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_beauty_night_skies.thumb.jpg.2711ade15e31d01524e7dc52d15c4217.jpg

Astroblagger

Atik 460ex with canon 50mm lens??

Recommended Posts

Morning

Has anyone tried this combo? or short focal length lenses with the Atik? iv been using a 200mm lens with fairly good results but want to try maybe image barnards loop etc so need a large field of view.  I have a filter drawer for filters that connects camera to lens. wouldn't be expecting top quality results but questioning whether to try rig it together for a go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say just try it. Although I've not used that exact combination, it was pretty close. I imaged with an 8300 chip and a Nikon 50mm. You will have smaller pixels so the resolution should improve a little.

My very first cooled CCD image was with this comb and I'm still proud of it nine years later :) 

Dave.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried it out as I am planning to use such a combo in Spain in May/June, but not actually taken an image with it as yet.

Carole 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're going to be working at 18.6"PP which is a very coarse scale so, seen at anything like full size, the image is going to look pixelated with blocky stars. However, if the image is presented at well below full size it should look OK. For comparison I took this image of Orion at a very similar 19"PP with an 80mm lens and Atik 4000. However the key difference is that my image is a 6 panel mosaic so each individual panel is shown only at a tiny fraction of full size. Still, it will give you an idea. You would certainly get a far better result (over a much longer time!) if you did a mosaic with your 200mm lens. (Note that, in places, telescopic data has been blended into this image.)

ORION%202014%20reprocessWEB-XL.jpg

Olly

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the Info, Superb image Olly as usual. ok that gives me something to think about.  Maybe a mosaic with a mid range lens might be the way to go then to get the full loop , as the 200mm lens field of view is a bit tight and the 50mm lens to wide and as your saying will end up blocky looking.  Is that an HaRGB?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Note that, in places, telescopic data has been blended into this image

Not the hubble telescope, by any chance? ? ? *

Stunning photo. 

Ady

*I know the hubble doesn't do widefield per se, but, like Carlsberg, if it did it would be only as good as this ☺ 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Astroblagger said:

 Is that an HaRGB?

Yes, it's HaOSC. At the time we had a pair of Atik 4000s, mono and OSC. This had 5 hours Ha in the mono and 5 hours OSC per panel.

Olly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth remembering that some of the most stunning Milky Way images are captured with small pixelled DSLRs and wide field lenses, typically 14mm.  Of course if you zoom right in it will be clear that the images are undersampled, so don't do that!  It is all about what you want to do with the image.  If you aren't after making posters and choose appropriate targets (Orion sounds like a great start) then you can have a lot of fun with a 50mm lens.  Best thing is to give it a go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, MartinB said:

It's worth remembering that some of the most stunning Milky Way images are captured with small pixelled DSLRs and wide field lenses, typically 14mm.  Of course if you zoom right in it will be clear that the images are undersampled, so don't do that!  It is all about what you want to do with the image.  If you aren't after making posters and choose appropriate targets (Orion sounds like a great start) then you can have a lot of fun with a 50mm lens.  Best thing is to give it a go.

Indeed, and this is a classic example despite the 9 micron pixel size: http://www.robgendlerastropics.com/OrionSG.html

Olly

 

Edited by ollypenrice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I have tried it out as I am planning to use such a combo in Spain in May/June, but not actually taken an image with it as yet.

Carole 

Just to clarify, I am going back to our friends in the Costa del Sol where I got an image of the Antares region with a DSLR the last time we went in 2017 with the same camera lens. 

The Antares region is very large, but I now want to get some nice luminance to combine with the rather noisy DSLR colour data.  Because I can't take the full rig with me on a plane (lol) I have to make do both times with my Ioptron Skytracker which tracks, but no guiding, so the subs can't be too long, I just about managed about 3 - 4 minutes last time.  I bought a Geoptik adapter so I could attach the Atik to the camera lens and was planning to bin the luminance to get more data in a short time, but bearing in mind Olly's comments above regarding resolution, I think I will take 2 sets, one unbinned and one binned just in case.  Maybe I can combine them - will have to see.

So all I have really done so far is a test to check I could get focus OK.

Wish me luck.

Carole 

Edited by carastro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a look here the other day - 

If my calculations are correct Dave's imaging at around 21 pp so that's even worse than the Atik and a 50mm lens. Great shame about the telephone cable but you get the idea. It's a good job he didn't see this thread before he started ?  In fact he's talking about trying a 20mm lens !!

I have a 17" laptop and it looks just fine full screen. It's even ok zoomed in as much as the image allows on the forum. Most of the stars actually look round which is better than some of mine ?

Dave.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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