First foray into AP

[JCINGA]

So I just ordered the super wedge for my 12" lx200, I will be doing some research on what imaging hardware and software I will be using, but I just can't stand it - I have to start taking shots!
I was a pro photographer for decades and gave it up about 5 years ago. Making photography a job has the side effect of making the hobby not fun anymore...but it's been long enough and I have never done AP so....

Anyone found that there is any advantage to using an SLR body versus say a ZWO or the like imager?

Seems like the latter requires the pc to be connected while the body does not?

[bobharmony]

If you have a DLSR body hanging around, you should slap it on and start shooting. There are many camera choices to pick from in the long run, but AP isn't like most other forms of photography, and you should jump in and start the lessons

I have been using a DSLR for a few years now and am considering moving to a dedicated astro camera when I can scratch enough change together. For me, the main advantage that will bring is the ability to cool the camera and reduce the amount of noise that AP images generate, and the fuss it is to deal with in post-processing.

Now that I've rattled on about me, what type of AP are you thinking of, planetary, lunar, deep sky objects? The mechanisms to do each well utilize different types of software, and knowing where you want to go will help our experts chime in on the subject.

Bob

[sdbodin]

The dedicated astrocams are usually cooled to get rid of thermal noise, which is very noticeable on the long exposures needed for all that faint stuff. And I mean faint, maybe a few photons per second of signal, so noise needs to be below that.

Then there is all that guiding accuracy, by using a guide camera, to get those precious few photons to register and not smear out. You will find a PC necessary to do all these jobs.

And lastly, astrocams are light weight, some DSLRs can be down right lead weights.

Astroimaging is called the 'black hole' for a reason, hair pulled out, wallet emptied, and two hours down the drain for the stupid mistakes we all make.

Good luck,
Steve

[JCINGA]

That last statement is what scares me, if you know pro photography, you know how draining that can be on the wallet.

I think I will start easy and just go with planetary, lunar and maybe bright DSO's like Orion or Andromeda?

I have an old DLSR that isn"t too heavy that I'll throw on this weekend and start testing and getting used to it.

What would be a good place to start for software to process as above?

[sdbodin]

I hope some of the DSLR guys will chime in here as I know little of that. I have used Nebulosity for DSLRs brought over to the scope by friends, but I think there is free stuff out there.

Go for bright stuff, the moon is away for a week or so, so try some clusters, M45, M39, Double Cluster come to mind, Keep exposures to 10-15sec initially to minimize tracking errors. Planets will just be almost pinpoints. Faint fuzzies need a half hour to be just acceptable, especially at f10 with that 12inch and Orion or M31 wont fit the field anyway.

Keep expectation minimal for now, getting a shot will be an accomplishment initially, you should see my first stuff.
Steve

[Thefatkitty]

I mostly take pics of the Moon and occasionally planets with my Canon T3 and C80 Celestron/Vixen. The software I use is Autostakkert, PIPP, and either ImPPG or Registax for final processing. They're all free to boot; just do a search on the titles. As well a lot of people also use GIMP/Photoshop for further tweaking. At least it will give you a feel for the whole process.

Come to think of it; I've imaged the Pleiades a few times with my T3 on a little f/6 achro 60mm on my CG-4 doing manual tracking. The results were pretty good at 13 seconds, and it was actually fun as well

That's the limit of my know-how; best of luck to you!

[sdbodin]

OK, my fubar, sticking the DSLR on the 12, wow tuff place to start. Better way is sticking the DSLR and a good lens 50-100mm on top and using the 12 to track. Orion and Andromeda will frame fine this way and maybe 30sec exposures are possible without guiding. Nice wide field Milky Way shots also doable with a short lens.

Since you are a professional, you should have a bunch of nice lenses that you can use a f2.8 or better without terrible edge effect and speed is needed for the faint stuff.

OK, you got places to start, like Nike says, just do it.
Steve

[SkyHiker]

The main benefits of a DSLR are large sensor size and on board image storage - no computer required! And dirt cheap, they can rival astro cameras if you do your research. A OSC astro cma has some benefits over a DSLR but IMHO I would get a mono and then you have to deal with filters, refocusing, all major PITAs compared to the ease of use of a DSLR.

[JCINGA]

Great feedback guys.

I actually sold the majority of my gear as a sort of purge when I started the company about 5 years ago. That way I didn’t have to lie when someone asked me to shoot something and I said “I can’t”

So I have ordered the Nikon adapter for an older body and will do my best on Jupiter and Saturn this weekend.

Feedback coming

[Hankmeister3]

I use both a Canon EOS 77D and Canon EOS 80D DSLRs. The only real difference between the two is the 80D has a special "B" (bulb) setting whereas with the 77D you dial up the "M" (manual) mode and then side scroll left to the "B" (bulb) option. I also have a Canon EOS Rebel as a back-up camera and it's still new in box. The same T-adapter works for all three so that's not a logistical issue.

I like them. Each has a ton of internal processing software built-in if you ramp up the NR mode to its highest (three bar) setting. They aren't as "efficient" as dedicated astro-cameras are and the DSLR are "noisier" because they aren't easy to cool. I did notice when the weather turned really cold last winter (anything below 40 degrees is cold to me despite living in central Illinois for the last 36 years!), the cold was wicking away much of the heat generated by these cameras when making long exposures and so noise levels were a bit less and I was also getting better image density for a given exposure.

I was a semi-professional photographer in the late 1970s and 1980s and spent a good part of my life from the age of 13 - when I bought my first 35mm Pentax SLR - to about ten years ago as a serious amateur photographer. Because of that photo culture in which I was immersed for decades, I continue seeing telescopes, small and large, as telephotos on steroids. Yeah, in my early years it was all about ASA, f-stops, depth-of-field, film reciprocity failure, color shifts, kelvin temperatures as it relates to color balance, etc.. The fact is, the properties and effect of photons are the same whether they pass through precision refracting glass or bounce off of mirrors, both of which can be found in either big telescopes or extremely compact telephoto lenses. Given your own experience with conventional/terrestrial photography, about 80% of that experience and knowledge easily transfer over to the field of astrophotography. But I'm probably not telling you anything you don't already know.

I found my conventional knowledge of terrestrial photography is a great aid in having an understanding of what I need to do to improve my own astrophotographic experience while removing much of the "mystery" regarding extremely high-performance image capture. Already knowing the nuts and bolts of photographic theory and the how and why photons do what they do when they encounter a different medium like glass or a first surface mirror (or both) confers a real advantage to experienced terrestrial photographers when dealing with different optical trains, focal lengths/f-ratios, the light gathering advantage of bigger objectives, filters, the various optical aberrations like astigmatism, off-axis coma, flatness (or curvature in Schmidt "cameras") of focal plane etc. Every time I'm in the field I'm using photographic knowledge I first started learning as a 13 year-old camera nerd. Heh!

[JayTee]

Please reference this post to determine which software is needed for the object you are imaging. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=523

Cheers,
JT

[JCINGA]

Thanks both of you.

I have had cloudy or not ideal nights since I got the T mount and as such, not had time to practice. Add to that the outreach and I’m doesn’t for this week too!

Soon I hope, I’m all ready to try it.