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.

Rihard

old Canon 5D mk1 (first model) any good for astro??

Recommended Posts

Hi,

does anyone still use a classic Canon 5D (first version) ???

I own a few nice and sharp 35mm-format prime lenses that I would love to use in daylight (portraits, buildings, landscape etc) so I thought to get a second hand full frame camera that I might also use for astronomy once or twice a year when the weather man approves it (mainly for wide-fields and some large DSO's) and I found some inexpensive 5D's and I was wondering if anyone is still using them and how do they compare with more modern crop / APS-C cameras.

My main camera is a Nikon D7000 (a fantastic camera!), but my old 35mm lenses won't focus to infinity on Nikon unless I use some cr@ppy glass adapter that degrades the image. I also don't like at all that the pictures are cropped and much more narrow and I cannot afford proper wide and fast Nikon lenses for my D7000.

So considering that I don't need any AF, Backyard EOS or any fancy digital-era things, that my budget is restricted plus I really need to go on holidays soon (making the budget even smaller) I thought the 5D could be good enough as a first digital full frame camera to play with but I haven't found any convincing information on using it for astronomy and being a pretty old model I'm still not sure if it would be a disappointment, although I see that, for daylight, some experienced photographers obtained great results.

Any input will be appreciated! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to shoot a lot if 35mm so returning  to full frame was like a breath of fresh air....

From an astro  performance point of view You will be comparing older technology but larger pixels in the original 5D to smaller newer technology ones in the Crop sensor cameras... So it's not cut and dried...

Peter...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to shoot a lot if 35mm so returning  to full frame was like a breath of fresh air....

I know what you mean :) When I take photos on 35mm film (you know, nostalgy...) not only they look much more "alive" to my eyes, but also, what a difference being able to fit my favourite buildings in town even on a 50mm lens without having to stand far away from the subject!

I ended up getting the old 5D at a bargain price so I can make some experiments with it also with the night sky.

Clear Skies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have been looking at the 5d mk1 for modifying (hence finding this thread).

What was the outcome of your tests?

I'm particularly after a full frame canon that I can mod as they're better for noise at higher isos, but I don't know if this is true for older full frames like the 5d mk1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have been looking at the 5d mk1 for modifying (hence finding this thread).

What was the outcome of your tests?

I'm particularly after a full frame canon that I can mod as they're better for noise at higher isos, but I don't know if this is true for older full frames like the 5d mk1.

Hey Jonk,

sorry I just saw your reply here. Did you eventually get a FF camera?

This camera does the job, it's usable for astronomy but it's fairly noisy compared to more modern cameras,  and it goes only up to ISO 1600.

I only took 2 single exposures with ancient M42 lenses (post-processed wtih PS):

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tziuriky/15109015652/in/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tziuriky/15117235541/in/photostream/

Not the best I reckon but I'm happy it could easily show the milky way without extra effort from my side.

Best Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I haven't - I'm using a fairly modern 70D at the moment but haven't had many opportunities to get out and do some imaging.

if I had the money and was going to buy a FF DSLR for both astro and daytime work, I'd probably go for th 6D as opposed to the 5d mk3, as it's better at low light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Nicola Hannah Butterfield
      First image from my new NEQ6 Pro driven mount, all other images before this were static.
      Sky Watcher 200P prime focus, 10x 60's lights, darks, bias and flats. ISO 200
      Bortle 6
      Yes I know there is a plane track through it.
    • By alexbb
      I've been processing this image for quite a long now.
      I started acquiring data the last season when I only managed to shoot 3 panels with the Canon 6D through the Esprit 80 for a total of ~7h.
      This season I restarted and I added more data and covered a wider area. So a mix of portrait and landscape panels were planned and shot with the same scope and camera. Now every pixel represents at least 3-4h of integration, some have more.
      All the above were shot from Bortle 2-3 sites where I traveled sometimes even for an hour of exposure.
      To the RGB data I added 17.5h of Ha, same story with the panels. Some were oriented N-S, others E-W. These were shot with the SW 72ED and the ASI1600 from home and Bortle ~7.
      Then I figured out I still had time and I planned and shot 9 more panels of luminance with the 72ED and ASI1600, each consisting of 1h of exposure.
      I combined all of these into an image, processed it and for the Orion nebula and Running Man nebula I also blended some data I shot last season with the 130PDS and ASI1600 from home.
      Below it's my first final version of all data combined. You can watch it in full resolution on astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/full/jni0w8/ or Flickr: https://flic.kr/p/2iBGUXq
       

    • By MarsG76
      The Orion Nebula imaged in RGB through a Celestron 8" SCT at F10 (2032mm FL) using a full spectrum modded and cooled Canon 40D. Tracked using a Celestron CGEM mount. Total exposure time was 1 hour and 24 minutes.
    • By MarsG76
      Hello All,
      I was wondering whether it's possible to image a DSO and capture any depth. Every 3D astro image online is faked so at the start of the year, I decided to image M42 six months apart.
      Back in March I posted a image of M42 imaged at f10, 2032mm FL through my 8SE on 28th February 2019. Than on 3rd September (setup and captured 15 second subs on 1 September) I captured M42 at the same focal length, same orientation and very similar subs for a total exposure of 1 hr 24 minutes. This was almost to the day exactly 6 months between the two images, so the earth was 300 million km away from the original position on the other side of the sun, furthest I could hope for imaging a 3D stereo pair.
      First attached is the image from September...

       
      I color matched the above image with the image from February, aligned them and below is the end result....

      As you can see there is no detectable 3D effect... There was a 3Dish effect but this was most likely due to the differences in processing of the two stacks and when I SCALE and rotate the two images to align them, and hence no 3D effect.
      Of course the stars and nebula are certainly not on a flat plain so I believe that the reason for the lack of any discernable depth is simply due to the distance of M42 resulting in  a very small angular shift in the stars, so small in fact, that it’s beyond the sensitivity of my 8” SCT, camera pixel resolution and tracking accuracy of the CGEM.
      Calculation of the expected motion of any parallax shift when the Orion Nebula is 1344 lightyears away and the distance of Earth being 149,600,000km from the Sun:
      1344LY = 1.2715e+16km
      Θ° = Tan-1(149.6e+6/1.2715e+16)
      Parallax Shift Θ” = 2 x 3600 x Θ
      Parallax Shift Θ” = 0.0048536712567150
      An angular motion of 0.005” was not picked up by my system that tracks with an average accuracy of about 1” RMS, with a camera sensor that has a resolution of 1.16”/pixel at 2032mm focal length with a 8” SCT. Even if I could get consistent tracking at the best accuracy that I have ever seen with my gear, 0.38” RMS, this is still well above 0.005” and well beyond the 40D sensor pixel resolution, and all this is without considering atmospheric distortion, obviously my setup is not even close to sensitive enough.
      This was a good project but unfortunately the distances of objects in the universe are too great, even objects classed as in our celestial “backyard”. If I didn’t try this experiment than I would be always wondering and curiosity would most likely make me try it eventually.
       
      Clear Skies,
      MG
       
       
       
    • By masjstovel
      Hi,
      I bought my first telescope, SW 150pds about 6 months ago with the purpose of astroimaging "when i feel ready".  So far ive used my Nikon D810 for that, and I'm now  planning on taking the step buying my first AP camera.
      My targets would be DSO's, and not planetary. I want a mono-camera, not color. 

      I want to get away with a very good camera to a reasonable price (wouldn't we all...) and in this regard I've been drooling on the ZWO ASI 1600MM Mono for some time. The price for it is in the upper part of my budget, but I'm willing to if its worth it.  I've seen from other treads that sensor-size isn't everything, and dynamic range and gain and all is just as important, but i have trouble understanding it all 100% when it's all new to me, but in my experience i am a practical person who learns things much better and faster with the gear in my hand. So without getting to technical, and staying as objective as possible - please help me with; 

      1. Is this a good camera to go for?
      2. It's sold with options of filters 1.25", 31mm or 36mm - Why these options, and what determines what i would choose?

      3. Would you go for another camera in this price range, and why? - Or to rephrase it a bit; If you were in my shoes, which camera would you og for?

      I'd appreciate any help:)

      I might add, that i understand that with my lack of experience, buying a mono-camera with filters and all might seem premature, but for some strange reason. I enjoy these "way over my head"-projects and figuring  out things as time goes - I just need some guiding in the right direction. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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