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_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

Waylandscape

Members
  • Content Count

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

1 Follower

About Waylandscape

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Landscape Photography, Bushcraft and Living History.
    Oh and Astronomy of course.
  • Location
    Saddleworth
  1. Just a quick heads up. PhotoLine v18 has just been released and from what I have seen so far has some good improvements.
  2. Can I just add my support for this post. I have recently started looking for a viable alternative to Photoshop and tried Photoline after reading a recommendation. Just like Herbert I have been blown away by the capabilities of Photoline in comparison and lets remember this currently costs about 10% of the Adobe price. There is a thirty day free trial available, just try it and decide for yourselves...
  3. Thanks for the advice folks. I think it has firmed up my thinking about the kind of images I am looking to get. I've just beefed up my low light capabilities by upgrading to a 6D body which first tests show to be off the scale compared to the 5D. I think I'll be looking for an Astrotrac or a SkyTracker next and working with the glass I already have in the bag. Watch this space...
  4. Lots of good advice guys, thank you very much. I'm seriously coming round to the idea of an Astrotrac because it would be a lot more portable for use on location, both here and abroad, especially not having to carry a heavy battery pack and laptop to guide the thing. I may well go for a HEQ5 or 6 at some later stage if I decide to go for a scope but working with my existing kit seems to be a sensible idea for the moment. I already have a clutch of good solid tripods from Manfrotto and some spare heads that I can utilise as well so it seems like a sensible road to explore. I'll certainly post some work up when I get anything worth showing the only thing I've done so far with the 5D that might be of interest here is a star trail shot I took a while ago. It does show the type of image that interests me but I'd like to do something a little less typical if you know what I mean. Just being able to get a good tracked shot of the Milky Way in the background would be a good start.
  5. Stuart, I've noticed a few of your shots and would be very pleased if I could achieve that kind of quality. That makes a at least two people on here producing good results with the Astrotrac. I had been looking towards the HEQ5 but it's not just the cost of the mount but also the power supply and the need for guiding which makes it a lot more cumbersome. Are you guiding your Astrotrac or using it out of the box?
  6. I did wonder about the Canon M to maintain compatibility with my lenses but it lacks a little in controlibility as far as I can see. Having said that it will be a while before I have to make that sort of decision I think. By the way, how do you rate your Astrotrac? It looks like an interesting option.
  7. As a photographer that learned my trade using 5x4 inch sheet film and then turned to medium format for a compact option, I still consider "full frame" 35mm cameras a little fiddly. The short focal length lenses required for wide angle work with APS-C cameras do not seem really up to the job and the lack of differential focus can be a real pain. Having said that, these are all things that are the opposite of problems for astrophotography I guess. When shooting landscapes, often in very low light, it is the low noise characteristics of the larger sensor that makes me hang on to my 5D body even though it is considered old tech. these days. I've used a few small sensor cameras and indeed carry a Fuji x10 as a visual notebook but I find the quality rather lacking when it comes to serious work I suppose. I may have to look at a second body for use in AP but I doubt if it will see much use for anything else.
  8. Sadly my old 5D predates live view but it does look as if I may be sticking to the marque lenses for a while to get the coverage on the large sensor. That may well suit my style of photography for a while anyway.
  9. I had noticed but we all have our own little bias', normally based on the roads we have travelled. It takes a level head to admit we have turned the wrong way sometimes. I've seen a couple of Melsky's very impressive shots before. When I google Saturn5 I got a very big boy's toy... Doh... Found him in the members section of course, nice shots and my kind of stuff too. Part of the reason for taking things one step at a time is that I'm unsure of how far down this road I will eventually travel. A good scope appeals to me but I may find myself just using the scope for observation and with the camera piggybacking for wide field shots. I am realistic enough to know that I am unlikely to produce anything that has not been seen before as far as deep space shots go but mixing landscape with wide field work Is something I would like to try.
  10. That's a very honest thought and one that has been rattling around in the back of my head as well.
  11. I must confess the idea of a small, cheap body, perhaps modded down the line makes a lot of sense, not least because my life style can put me into some quite remote places and the self contained nature of a DSLR provides more flexibility in many ways. Skills wise, I can see that I'm looking at a steep learning curve but I am fortunate that I find book study a good way to fill my spare time and seem to learn well that way. I consider myself a competent PhotoShop user and I think I understand the principles behind the Astro software I've seen so far but of course I'm sure I'll make plenty of mistakes along the way.
  12. The CCD route is another option but seems expensive to get good returns. I haven't bought into the megapixel arms race in cameras too much but I tend to think of 12mp as a base line for decent prints. (I used to work with medium and large format in the days of film so perhaps I'm expecting too much.) I could change my mind down the line I suppose, but I think I might need some convincing.
  13. I'm hoping to get a lot of good use out of the lenses on a decent mount like a HEQ.5 and I can see that dovetailing well with my main interest of landscape photography. I must confess that I am so attached to the image quality that the large sensor provides I find it hard to leave that behind but sadly I can see the logic of going smaller on a scope.
  14. That is certainly one of my concerns. I was hoping to budget the whole package, mount, guider and scope, for 2 - 2.5K or there abouts so unless I get luck with some secondhand gear that gives me around a thousand for the scope. The new SkywatcherEsprit looks interesting but I'm also considering the William Optics scope with a built in flattened which claims to cover full frame. Any others suggestion worth looking at would be welcome. As you suggest though, a modded APS-C camera might be a better option in the long run though.
  15. I'm a bit torn at the moment. I'm looking to get into Astro-photography and the path I'm looking at is a mount first which I can use with my camera for wide and medium field shots with my existing lenses and then getting a Apo scope of around 80mm for the next step. The problem I'm facing is whether to go for a decent scope that will cover the 35mm full frame of my 5D or buy a second APS-C body that will then allow me to use a slightly less expensive scope to cover the frame. It seems like a backward step to me but one that may prove more effective in the future. I would really value some good advice as virtually everything I have read so far on the subject seems to ignore full frame DSLR cameras, presumably because they are more expensive, but in my case it is what I already have.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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