Why not mount the camera on a dedicated astro telescope? Is a wide range of lenses that critical? Especially as the purchaser will likely have a bunch of perfectly good and 100% compatible EF and EFS lenses.
Why not mount the camera on a dedicated astro telescope? Is a wide range of lenses that critical? Especially as the purchaser will likely have a bunch of perfectly good and 100% compatible EF and EFS lenses.
Wow, that's a beautiful video!! i hope i can get my hands in one Eos R soon!I shot this on my Canon EOS R using the RF 35mm F/1.8 STM lens stopped down to F/2.0 for coma.
I would love to get more latitude on both ends of the light spectrum with the sensor. It would also be great to have a dedicated intervalometer for ramping holy grail timelapses. Some other features could be an internal closure for the eyepiece to block light, dedicated color temperatures for night skies, a better way to regulate sensor temperature, a simple process that takes blackout frames for noise compensation in camera, a night-mode for all screens, better battery performance (think ability to connect to a battery pack), improved infinity focus peaking, and illuminated or glowing buttons externally.
I think Canon's biggest hurdle is lenses as almost all their fast primes exhibit the annoying coma aberration. I saw this at f/1.8 on the 35mm lens in my most recent tests. It's Milky Way season this week, and this news is exciting!
Yes, that's the main problem. Canon is notorious for not giving a crap about coma, because their lenses are orientated towards wedding / wildlife / PJ use-cases and not the fringe outliers of astrophotography.I think Canon's biggest hurdle is lenses as almost all their fast primes exhibit the annoying coma aberration. I saw this at f/1.8 on the 35mm lens in my most recent tests. It's Milky Way season this week, and this news is exciting!
That's amazing! Did you have to do anything to prevent condensation from hitting the lens? I've done a test of the Holy Grail with city lights on the 5D Mark III and am planning on trying for the milky way on Linville Gorge.I shot this on my Canon EOS R using the RF 35mm F/1.8 STM lens stopped down to F/2.0 for coma.
I would love to get more latitude on both ends of the light spectrum with the sensor. It would also be great to have a dedicated intervalometer for ramping holy grail timelapses. Some other features could be an internal closure for the eyepiece to block light, dedicated color temperatures for night skies, a better way to regulate sensor temperature, a simple process that takes blackout frames for noise compensation in camera, a night-mode for all screens, better battery performance (think ability to connect to a battery pack), improved infinity focus peaking, and illuminated or glowing buttons externally.
I think Canon's biggest hurdle is lenses as almost all their fast primes exhibit the annoying coma aberration. I saw this at f/1.8 on the 35mm lens in my most recent tests. It's Milky Way season this week, and this news is exciting!
I use a dedicated external intervalometer for two reasons. ML is an additional drain on the battery and doesn’t give you perfect intervals. I assemble time-lapses in LRTimelapse and have seen the 1-2 second misses on regular intervals.That's amazing! Did you have to do anything to prevent condensation from hitting the lens? I've done a test of the Holy Grail with city lights on the 5D Mark III and am planning on trying for the milky way on Linville Gorge.
I'm curious, what's your process? For the MKIII, I use ML with ETTR and iso limited to 6400 iso, then timelapse deflicker and ramp script from Magic Lantern. Using the free script for Adobe Bridge, you can ramp your white balance and most other ACR settings.
I thought about getting the R to try and obtain a higher dynamic range Holy Grail Timelapse, I assume the larger range of ISO invariance would allow the AV setting to be sufficient until Magic Lantern makes it on the R.
What exactly would you be blocking light from reaching by blocking off the viewfinder of a mirrorless camera? It's not like there's any passage way between the viewfinder and the sensor as there is in a DSLR. I would think that even if there were some tiny cracks between the viewfinder housing and the chamber that contains the sensor, you would pretty much need direct sunlight going right into the viewfinder to be able to maybe get any light leakage from the viewfinder into the sensor. The tiny amount of ambient light when doing astrophotography at night would almost definitely not be enough to get through the viewfinder and wind up reaching the sensor somehow.Some other features could be an internal closure for the eyepiece to block light
What exactly would you be blocking light from reaching by blocking off the viewfinder of a mirrorless camera? It's not like there's any passage way between the viewfinder and the sensor as there is in a DSLR. I would think that even if there were some tiny cracks between the viewfinder housing and the chamber that contains the sensor, you would pretty much need direct sunlight going right into the viewfinder to be able to maybe get any light leakage from the viewfinder into the sensor. The tiny amount of ambient light when doing astrophotography at night would almost definitely not be enough to get through the viewfinder and wind up reaching the sensor somehow.