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!

What Types of Astrophotography Do You Do?

AlenK

AlenK

Active Member
This seems an opportune time on this new forum to ask such a question. I'll provide the first answer. Primarily, I do “deep sky” astrophotography. Most of that is through lenses on a DSLR, with about 30% of images taken with the same DSLR attached to one of several telescopes. I have been gradually widening my fields of view to the point where I now end up with terrestrial foregrounds in my shots as a feature rather than an accident, i.e., I do more nightscapes.

One thing I have not seriously done is planetary imaging. However, I do occasionally take images of the full disk of the moon through a telescope. That’s more a case of shooting the thing that is destroying the nice dark sky I wish was there instead of fighting it.

Because deep-sky and nightscapes do benefit greatly from dark skies, I primarily shoot from country sites that are less than hour’s drive from the moderate-sized city in which I live in mid-latitude North America. (As close as I will come to pinning down my actual location.) The few times I have tried to do such imaging in my backyard have been excercises in frustration with little reward.

Your turn!
 
At the moment I have yet to shoot anything. I'm getting the 8" Celestron ready for some summer visual observing. Once the weather dries out here in the great PNW I hope to take some wide-angle skyscape shots at night. Then...
...assuming I make it through the summer and my interest remains high I hope to move on to DSO with (possibly) a new set-up.
We'll see.
 
Well... the vast majority of what I've done is moon shots with the Tamron 500mm mirror lens I mentioned in another thread, and a few other pics like the ones I posted there.

I'm interested in doing more, but everything I've done so far has been mostly fumbled into, and I don't really know where to go from here. (Also, living in Kansas City, I've had mediocre luck at best trying to find good places to shoot - see below.)

Some of the thoughts/questions I have:

  • Equipment.
    • Cameras. So far, I've used my Olympus E-M1 II to shoot with, because the crop factor gives it greater reach. I've also got a Lumix S5 for a full-frame option, but I'm not sure if the added light gathering area on the sensor makes up for the reduced reach for shooting sky objects.
    • Lenses. I have the 500mm mirror lens. I have the Tamron 80-210 I used to shoot comet NEOWISE. I've done just enough basic astrophotography reading to have some idea what to look for in other lenses.
    • Money is currently very tight, so getting a telescopic rig is out of the question; so is spending significant cash on a tripod rig for star tracking.
  • Stacking software. I know the basic principles behind stacking software, but when I tried using it with NEOWISE, it was a disaster. I tried one basic program that was simple enough I could use it, but the results weren't great. I tried a different one that promised better results, and couldn't figure out how to use it effectively.
  • Location. When I shot NEOWISE, I tried three different locations; all had to be within reasonable driving distance of KC so I could be at work the next morning:
    • A rural area partway between Kansas City and Lawrence, around https://goo.gl/maps/EznHzqMMtVLEvLxYA Light pollution seemed OK, but had lots of trouble with finding unobstructed places to shoot (lots of trees/hedgerows)
    • Clinton Lake, to the west of Lawrence, around https://goo.gl/maps/5EhjVYSmUrJxdUUH9 - there are hills that shield the lake from Lawrence proper, so I was hoping the light would be decent; unfortunately, that wasn't good enough.
    • Hillsdale Lake, https://goo.gl/maps/XrtnaN5JM78MApnL8 Figured the large lake area would give a good combination of unobstructed sightlines, and low light pollution. It was the best of the spots I tried, but there were still spots on the horizon where a local farm or other habitation had a bright light going.
So, I guess... any thoughts on equipment? Suggestions on stacking software, whether it's useful, how to work it? Tips on finding good spots to shoot? I feel like I'm stumbling around in the darkness. ^^;;
 
Can’t help you with locations. But in regard to cameras, the greater light gathering and/or wider field (all depending on what lens you use) of the full-frame camera is generally an advantage for wide-field imaging. It’s not going to help with narrower fields of view. If you are trying to do a nightscape, you should use a full-frame camera. I don’t have one so I get by with APS-C.

Re stacking software, I use Sequator for everything. So far it has worked well for me.
 
AlenK said:
Can’t help you with locations. But in regard to cameras, the greater light gathering and/or wider field (all depending on what lens you use) of the full-frame camera is generally an advantage for wide-field imaging. It’s not going to help with narrower fields of view. If you are trying to do a nightscape, you should use a full-frame camera. I don’t have one so I get by with APS-C.
Click to expand...
<nod> Yeah, I've used the M4/3 camera because almost all of what I've shot so far has been specific celestial objects, so higher magnification was more important; I haven't tried any wide-field stuff yet.
AlenK said:
Re stacking software, I use Sequator for everything. So far it has worked well for me.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, that's apparently Windows-only and I use a Mac. (I might be able to get it running under Wine; I'll have to give that a try.)

What I tried before was Astro Pixel Processor, and I couldn't figure it out for the life of me.
 
Travis Butler said:
Unfortunately, that's apparently Windows-only and I use a Mac. (I might be able to get it running under Wine; I'll have to give that a try.)

What I tried before was Astro Pixel Processor, and I couldn't figure it out for the life of me.
Click to expand...
Sequator is worth the effort of running an emulator, IMO. It is easy to use and very fast; much, much faster I have heard than APP, although APP does a lot more than stack and its stacking has other benefits. (I have read about APP but have not tried it.)

One thing I like about Sequator is that it correctly applies what is called a color-correction matrix (CCM), which is necessary to get proper colors out of an unmodified camera. If it is not applied, red in particular is suppressed. That’s not the color channel you want suppressed with an unmodified camera. Most other astronomical stacking programs do NOT apply the CCM.

Mac alternatives to Sequator include Starry Landscape Stacker and Starry Sky Stacker. They aren’t free but do offer free trials.

sites.google.com

Starry Landscape Stacker

Reflections in Yosemite, August 2016 Made with Starry Landscape Stacker 1.5.0 from 23 light frames. Canon 5DS, Canon 11-24mm f/4L USM, 11mm, f/4, ISO 12800, 15 sec, f/4 Original image is 50 mega pixels. You can purchase Starry Landscape Stacker from the Mac App Store or download a free trial.
sites.google.com sites.google.com

Starry Sky Stacker

Starry Sky Stacker is a Mac application that reduces noise in pictures of the night sky. The reduction in noise comes from combining a sequence of identical exposures into a single image. Starry Sky Stacker requires that an equatorial mount that ensures that stars move very little either during or
sites.google.com sites.google.com

However, you will need to buy both programs if you do deep-sky AND nightscapes (containing foreground), whereas Sequator (FREE) handles both types of images properly.

sites.google.com

Stacking Apps - Frequently Asked Questions

Buying and Installing Are your apps available as bundles? If you are running MacOS Mojave (10.14) or later, my apps are available as bundles. Two bundles are available. Star Stacker Bundle includes Starry Landscape Stacker and Starry Sky Stacker. Image Stacker Bundle includes Starry Landscape
sites.google.com sites.google.com
 
Travis Butler said:
Money is currently very tight, so getting a telescopic rig is out of the question; so is spending significant cash on a tripod rig for star tracking.
Click to expand...
I forgot to address this. Why not make your own tracker? I made one in the late 90’s and used it successfully with lenses up to 135mm on a 35mm film camera. This one:

gallery_96203_4345_591545.jpg


(Details here: https://www.cloudynights.com/gallery/image/60895-curved-bolt-barn-door-tracker/)

I can’t remember what it cost me back then but it was probably under $50. (I already had the 6x30 finderscope that I purchased in a swap meet.)

I don’t use it much lately because I have Astrotracer with the Pentax K-3II.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, APP was recently updated to run natively on the Apple Silicon. I've been a Mac APP user for several years, and the speedup is very impressive. So if you have a relatively new Mac, APP is not slow (anymore).
 
How about tracking satellites? I have been in the satellite business since 1978 (my how time flies) and track satellites with my Nikon D200. I take photos of them as they go by overhead and use "astrometry" to get the information that I need to generate "observations" which then allow us to calculate the orbital parameters for satellites. The D200 is a great camera, I shoot in Black and White and use a 10 second exposure. If you are interested, shoot me a note.
 
Deep sky and aurora. I've tried to get into Milky way landscapes but for whatever reason that bug just has not bitten hard enough...yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top