What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

7Artisans,TT Artisan from 35 to 50 mm FL. Have You tried those lenses on starry sky with m4/3?

Y

Yar1971

Active Member
Hi!
Maybe I bring some life to this subforum ;)
As title says:

Lenses comparison - LensTip.com

Best digital cameras and lens reviews. If you are looking for the information about digital cameras and lenses you are in a right place. We have many professional tests of digital photography equipment.
www.lenstip.com www.lenstip.com
Anybody? I mean starry sky photo to look on.
Regards,
-J.
PS. If somebody has tried on the night sky any of those but with different mount (Sony, Fuji, whatever) I would like to know too...
 
Yes I did - but… my application was as a “digital finder scope” to put on a much larger telescope, operating tethered to a laptop (MacBook). Fast frame rate and focal ratio were the priority not sharpness.

55mm f/1.4 with M4/3 Mount, connected to a M4/3 to T2 ring (from ZWO) with a ZWO ASI533 MC Pro camera, it runs nicely at 1 frame/sec showing objects down to magnitude 10 - galaxies and all.

These cheap Chinese lenses are fast, but they are not sharp. I tried a couple of others a friend had and they were likewise not sharp.

All of the lenses from Oly or Panasonic are far sharper if you want to photograph starry skies.

I’ll pull it out and take a few shots on my OM-5 if you want but I guarantee you won’t like what you see.

NB the ASI533 has TEC cooling and is way more sensitive than conventional M4/3 bodies, as well as having a Bayer filter optimised for full spectrum way into the red. The image of M20 was done in 15 minutes on a telescope of focal length 873mm at f/5 under urban skies.

Trifid-RGB MN65.jpeg


IMG_2131.jpeg
  • Apple - iPhone 11 Pro Max
  • iPhone 11 Pro Max back triple camera 4.25mm f/1.8
  • 4.3 mm
  • ƒ/1.8
  • 1/100 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • ISO 100
 
Last edited:
Hmm. Looking outside it’s first-quarter moon which isn’t great - I’ll have to wait a couple of weeks to show how this lens behaved in my light polluted sky.
 
Yar1971 said:
Hi!
Maybe I bring some life to this subforum ;)
As title says:

Lenses comparison - LensTip.com

Best digital cameras and lens reviews. If you are looking for the information about digital cameras and lenses you are in a right place. We have many professional tests of digital photography equipment.
www.lenstip.com www.lenstip.com
Anybody? I mean starry sky photo to look on.
Regards,
-J.
PS. If somebody has tried on the night sky any of those but with different mount (Sony, Fuji, whatever) I would like to know too...
Click to expand...

I have a few 7Artisans and a couple of TTArtisans, and a Laowa. But I am not into starry skies, sorry. But I might dispute that they are 'not sharp'. Maybe some of the cheap Chinese examples? I will have to do a bit of testing ....
 
Well, depends what you’re shooting and what you think “sharp” looks like.

I just tried writing a little program that draws a grid of 1-pixel white dots on black background on my iMac (27” retina screen) and standing back about 1.5 metres from it and taking a shot (note have to shoot underexposed at least -3eV to prevent overexposing the white). The dots looked good right into the corners.

Have to wait till I get it out under a dark sky (no moon) to show you why it’s not a great lens.

The OM-5 has a “starry sky” trick where it will focus AF lenses, so can do a comparison with the better lenses I have.
 
Well, depends what you’re shooting and what you think “sharp” looks like. I agree for some things these produce results that are interesting and it gives real manual control - which I like.

I just tried writing a little program that draws a grid of 1-pixel white dots on black background on my iMac (27” retina screen) and standing back about 1.5 metres from it and taking a shot (note have to shoot underexposed at least -3eV to prevent overexposing the white). The dots looked good right into the corners. Very deceptive because on stars it’s not nearly so good.

Have to wait till I get it out under a dark sky (no moon) to show you why it’s not a great lens.

The OM-5 has a “starry sky” trick where it will focus AF lenses, so can do a comparison with the better lenses i have. I’ll also use the ASI533 for the sake of it just to show what that can do.
 
Thanks to You all for Your opinions. To clarify what I need, some more explanation. I use mostly Oly 17/1.8 for WA night sky photo. This is my general use fast prime for low-light conditions (interior and night outdoor photo). I mostly photograph while traveling/hiking. So astro/night sky is just added reason to use it. If I buy a prime of 25- 60 mm FL this would be dedicated solely for very casual night/astro photo. So I don't want to spend lots of money on AF glass, if there's cheaper, but not very bad (IQ wise, compared to my 17/1.8) alternative between MF lenses. If any, of course.
Otherwise, I just can choose from good & non-expensive Sigma 60/2.8, O. 45/1.8. Pana 25/1.7 or so. There's a gap at 35 mm FL - I see no candidate. This triggered my question about TT Artisan 35/1.4 and the rest of the mentioned glass.
Further opinions (especially photo samples) in the thread are welcome.
Regards,
-J.
 
Ah ok. Sorry my astro gear hasn't been out yet as the weather turned for the worst after my previous post and still hasn't cleared up.
It's not an expensive lens so I'd suggest take a punt and buy one, you may like what it does, well enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top