just found your channel today. great information. i hope to add a star tracker to my system this year. Northern Michigan has lots of dark sky areas to shoot.
It’s the pixel size that determines the sensitivity to untracked star motion. If the crop sensor has the same pixel size, say 4 um per pixel, and a full size sensor has 4 um per pixel, they are equivalent in terms of arc seconds of sky per pixel for a given lens. Many aps-c crop do in fact have smaller pixels though.
I've used the Tamron 600mm G1 in a star tracker pretty successfully to capture Andromeda Galaxy and Orion neb. I think I was getting like 50 sec exposures
nice work. i only found you today but the videos have useful information. you should do a video about catching the orion constellation. i know theres plenty out there but i bet you could fill it with different information anyways. keep it up :)
Thanks! I've been trying, but the the clouds have been ruling the night skies recently! I'm really wanting to do a video about photographing the entire constellation with a 50mm lens!
I recently stumbled upon your videos and I love them! ❤ I have a 10mm Rokinon lens 2.8F and a crop sensor camera (nikon). I recently took some shots of the ML at iso 3200 and 6400 around at 6 and 8 seconds and there was a lot of noise on both. Any tips? I do have a manual tracker but have not used it yet.
Thanks for this interesting video, Walt. What do you think about mirror lenses? They are of course cheaper, they have fixed aperture and shorter length. As far as I know they're also less affected by cromatic aberrations. I got a 900mm f/8 and a 500mm f/6.3 (on a 1.5x crop camera, nikon d5600) and I'm waiting for the holidays to test them under a darker sky than the one I have here in Rome (bortle 8/9). I just tested them on the moon, for now, and they seem to behave pretty well. ps: I'll surely buy the Rokinon 135 f/2 (here in Europe is manifactured by Samyang but it's the same lens) and I already got a second-hand Rokinon/Samyang 85mm f/1.4.
Honestly I haven't really looked into mirror lenses until I saw your comment. I'm gonna have to get one and try it out! Keep me updated on how yours work out!
Hi I’m watching the video and I’m thinking things I have the canon RP with 14-35 F4 and I’m thinking I should trade it in for they 16mm f2.8 and then I just need a good idea for moon pictures and good ideas
Peter Zelinka has an article about this on his page. He shows the optimum pixel size for a given focal length. Format wars don’t really apply to Astro. That’s why there are so many serious Astro cams that are Micro Four Thirds. As far as formats are concerned, look up Roger Clark. He has written a number of articles on his website, Clark Vision, including articles about sensor size, etc.. Take a look at his AstroBin page while you’re at it. Dr Clark is a planetary physicist and does this for a living and has written processing software. He uses a Canon EOS 7D Mk II and a 300mm f/2.8. As far as astrophotography is concerned, aperture rules over sensor size almost every time.
Delta, thanks for the videos, they have been a great help for me. I do have a question in regards to the Tamron 150-600mm, I have a Canon SL2 which is a crop sensor, how will this perform on my camera, I know the focal length will greatly increase but you mentioned better performance with the Full sensor, is it not worth the investment for my camera? Should I have picked up a full sensor camera vs crop sensor? I'm also interested in using the lens vs telescope for daytime usage. I have looked at the redcat 51 as well as the william optics 61 but they're fixed focal lengths and for any further objects I would have to purchase larger telescopes. I'd like to stay with using the star adventurer vs EQ full mounts since I like to travel around and not just my backyard. Future plans is to go with a guide scope for auto guiding and a full Astro camera vs DSLR. Any suggestions will greatly appreciated. So far I'm really enjoying the new hobby.
I have a Canon T5i (crop sensor) that I use with my 150-600 with great results! I think that will be a perfect setup for you! I do have a few recommendations. Go ahead and invest in the autoguiding setup. You'll really benefit from it at those high focal lengths. It'll be the difference between 20 to 30 second exposures, and three minute exposures. Now an autoguider is going to add a little weight to your setup and depending on how you mount it, it can really affect your balance. You might need to get a second counterweight or an extension rod if that happens. And finally I got a cheap bahtinov mask for that lens. It really helps get those stars super sharp! It can be a little difficult to find one for that lens. You just need to be patient and keep searching for a 92mm clip on bahtinov mask and eventually one will pop up on ebay or somewhere! Good luck and clear skies!
@@deltaastrophotography Delta thanks for the advice, greatly appreciated. I'll be placing my order today. I've been watching other videos on setting up the lens with a guide scope and I think I have a way to setup the guide scope using the bottom post of the balancing arm using a ball head. I'll share what I come up with once I set it up and test it. We'll be in touch.
These videos are so good . Thank you very much for posting them . I would like to buy a mirror less camera , but I have no idea what all the technical specs mean . Would you mind recommending a Canon mirror less camera for under $ 1000 . I want to get started in this hobby by taking wide angle and deep space pictures with a tracking mount for long exposures. Thank you for the help - Rob
My friend got a Canon M50 and loves it! It's an entry level mirrorless camera. Keep in mind that you'll need an adapter to use older lenses designed for non mirrorless cameras. So keep an extra $100 in your budget. You can get both the M50 and the adapter for under $800!
A motorized German equatorial mount is going to be best! A star tracker is cheap and portable, so it's good for people that like to travel or who are on a budget
Well you can get some cool cameras to connect to those cheap telescopes and take some kick ass photos! Check out ZWO planetary cameras! They would be awesome for moon photos!
Aperture is the most important thing. Stop using f-stop as a guide. It will confuse you. The only thing that matters is true aperture in millimetres. A 24mm f/1.4 has a aperture of 17mm, whereas a 14mm f/2.8 has an aperture of only 5mm. Which one do you think is going to let in more light? The 24mm of course but not because it’s f/1.4 but because it’s 17mm. A 50mm f/2 is 25mm. A 300mm f/2.8 is 107mm. Forget f-stop. It’s a dimensionless number that helps with exposure in normal conditions. That’s it. The only way to seriously gather photons is with a large true aperture. The point of this is that _sensor format is unimportant_ in most cases. In astronomy, aperture rules. That’s how to photograph things you can’t see with the naked eye (which has a maximum aperture of about 6.5mm in a young person with healthy eyes). For further information, look at Clark a vision, the website of Dr Roger Clark. Dr Clark is a planetary physicist. He does this for a living and he has written some powerful processing software as well. While you’re at at, take a look at his AstroBin page.
Are you using Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f2 by any chance? Could you make a video about astro photos using this lens? I have one of these but struggling to get good results
he doesn't have one (or so i thought he said in this video) but so many others do. one he recommends is AstroBackyard. watch him he uses the Rokinon 135mm f/2. its gorgeous.
Rokin on 135m is one of the best astro lenses out there! It was so good with my crop sensor mirror less Lumix G9, I had to buy another for the new Pentax K1-Mii with Astrotracer. But everytime I buy new gear, the Sky gods gift me with clouds. :(
@@astroattorney that's nice to know Linda..I have tried some single exposure 2 to 4 sec shots with it but haven't found much good results..maybe time I got a star tracking equipment
Absolutely! I use the 6D mk1 and love it! I've been wanting to upgrade to the Mark II lately just for video purposes. Now that Canon is starting to switch to mirrorless cameras you might have to eventually get your lenses on the used market.
I think that should be a fine camera to start with! Is the kit lens 18-55? 18 is a perfect focal length for Milky Way. The 70-200 is going to be a bit challenging without a star tracker. Possible but very difficult and time consuming.
The rokinons are the worst possible lenses for astrophotography period! Exceptionally cheap build quality with huge variance in build quality & durability for sample to sample. The only reason most people recommend these are because they are cheap. In some units the "glue" that holds the lenses in place deteriorate over period of time and the lenses go off centre resulting in significant distortion in the edges. I know because I have had many of these fail in fact my local agent said they are sort of acceptable of astro work if stopped down to at least 5.6 if not more to minimise these distortions so you've got to ask your self would you like good quality images to start of with or waste enormous amounts of time trying to fix them in post. Some such as Coma distortion are simply not really fixable. Thank you for the tutorial
Canon does not have a prime RF f1.4 lens. They have 50 new mirrorless camera and no prime RF wides??????? Why should my only option for fast wide prime is a 2015 Sigma EF with adapter? Canon is so ridiculous. At least allow third parties to make what we need if you cant. The line of stm lens for 199 dollars is not my answer to astro.
I'm going to avoid going mirrorless for a long time. The last DSLRs were great cameras and there are 20 years worth of great lenses out there to go when thenm. Screw starting over from scratch, using adapters, and having to buy new lenses
@@deltaastrophotography You make a great point. My 1DxMark 1 is still a work horse and gets it done .That said, after using my R6 and R7 for a while, the old dslr feels like a dinosaur lol Did I mention the RF lenses are hella expensive.
