Has anybody used an Olympus E410 for Imaging?

[merlinxlm]

Has anybody on the forum, had any luck with using an Olympus E410 for imaging.

What type of adaptor will I need to perches? What type of results can I expect with this camera, fitted on to my Celestron C6-S, Barlow lens and motor drive assembly?

Thanks.

[lunator]

HI Merlin

I do not have a DSLR but Steve at FLO should be able to provide the appropriate adapters.

Canon are the most popular make for Astro-photos but I am sure you can get good result with the Olympus.

Cheers

Ian

[russ]

The T-adapters are on Ebay for a few quid but FLO is the safest bet.

All I do know is the Olympus DSLR's have the noisiest sensors in town due to their small size. Lots of pixels crammed into a small chip produces more noise. But the E410 should still produce a reasonable image, just not Canon or Nikon standard. Remember to capture as many images as possible for stacking.

[greenkat]

I have an E500 and have used it sucessfully for a few widefeild shots using a sigma 55-200 (110-400 in 35mm terms using 4/3 system), not guided or very long exposures, 20 secs probably the longest ive done. Havn't realy tried it on a scope, but agree the Olympus range are quite noisy compared to other DLSR's.

Only bought mine when they first came out as Amazon listed them with incorect very cheap price and had to honour the sale otherwise I would have gone the Canon route.

Give it a try though, what have you got to lose

[barkis]

Hi Merlin.I own an Olympus E-500, but the only time I've used it on the sky, was on the moon attached to my 150mm f6 Achromatic refractor . Here is one of the images. The others were total lunar eclipse sequence, which fortunately managed to win me SGLPOTW.

I know there is no comparison to long exposures, but KK advised me to take a series of exposures with the lens covered, and at different ISO's, to see what results you get. You could arrive at an exposure suitable for taking subs that will be free of noise, and together with good processing, you could build a very nice image. Because a piece of equipment is not as good as another make, does not render it useless. make the best of it, it helps to keep your expenditure down. And Astro photography can give you large bills if you let it. :laughing2:

Ron.

(click to enlarge)

[russ]

Crikey what i wrote sounded bad.....don't be put off. Although i said it was the 'noisiest in town', that's only by DSLR standards. And even then it's only marginal between most of them. Just Canon and Nikon really have the noise issue under better control. But all DSLR's, including the Olympus, are leaps and bounds better than any compact or bridge camera.

I think the E410 will be give good results. And Hutech wouldn't offer the filter mod if the camera didn't have potential. So i look forward to seeing your results.

[merlinxlm]

Do you have to use a Barlow lens when attaching the camera and t adaptor to the scope?

Thank you.

[barkis]

You don't have to attach a Barlow, but you can do so if you wish. It will double the focal length 0f your telescope, if it is a x2 Barlow that is.

Using a Barlow, will give you a larger image size, so useful mainly on Lunar and Planetary shots.

Ron.

[dph1nm]

All I do know is the Olympus DSLR's have the noisiest sensors in town due to their small size. Lots of pixels crammed into a small chip produces more noise.

The usual reason photographers moan about small pixels is that these invariably go with small lenses, which means fewer photons and more shot noise for your typical daytime picture. For prime focus astro imaging, where the telescope acts as the lens, this shouldn't be a problem. Dark current is the main killer for long exposures, but I have yet to see a site which compares this for different DSLRs.

NigelM