FenlandPaul

34 minutes ago, callisto said:

Yeah, I agree with you on that....Lovely 👍

 

Mark

Thank you Mark. 

With the next couple of weeks looking  to be dogged with cloud, I decided to capture Mars and Pleiades while I still could.  I had about window of about an hour before moonlight started to get intrusive, and even then I was fighting with gradients (hence quite a tight crop for 135mm).

But I'm pleased with the result and the gorgeous colour contrast of these two.

Canon 6D with Samyang 135mm at f/2.8, 77x 60s subs with darks and flats at ISO800 on a StarAdventurer Pro.  Stacked in DSS and processed in Photoshop.  Feedback, hints and tips welcome as always!! ☺

20210228 Mars and Pleiades edit 1.tif

1 hour ago, Richie092 said:

Did you have to pay duty or import tax on the screen price? It looks a little too cheap to be true!

No - I only paid what was quoted - no other charges.  This was before Brexit, so not entirely sure on whether that would change things.  In my experience the prices were very good indeed.

Very recently, however, I bought a lens from a fellow forum member in Germany and was charged import VAT by the carrier.  Nothing the seller could have foreseen, but just saying for transparency.

28 minutes ago, Richie092 said:

Shame they are different but I’m not surprised. Cheapest I can find a Canon one is £450 ish. Sony are £100 cheaper and the Canon ones don’t seem to come up 2nd hand. 

Hi Richie, I purchase mine in October from a company called Tecobuy, who I think ship from Hong Kong. It cost £328.99

It took about 3 weeks to arrive I believe. Mine has been a good example, and I don’t know how I would have fared if I had problems with it.

Online you’ll see mixed reviews on product quality and customer service, but they’re undeniably the cheapest place to buy new. I did well with them, and am considering going back for a 24mm f/1.4

If you’re prepared to take what may be a bit of a risk, it’s great value for money. But proceed with a level of caution.

13 minutes ago, davew said:

Damn. Processing would have been a wonderfully warm alternative ! 🥶

The lens stops down via the camera doesn't it ? As a Nikon user I haven't much clue on the operation of the 450D.

I hope happy-kat sees this post. She will know,

Dave.

Eureka!!  Mostly I use fully manual lenses (e.g. Samyang) so hadn’t realised that - now all makes sense, and turns out I was shooting at f/3.5 (bit embarasssing!!). Thank you.  That opens up (no pun intended) a lot of possibilities!

32 minutes ago, davew said:

Hi Paul,

If you need to know whether more subs are needed then have a look at a single unprocessed image first. If that's blown out then it's back outside for you but if it isn't blown out then it's a processing problem as you've blown it yourself. 

What is a fixed aperture Canon EF lens ? Is it broken ?

Dave.

Thank you - great tip.  So it’s the subs that are blown out rather than the processing then.  *looks at tonight’s forecast 🧐*

So I may be wrong on this new (used) 200mm lens, but I can see no way to stop down the aperture with an inbuilt diaphragm - please tell me I’m being incredibly stupid and missing something!!   

1 hour ago, tooth_dr said:

Really nice, great FOV.  What did you stop the lens down to?  Personally I am not a bit fan of the diffraction spikes.  If you didnt want them, an aperture mask would be a solution.

Thank you.

It's a fixed aperture lens (which I hadn't actually appreciated before acquiring it!), so it was at f/2.8. 

I'm actually ok with a level of diffraction spike (long-time Newtonian user!) but these are maybe a bit "busy" - I haven't really decided yet what I think of them.

And here's the final flattened TIFF file (for those who like to explore at high res).

20210210 Orion Nebula (Final - flattened).tif

I recently acquired a Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 lens from a fellow SGLer and, incredibly, the night after it arrived was stunningly clear and it was a new moon.  

So it was great to give it a go on the Orion Nebula with my modded Canon EOS 450D mounted on a Star Adventurer.

I took 178x 30s subs at ISO800 and stacked the best 90% in DSS with darks and flats.  Processed in Photoshop.

Clearly the central region is blown out, something that I struggled to control in processing and it might benefit from blending with some shorter subs (bit beyond me at the moment, that!).  I wish I'd framed it a bit better to get the Flame, but I was keen to centre the main nebula to counter any dodgy polar alignment.  Maybe next time.

Anyway, keen for any hints, tips etc please!

 

8 hours ago, geoflewis said:

@FenlandPaul I've downloaded it and had a play. I need better data, but I managed to stack some images, so definitely progress. I like the option to preseve the foreground, so I'll be able to shoot some of those too now, as previously I've avoided that. I'm using a Star Adventurer to track stars, so the foreground is always blurred, but I'm guessing that I could use a shorter exposure to freeze the ground in the base image, then align just the stars. Will try that out anyway. Thanks again for introducing me to this software

Great stuff Geof and you’re welcome.  You’re correct that if you’re using a tracker then the foreground would blur anyway (sorry, I’d missed that) but it’s amazing what you scan do with shorter exposures at high ISO and some stacking to reduce noise.  It’s not tracked-exposure depth and quality, but it’s still remarkable and with the added benefit that you don’t have to lug your SA to that lovely landscape site!!

All the best with it!

2 minutes ago, geoflewis said:

Thanks Paul, I've just had a look at their website. I'll definitely check it out, though I generally struggle with all these tools, unless I have someone to show me what to do. Usually I get part of the way in, then something doesn't make sense and I end up flaying around..... 🤔

Lovely pic BTW... 👌

As it happens, there was a good tutorial video posted about it a few days ago. 
 

Or I highly recommend this guy, who also explains it well (plus his pictures are absolutely stunning!).

I’ve been super-impressed with this lens. Here’s a couple of images with a modified Canon 450D (Orion) and Canon 6D (Pleiades) over the last few weeks. I’m not very experienced in deep sky (although long-time observer) but I found the Samyang a delight and very forgiving to use.

5 minutes ago, geoflewis said:

Thanks Paul,

I'm not familiar with Seuator, so what does that do please?

It’s a free stacking software so it helps with signal-to-noise. But its greatest feature is that you can simply mask the sky (you colour it in with you mouse) and can “freeze” the ground so that you don’t end up with blurred foreground. It has the capacity to load dark and flat frames in it as well. I find it very simple and intuitive.

I use it in almost all of my starscape images, like the one below.

That combo shows a lot of potential based on those single frames! As soon as you get stacking, with maybe some foreground interest, in something like Sequator you’ll be away!

Wide field DSLR suits my tastes very well, and has the advantage of being more forgiving on processing precision (in my opinion) - I suspect I’d be a bit hamfisted with good quality cooled camera data!

I hadn't been expecting a clear sky last night, but we got one for a couple of hours that gave me the opportunity to quickly set up the Star Adventurer in the back garden.  

It was a little hazy, in Bortle 4/5 skies, but I managed 76x 1 minute subs with my Canon 6D and Samyang 135mm lens at f/2.8 and ISO800.  I captured some darks and flats too.  Stacked in DSS and processed in Photoshop.

I would like to go deeper on this object, particularly for the "muckiness" in its locality, but as a starting point I'm reasonably happy.  Deep sky isn't something I've done a lot of, but it's nice to learn.  I'd welcome feedback, tips etc.  Thanks!

Lovely composition Paul. Reminds me of An American Werewolf in London! 😂

21 hours ago, globular said:

I have a pair of these and, for me, they are perfect - no faffing with mittens or removable bits and bobs; just wear them and get on with things, including the fiddliest of adjustments to small parts.

The exposed finger ends do get cold when you first get them and it can be tempting to think "this is rubbish" and give up on them.  But keep them on and keep busy and your body seems to adjust to the new normal of some exposed bits and the rest covered and everywhere soon feels uniformly warm.  After each session the "this is cold" feeling lasts less and less and I no longer get that feeling at all any more.

I think it's worth the learning curve your body needs to get used to them as they provide hassle free use. Highly recommended.

[For balance I would add that my wife had less patience / didn't believe the cold feeling would pass with her pair; so she gave up on them and went for a normal pair of warm gloves and leaves all the equipment adjusting to me.]

I’ve had a pair of these for a year and they’re great. Mainly use them for fiddling with cameras at night now, but before that they were great while threading filters onto eyepieces etc. Hands appreciably warmer than constantly removing ostensibly warmer, but more cumbersome, gloves.

Gorgeous picture. 

A warm welcome from a fellow Fenlander! 

So excited about this. Landscape astrophotography has turned my Astro-mojo back up to 11 over the last few months, so this is going to be fantastic!!

That’s a terrific image! I did a similarly framed  image a week or so ago but yours is definitely something to aspire to! 👏👏

Fascinating - thanks for posting! 

Absolutely love it, Paul.  👍

Using a Canon EOS 450D (modded), Samyang 135mm at f/2.8.  About 2h41m of 45s exposures at ISO800, using a Skywatcher Star Adventurer.  Stacked in DSS and processed in Photoshop.  Feedback, observations, tips and constructive criticism welcome!

41 minutes ago, Kyle Allen said:

Lovely image but the stars look big on the left side (like they are ever so slightly out of focus) compared to the right.

Thanks Kyle.  It looks like something has crept in during processing.  The original unprocessed stack (below) doesn't seem to have the same issue (to my eye - unscientifically) but it looks like it's come in when I tried to deal with the gradients.  🤔