Full Frame Astrophotography DSLR Coming [CR1]

[meywd]

I once saw an article that said that the proper term is photo-astrography for shooting stars. Astrophotography refers to being in space and shooting photos. True?

from Wikipedia

Astrophotography is a specialized type of photography for recording images of astronomical objects and large areas of the night sky. The first photograph of an astronomical object (the Moon) was taken in 1840

 

[Don Haines]

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

 

[StoneColdCoffee]

This would be some great news.
It sounds a bit more like deep sky astrophotography, like previous canon versions. I hope it is for us normal landscape astro people. but either way its a win for some people. Ive found my 6D to outperform the old 5DII but i haven't been out much with it. Hoping soon.
basically this would be a great idea for Canon as Sony and Nikon keep advancing too. Hopefully it will be an improvement in low light with large pixels So im hoping more for the 6DIIa than the 5IVa just on a cost basis.
And wish it was coming out in 2015 so we could see a price drop in the 2016 season. Its still a bit hard to watch the price come down so fast after a year. But its all a choice. Maybe i should sell to fund this more..but i wont be quitting my day job Either way its always exciting to see technology pushing forward. Eventually with the mirror-less option.

 

[bdunbar79]

I once saw an article that said that the proper term is photo-astrography for shooting stars. Astrophotography refers to being in space and shooting photos. True?

Nope.

 

[weixing]

Just a question as I really don't know much of the technical aspects: Is an "a" type cam strictly considered an astro only cam, or is the "a" configuaration an enhanced asset which allows you to do both daylight photography and outstanding astrophotography?

After posting I read this, http://randombio.com/d90infrared.html but the question remains...
Is it possible, to manually adjust the white balance in post (RAW) to a "normal photography" color scale?
Thank you for any hint on that. Regards, Peter

Otherwise, if they'd announce a 6Da I would add it to my 5D3 and be happy camper for years...;-)

Or as a fellow poster put it, how much more sensitive is a dual use camera?

Actual sensitivity to HA will be a factor. If canon releases this as a dual use camera it will likely not be as sensitive as simply modifying a stock camera... which is also much cheaper than buying XDa camera... if history repeats itself.

Hi,
I used to had a mod 450D for Astrophotography use and I try to use it to shoot normal photo, but the colour turns out very odd even if I use custom white balance. What I did was to get a OWB (Original White Balance) clip on filter for it and work quite well, but the negative side were that, the viewfinder become darker with a green/blue cast, you can't use EF-S lens on it (for crop DSLR) and I think can't use lens at f2.8 or faster.

Anyway, now also got clip on filter for EOS full frame DSLR, but will turn your DSLR to "mirrorless" camera.

Have a nice day.

 

[tron]

I am not sure if it is the best idea to be the same as the photo of this post 5DSRa.

It would be much better to make a 5DIIIa type camera. Less mpixels = less noise in high iso. In addition, less megapixels = better resistance in star trailing.

It's better to have more pixels... more resolution. For DSLR astrophotography with conventional lenses, most of us are reach limited and therefore opt for a crop sensor. While noise is a huge factor for astrophotography, ISO 1600 on any current rebel is excellent in the noise department when you consider image stacking. If this is as good in the noise department as the 7DII, it would give you a FF view with really excellent resolution and outstanding IQ.

Also, if you were using this camera it is assumed that you would be using it on a tracking mount, and with a quality tracking mount and good polar alignment, star trailing is not really a factor.

Actual sensitivity to HA will be a factor. If canon releases this as a dual use camera it will likely not be as sensitive as simply modifying a stock camera... which is also much cheaper than buying XDa camera... if history repeats itself.

Astrophotography does not refer necessarily to photographing pure sky. In landscape astrophotography you cannot use tracking mounts so the smaller pixel the less time you can expose without startrails.

 

[meywd]

I am not sure if it is the best idea to be the same as the photo of this post 5DSRa.

It would be much better to make a 5DIIIa type camera. Less mpixels = less noise in high iso. In addition, less megapixels = better resistance in star trailing.

It's better to have more pixels... more resolution. For DSLR astrophotography with conventional lenses, most of us are reach limited and therefore opt for a crop sensor. While noise is a huge factor for astrophotography, ISO 1600 on any current rebel is excellent in the noise department when you consider image stacking. If this is as good in the noise department as the 7DII, it would give you a FF view with really excellent resolution and outstanding IQ.

Also, if you were using this camera it is assumed that you would be using it on a tracking mount, and with a quality tracking mount and good polar alignment, star trailing is not really a factor.

Actual sensitivity to HA will be a factor. If canon releases this as a dual use camera it will likely not be as sensitive as simply modifying a stock camera... which is also much cheaper than buying XDa camera... if history repeats itself.

Astrophotography does not refer necessarily to photographing pure sky. In landscape astrophotography you cannot use tracking mounts so the smaller pixel the less time you can expose without startrails.

But do you need a modified camera for landscape astro?

 

[rfdesigner]

I've done a bit of astrophotography on film, dslr and CCD.

Dear Canon.

Please include:

A: Temperature sensor on chip, fed to either an electrical or optical output so camera can be externally setpoint cooled.
B: If possible a heat sink from sensor to Camera base.
C: In camera dark frame removal from a RAW image stored on the card (so user can upload image to camera) using a scaled dark frame removal algorithum.
D: In camera flat frame division from a RAW image stored on the card (so user can upload image to camera).
E: RAW 100% resolution video, even if only a very small section of the sensor such as 640x480 pixels, with "bright spot tracking" for planetary work. (Commercially this would be significant as it would make a great deep sky and and a great planetary camera in one)
F: toughened/quick release tether port; it's just too easy to trip over a cable in the dark.
G: Please also concider doing a mono version.

 

[NancyP]

meywd - no, you can do perfectly good landscape astrophotography with an unmodified camera, and most people will use an unmodified camera.

Modifications are helpful when you want to photograph certain hydrogen-rich nebulae at the telephoto (100 - 600mm) to telescope range. If you aren't into "faint fuzzies" (nebulae), you don't need the wider spectrum hot filter that a modded camera will have. Here's a good explanation by a well-established astrophotographer with the ability to teach:
http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/EQ_TESTS/60Da_60D_550Da.HTM
You can see that the changes are the intensification of the red signal. This is a favorite faint fuzzy to photograph.

If you are shooting star clusters, which are not emitting very much in the Ha wavelength, a stock consumer DSLR will do very nicely. Here is a nice (randomly selected) star cluster image of M13, a really big cluster with lots of different star temperatures (notice some stars are blueish, some white, some golden).
http://smithplanet.com/astro/messier/m13/

RFdesigner, I like your suggestions, bigger heat sink and a temperature sensor would be nice, but how well would this work with external chilling of an off-sensor heat sink portion? You can't have a huge temperature gradient inside the camera without affecting the fit of various parts made from different-thermal-properties materials.RAW video capture might be possible with Magic Lantern on a stock Canon, but aren't specialized planetary cameras relatively cheap? As in, not worth the trouble for Canon to duplicate this function?

 

[tron]

I am not sure if it is the best idea to be the same as the photo of this post 5DSRa.

It would be much better to make a 5DIIIa type camera. Less mpixels = less noise in high iso. In addition, less megapixels = better resistance in star trailing.

It's better to have more pixels... more resolution. For DSLR astrophotography with conventional lenses, most of us are reach limited and therefore opt for a crop sensor. While noise is a huge factor for astrophotography, ISO 1600 on any current rebel is excellent in the noise department when you consider image stacking. If this is as good in the noise department as the 7DII, it would give you a FF view with really excellent resolution and outstanding IQ.

Also, if you were using this camera it is assumed that you would be using it on a tracking mount, and with a quality tracking mount and good polar alignment, star trailing is not really a factor.

Actual sensitivity to HA will be a factor. If canon releases this as a dual use camera it will likely not be as sensitive as simply modifying a stock camera... which is also much cheaper than buying XDa camera... if history repeats itself.

Astrophotography does not refer necessarily to photographing pure sky. In landscape astrophotography you cannot use tracking mounts so the smaller pixel the less time you can expose without startrails.

But do you need a modified camera for landscape astro?

It's not necessary but you could take some interesting pictures of the milky way (which normaly dominates in landscape astro).

 

[tron]

@tron: Depends on what size you wanna print your result. More pixels doesn't mean less image quality in landscape astrophotography. There are a lot of factors. It's one of the most challenging things in photography, but also one of the most rewarding.

I don't care about how much pixels a new body has inside. This is one of the less interesting things when it comes to quality.

If you want to print big with a high megapixel count I believe that you have no choice but to limit the exposure time. Otherwise, a star will "occupy" more than one pixel and this is equivalent to star trailing and you will have to look the picture from bigger distance to avoid seeing it. This negates the higher megapixel count.

By the way, the typical 500 rule does not apply even for a 22Mpixel camera. For example, there are always star trails in FF when using 14mm and 30 sec exposure, so I use an exposure of 20 or 25 sec depending on how much I want to compromise. So a 50Mpixel camera would probably require a 15sec or even less exposure.

 

[Canon1]

I am not sure if it is the best idea to be the same as the photo of this post 5DSRa.

It would be much better to make a 5DIIIa type camera. Less mpixels = less noise in high iso. In addition, less megapixels = better resistance in star trailing.

It's better to have more pixels... more resolution. For DSLR astrophotography with conventional lenses, most of us are reach limited and therefore opt for a crop sensor. While noise is a huge factor for astrophotography, ISO 1600 on any current rebel is excellent in the noise department when you consider image stacking. If this is as good in the noise department as the 7DII, it would give you a FF view with really excellent resolution and outstanding IQ.

Also, if you were using this camera it is assumed that you would be using it on a tracking mount, and with a quality tracking mount and good polar alignment, star trailing is not really a factor.

Actual sensitivity to HA will be a factor. If canon releases this as a dual use camera it will likely not be as sensitive as simply modifying a stock camera... which is also much cheaper than buying XDa camera... if history repeats itself.

Astrophotography does not refer necessarily to photographing pure sky. In landscape astrophotography you cannot use tracking mounts so the smaller pixel the less time you can expose without startrails.

But do you need a modified camera for landscape astro?

Of course not, but I would not buy a modded camera if my primary interest was to include the landscape with the Milky Way. For what it's worth, For imagery that includes both a landscape element and the night sky tracking and stacking still produces superior results. Shoot one set of exposures for the sky (tracking) and one for the landscape, then combine. A single 20 or 30 second exposure on a static setup can produce spectacular results, however it is best to track and stack to improve snr.

 

[meywd]

I only asked to clear a point, if we don't need a modded camera for landscape astro, then the modded camera will be used for deep space objects, and so a 5Ds/5Dsr will be better than a 5DIII/6D

 

[cazza132]

An astro 5DsR with sensitivity to Ha would be a great idea. Even better, for me at least, would be a full spectrum version with sensitivity from 350nm to 1100nm. Would be good for shooting infrared and astro. Would also be useful for forensics. With the availability of lens mounted and clip in (X-Clip by Astronomic) UV/IR cut (for ordinary photography), UV/IR cut with Ha pass (for astro), IR filters, etc, as full spectrum version makes more sense to me than just an astro version.

 

[Canon1]

I only asked to clear a point, if we don't need a modded camera for landscape astro, then the modded camera will be used for deep space objects, and so a 5Ds/5Dsr will be better than a 5DIII/6D

Apologies, my last response was a reply to tron, but I copied your response into the discussion as well.

I agree with your last statement here. If given the choice and no budget concern, I would opt for a 50mp full frame camera for astro over a 5d3 or 6d. However, I would probably get a stock 5ds/r and modify it rather than buy one that is for astro already. Canon tries to make these XXDa cameras dual use by restricting the spectrum and reducing sensitivity to Ha somewhat while a modded camera Removes the IR filter and generally a clear filter is replaced to retain AF.

 

[NancyP]

Actually the Da filter is still an IR cut ("hot") filter, but the wavelength cut-off is a little longer than in the stock filter.

 

[Canon1]

Actually the Da filter is still an IR cut ("hot") filter, but the wavelength cut-off is a little longer than in the stock filter.

Correct. So you can still easily use it as a dual use camera. A spec that makes a stock production canon astro camera less appealing to me.

 

[rfdesigner]

RFdesigner, I like your suggestions, bigger heat sink and a temperature sensor would be nice, but how well would this work with external chilling of an off-sensor heat sink portion? You can't have a huge temperature gradient inside the camera without affecting the fit of various parts made from different-thermal-properties materials.RAW video capture might be possible with Magic Lantern on a stock Canon, but aren't specialized planetary cameras relatively cheap? As in, not worth the trouble for Canon to duplicate this function?

Re chilling: Measuring the sensor means setpoint cooling, the heatsink just means better coupling between the cooler and the sensor. If the whole camera is inside an insulated box it will mean reduced thermal gradients and reduced overchilling of the rest of the camera.. better thermal coupling is gentler on the camera. I'm assuming 0C setpoint not -40C as I have on my CCD.

Yes there are specialised planetary cams, but they all have small sensors. If the sensor could track a planet as it drifted backwards and forwards across the field of view then scope tracking becomes a much reduced issue. Additionally you only need to carry one bit of kit for both jobs, (granted a barlow would be needed to get suitable magnification for planetary but you'd need that for a seperate cam anyway)

Also I came up with another idea for relatively widefield shots:

Use image stabilisation to track the stars for a little bit, thus lengthening the shot length before stars start to elongate, even if it can only shift the image for say +/-5 pixels, that's 10 pixels of movement before trailing vs one pixel, which increases useful shot lengths 10x.. a HUGE improvement. The rate of drift could be learned by training the IS on a star in liveview before taking a shot for real, of course this can't work for really widefield but for many shots it would be a real help.

 

[surapon]

Thank you, Sir/ Madame, My Teachers and friends.
Now, I have a clear understanding what a great Astrophotography DSLR must have , to create the great Photos of the deep space views.
One day, after I get bore from take the Photos of Beautiful Ladies and Handsome gentleman, I will learn to shoot the deep space/ Sky.
Have a great Weekend, Sir/ Madame.
Surapon

 

[pvalpha]

I think after choice of the 60D for the 60Da we should expect a 6Da coming. The banding noise on a 6D is lower than even a 5D mark III, which I suppose would help in astro.

Unless of course, Canon wants to target the astro D810 and make a 5DSa, which would be pretty incredible, if not for the high-ISO noise. But since full-frame cameras can use wider focal length lenses with wide apertures, I think it might negate the difference between a 60Da and a 5DSa, since you could use a 24mm F/1.4 or a 14MM f/2.8 with longer exposures without startrails on a full frame camera. And I mean, the 5DS is still at the noise level of a 7D Mark II, which is an improvement over a 60D anyway.

A 5DSa as you point out would likely have the ISO limitations of the 5DS/DSR reduced or even eliminated. It might make that an attractive camera for those who want high resolution and high ISO even for normal shooting. Just need an appropriate lens filter for Daylight or make the right adjustments to the camera.

I wonder if anyone thinks the LPF cancellation that the 5DS R has would be a benefit to an astrophotography DSLR?