few companies providing filter replacement for DSLR. Once the new filter is installed, you have to use a custom white-balance to take daylight picture because the red channel will be a lot stronger than before, but you can still use the camera normally.
The filter replacement operation is not cheap though (around 300-400€ depending on the camera) and the warranty is immediatly voided by the operation. So, Canon offering "a" models is mostly a good news.

If you still got questions, shoot, i'll try to answer.

Djaaf

Would an a model be the same as a modified camera where the low-pass filter has been removed: is there a difference between full-spectrum modification and the a-model in terms of IR-landscape photography? (I use clip-in filters, so I don't want a visibile-light block filter on my sensor).

Thanx!
Niels