Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_solar_25_winners.thumb.jpg.fe4e711c64054f3c9486c752d0bcd6f2.jpg

Aenima

Members
  • Content Count

    1,494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Aenima

  1. Awesome, Callum, thank you. Reason I asked is being v new to widefield - let alone lens based photography in general - I was hoping to ask advice. I like the budget astro page/site whole concept and a big fan of Dougs and the rest of you's pics and tutorials (not seen them all yet). If you didn't recognise any of my attempts at imaging then you might know me as Jay. Dont worry about not remembering me as I don't really make the effort to stick out much, and try to avoid trouble - just wish it would return the favour and avoid me Anyway, thanks for suggestions and I hope to be able to seek more of them at some point? Regards Aenima
  2. Thats encouraging news, thank you. I have tried the 'go to the end and back a bit' but the donuts just get slightly bigger not smaller, and to look through the viewfinder its clearly not passing 'through' infinity - like the kit lens does - as the distant objects do not get sharp then soft again - like the kit one - which would suggest that the focus just doesn't quite get there - again, the 18-55 lens is able to all the way from almost a foot away to infinity and then slightly past, looking through the VF you can see this happening aas focus travels from close to distant to just past sharp at the other end. Unfortunately the 28-100mm goes from close to almost sharp at the other end. I know it seems like i'm not getting that the infinity point is back a bit from the end but after trying this on stars it really seems like the end is as far 'away' as its going to get. I'm going to try a post about widefield tecniques and lenses, hopefully it might shed some light on exactly what I should be trying and how to choose the right lens. Someone somewhere must have a d3100 and use it for widefield. Thanks t those who posted above, grateful for any input. Regards Aenima
  3. Is it me? The camera is nikon. The lens is nikon. The lens has infinity marking (marking, not marked, it just says oo it on the back) and it wont turn enough in the desired direction to reach infinity. I would dearly like to think its a fault or bad luck, but the lens is ok - aside from the coma - in every other way, it just doesn't turn far enough for distant focus. O.o I hope its not the camera, thats for sure. Regards
  4. Sleeeeeeeeeeep

    1. Matt Scunthorpe

      Matt Scunthorpe

      Whats sleep? :D

    2. Daniel-K

      Daniel-K

      Sleep when your dead :)

    3. Daniel-K

      Daniel-K

      Sleep when your dead :)

  5. Doh!! VERY good point iksose7 (Callum?) - must've just forgot! Cheers for looking though dude, I will link in the other post as it has the full discussion there. http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/190309-camera-lens-is-this-right-know-your-lenses/ Thanks for the heads up Regards Aenima p.s Could you be Callum from budgetastro? if so, big fan cheers either way.
  6. Huge thanks for all the replies. Unfortunately without a scope attached i'm rather a newb at cameras, and although its a nikon lens which has the theoretical ability to reach infinity this one doesnt, nor did the telephoto m42 200mm one I tried before it. I have trouble believing that all lenses do focus infinity for the simple reason that out of 5 ive tried, 4 of which I have now only the kit 18-55 does so. I understand the newer ones do go past infinity for - I believe - flexibility at differing f-lengths etc. but not only does the lens not have it marked but it has a hard stop just before distant objects and points of light reach sharp focus, in fact the 28-100mm stops at a point where stars still look like donuts, I spent some quality time with the EQ5 and manual focus with both nikkors - live view is good on bright stars but I really wanted to see the smaller ones as well because the brighter stars can appear as points with enough exposure or flare as the hole in the 'donut' gets filled in regardless of it being a ring and not a dot. My industar 50 goes nowhere near infinty but that wasnt expected to, also my Canon-fit tamron 70-210 stops dead just before the end of its inward travel, which logically should be near infinity but it just doesn't quite reach, there might be a solution there in the form of an adapter - inward travel can be adjusted slightly by thinning down the bayonet adapter to bring the lens rear closer to the sensor. Not for the nikkor though as it goes direct into the camera. It has the oo mark on it, but not as a guide just as a label that says it does 0.96" - oo near the serial number. Anyway, long story short - I just want a lens that gives infinity at about 80 to 200 mm or either for widefield - the 18-55 is ok but not much magnification to it. Many thanks for the suggestions everyone posting above - the fixed lens looks like it would be worth a better look. I took quite a few pics in my fiddling tonight and will check them more thoroughly and maybe post an example or two - never know it might help. Thanks again, Regards Aenima
  7. I find with the EQ5 synscan that since the 3.35 update, a 2-star align is easiest and still allows for polar align feature to be used. Best to try and start at 'Home' position and looking through the finder polaris wont be exact in the crosshairs but close, then go for wide low stars either side approaching up and right buttons for backlash then PAE corrections each time a convenient object is centered. The biggest hassle I had with the synscan was knocking the power cable after everything was done, so then needing to start over, however I have noticed that if you already have your target in view when you get a power cut, its ok to just quickly switch it back on and go into the set-up menu and select 'tracking' = sidereal and it just starts RA tracking without needing to re-align. You might know this but I can remember many times giving up in a huff and packing up if this happened at just the wrong moment, but since finding out the 'tracking' works without the rest Ive not had the stress of power offs. Regards Aenima
  8. Thanks it was completely new and a shock to me that coma would appear on anything other than my badly collimated reflector! So, can II assume that for a nikon 28-100mm AF-g nikkor, this level of coma is absolutely normal? Would anybody suggest a reasonable priced lens that will achieve decent widefield shots, or at the least whether processing or using other kinds of techniques might help the current lens cope better? Much appreciated nmoushon, thank you.
  9. Im hoping someone who knows about widefield and camera lenses can help me? Rather than post again I will link it, please if you know what to look for in lenses regarding coma in particular i'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the images in the linked post. Thank you for any help, Regards Aenima
  10. Do you know your lenses? Because I don't, and this is a tentative attempt at widefield. I went to the trouble of getting a nikon lens for a nikon camera and one which said it focuses infinity, else all kinds of problems might have come before I got started. But after piggy backing my camera on my mount and turning focus to infinty, manual mode with release, I looked at the preview and noticed quite bad coma - on a camera lens this is unfamiliar to me so please could someone take a look at these shots for me? No processing: ~100mm between 6 - 20 secs ISO 800 - HI-2 Coma this bad isn't what I was expecting, especially on a nikon lens. It may have been slightly cheap but - is this normal? How can I choose one which doesnt coma? Any help hugely appreciated. Regards Aenima
  11. Aenima

    ngc6888 A

    From the album: The next step.

    Differences in processing. 40 x 40 sec / ISO 1600 / 200p/eq5 - 300D deepskystacker sigma clipping....

    © Aenima

  12. Aenima

    ngc6888

    From the album: The next step.

    Crescent nebula, Guiding on hold while problems are resolved, so 40 second exposures - not long enough for the kind of detail this deserves, being a pretty nebula, but did what I could with the little data I had.

    © Aenima

  13. Huge thank you for all the posts, recently been struggling with some of the smaller forums when posting as the feedback is very limited, so grateful for some input - might just be sheer numbers but I still find SGL to be the most 'responsive' forum there is (with exception to maybe the more 'international' ones, but i dont post in any so SGL seems a lot better). Anyway, yes - pixinsight is both popular and powerful. I'm finding though that its very resource heavy, this is the bad news as my 32bit vista junkbox will not stand up to the pressure, dual core with only 1 or 2 ghz of ram - this is way under what minimum specs are for PI - so its looking like i'd need to save up for a laptop as well as the software itself. My budget is another topic, but suffice to say it seems a little beyond my current capability. Which sucks as the program sounds well worth a shot. I might be able to use a 64bit system but that still only has dual core and a couple of gig ram, how slow would it be if it runs at all? Regards Aenima
  14. If anyone has used pixinsight either successfully or otherwise, please could you write your thoughts on how it was to use and how it compares to other software you might have tried? I hopefully want to get an idea of its pro's and cons as well as usability and value for money. Many thanks for any input to the thread (if it becomes one of course....) Regards Aenima ps I'm aware of the trial period
  15. Well, after some bodge-jobbing with a bit of modelling clay I'm getting big reductions in blue patches as in pic above. It seems to be mostly the i/o port area thats leaking and covering all but the remote socket has improved it almost completely. Still, I recommend to those with similar cameras after modding its a good idea to take extended darkframes, with (and without) a light source checking for leaks - I only noticed because guiding allowed longer exposures else it would've gone unchecked possibly affecting image quality. Thanks to the above posters for the suggestions and input, Regards Aenima
  16. You too tich? Oh joy. ) Getting used to sseing it in my pics to be honest, still be interested to see how it turns out - best of luck malc. Regards Aenima
  17. 3 hours to set up 1 and a half to get everything else done.

  18. I sellotaped a blow-brush thingy to a long stick and very gently swept any bits to either side - this is the high tech and sophisticated approach (cough)...... but worked for now, later a decent clean might be in order. Regards Aenima
  19. Happy to see you got rid of those streaks. Also pleased that my first guess ended up being right 0.0 (Doesnt happen too often, but great stuff all round) Aenima
  20. That overwhelming compulsion to peel off my skin and wrap what's left in a morphine soaked band-aid. .......anyone? ...just me? Oh well. :P

    1. Daniel-K

      Daniel-K

      ive been working i a factory all day thats like a green house has the compressor blowing air at me all day :)

    2. Aenima

      Aenima

      I would NOT like to add sunburn to the mix!

    3. nightfisher

      nightfisher

      thought it was sunburn, whats happened?

    4. Show next comments  27 more
  21. Aenima

    M3 globular cluster

    From the album: The next step.

    Some more practice on globular clusters.

    © Aenima

  22. Excellent imaging James, I really like clusters and while I cant imagine what they are made up of, they still have a definite allure visually. I recently tested a new dslr by snapping a couple of short exposures unguided of m3 and 13 and although tracking was terrible and processing not up to much but its now something I also intend to return to as an imaging target. A lot of them up there, more than I realised! Best of luck with the imaging, and clear skies all round! Regards Aenima
  23. Awesome image james, im assuming the camera is mono? But actually the other day I was just thinking about clusters and how they clump together, is it a ball of stars? are they held in place by gravity? and what might the middle look like or be like? It isnt something i'm knowledgeable on, also you seemed the right person to ask while the subject is up. But that is definitely a nice pic, though Regards Aenima
  24. Amen to that -- my knees really hurt right now! (flip that screen!)
  25. I have skimmed through the thread and seen excellent advice all round, so I really just want to put my two pee worth in as they say. After using a Canon 300D for astro and normal photo - and not used control software (those remote timers for a tenner with LCD's are very handy!!) I have to say it was a decent camera especially for the price of used EOS models. Also, with the filter mod and the russian hack for MLU and 3200 ISO its a great way to image DSO's. However, since getting hold of a entry level Nikon D3100 it was immediately clear that the more recent dSLR from both Manufacturers have a huge edge on the old 6 or 8 Mpxl cameras, and if you want to do normal photography with the same DSLR as astro then the recent models are again a big improvement (I know its not about old vs new but the difference is worth mentioning) I LOVE my Nikon d3100 very much after just a few days of using it. It is feature packed, the kit 18-55mm lens is also amazing if a kit is in your budget. But mostly, it is usable with a timer remote on bulb, has liveview that includes a mirror lock type function and is very lightweight and compact not to mention the 14mpxl sensor and a pretty high def movie mode. While clearly I havent tried many other dslr's for comparison, its also clear that the Nikons are every bit as high class and versatile as Canons and with the programmable timer/remote cable the software issues are not that restrictive. I was gobsmacked when I saw the huge file sizes of NEF(RAW) compared to the 300D - 80meg TIFFs and 15meg JPEGS compared to 6meg RAW and 1meg jpegs from the 300D. I'd say get the newer model whichever brand - and Nikon are only restrictive if you depend on the software for everything. A quick first light test shot d3100: Regards Aenima
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.