/p/ - Photography » Thread #3685893

[33 / 11 / ?]

2MiB, 2048x1152, IMG_2725.jpg

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:37:12 No.3685893 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3685905 >>3685973 >>3688155

I'm a brainlet and want to get better at astrophotography, I took this last night and need criticism on what to do better.
I'm running a canon 80D with a 17-40 lens, any good way to focus on the rock without all the noise? I also hope to try again tonight and see if I can get a better image, also any post processing help would be greatly appreciated.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_2730.jpg, 966KiB, 2048x1365

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:37:45 No.3685894 Report

Quoted By: >>3685915

Here's another photo I took, unedited

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:40:37 No.3685898 Report

Quoted By: >>3685932

Lower your iso and increase your fstop as high as you can. You want as much to be in focus as possible

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:42:48 No.3685904 Report

Quoted By: >>3685930

Also did not see an astrophotography thread, so can we make this one?
I'd love to see more inspiration or more help, I also just noticed the focal length I was using was 17mm, so I could have gone with a higher exposure length and a lower ISO? What should my F stop be, around 4 or much higher like 8 or 10

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:43:00 No.3685905 Report

Quoted By: >>3685932

>>3685893

read this -> https://clarkvision.com/articles/beginning-astrophotography/

but honestly really great first attempt. with just a little more knowledge on stars trailing and stacking you'll be taking amazing photos in no time I'm sure of it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:48:17 No.3685915 Report

Quoted By: >>3685932

>>3685894
Looking closer at these, it looks like the stars are actually decently in focus but your shutter speed is too high so you're getting just a hint of start trail making them look out of focus

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO neowise_web.jpg, 203KiB, 2680x1798

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 20:58:24 No.3685930 Report

Quoted By: >>3685948 >>3688131 >>3690020

>>3685904

rule of thumb,
aperture -> as wide as you can
shutterspeed -> as long as you can without getting star trail.
iso untracked -> 1600 to 3600
iso tracked -> 400 - 1600 or as long as you can without blowing out your highlights.

don't worry about "iso tracked" by the time you get there you'll know what you're doing.

to focus on the sky, go in live-view, zoom in 10x on a star and manual focus until it's the smallest it can be.

if you want to talk milky-way shots, you combine 2 photos, one of your sky and one of your foreground.
your sky is most likely going to be a number of exposures stacked together using a software specially made for stacking astrophotography. you stack your sky images to get a longer exposure without having stars trailing. example: 20x 5sec = 100sec exposure stacked.

Hope this helped.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 21:01:10 No.3685932 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685898
what settings should I shoot for? Specifically, what fstop?
>>3685905
thanks, I will definitely read up on that
>>3685915
thank you, yeah I noticed looking back they were starting to trail a bit

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 21:18:28 No.3685948 Report

Quoted By: >>3685979

>>3685930
thank you! although I'm unsure of what ISO tracked and untracked is, I'll look more into it

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 21:38:26 No.3685973 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685893
everything you need to know is in here
https://project-nightflight.net/DSLR_astrophotography_untracked.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 15 Jul 2020 21:45:03 No.3685979 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685948

basically means if you're using a tracking mount or not, a tracking mount will move along with the sky so it lets you in theory take exposures of as long as you want without getting stars to trail. Emphasis on "in theory".

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC08487-2.jpg, 805KiB, 1000x1502

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 14:39:33 No.3688131 Report

Quoted By: >>3688158 >>3688231

Shot this last night.
>light pollution haze
>star trail
>noise
shit sucks
I suck
astrophotography is hard
Any tips for a poorfag (only got a F1.8 35mm APS-C prime + a vintage 135mm F2.5 mounted on a FF to APS-C adapter) who lives in an area plagued by light pollution? Is there a way to salvage photos that have light haze on it?

I'll give >>3685930 a shot tonight, but if I follow the rule of 500 thing, it means I can only basically do 0.5s shutter speed tops with my long lens and it'll be super dark, won't it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 15:46:10 No.3688155 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685893
Stack 2 photos
A long exposure of the rock
Mask around it and add the properly exposed stars onto it

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bla.jpg, 320KiB, 1000x1502

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 15:49:06 No.3688158 Report

Quoted By: >>3688223

>>3688131
Stop posting gray crap
I literally opened this in irfanview and moved a single slider once and saved it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 17:23:40 No.3688223 Report

Quoted By:

>>3688158
legit looks worst. do you see how blown up you made the head of the comet look?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 17:35:37 No.3688231 Report

Quoted By:

>>3688131
>but if I follow the rule of 500 thing, it means I can only basically do 0.5s shutter speed tops with my long lens and it'll be super dark, won't it?
that's why you'll have to bump up the iso, but with your 135mm you can get 3.7sec, round down to 3sec to be safe on the edges. it's not much but you'd be surprised what you can pull out of the sky. just pick a bright, relatively big target. When I say bright I mean magnitude under 7.

one last thing, it's better to have a higher iso with slight noise than having an image that is too dark.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 23:29:53 No.3688403 Report

Quoted By: >>3688412

Remember that first thing is exposure time. The longer you expose for the more details you have. Secondary is ISO. All things being equal, a 1s image at 1600 ISO will have a stop or two LESS noise than a 1s image at 400 ISO. ETTR if at all possible, it generally gives me the best results.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0350.jpg, 3MiB, 3000x2000

Anonymous Sun 19 Jul 2020 23:59:59 No.3688412 Report

Quoted By: >>3688413 >>3688421

>>3688403
Also use timed shot and weigh down your tripod. I just found out the little plastic hook on mine can hold quite a bit and it noticeably helps.
In this images kept large for inspection...
With the weight.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0351.jpg, 3MiB, 3000x2000

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:00:36 No.3688413 Report

Quoted By: >>3688421

>>3688412
Without

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:20:05 No.3688421 Report

Quoted By: >>3688424

>>3688412
>>3688413

your comparison isn't very scientific, I think wind is the biggest factor in your shots.

but still having a steady tripod does help. that's why using mirror prop-up is always a good idea when doing astro.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:23:02 No.3688424 Report

Quoted By: >>3688431

>>3688421
Mirror? Like take a picture of a mirror instead of directly into the sky?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Comet1.jpg, 3MiB, 2500x3746

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:23:18 No.3688425 Report

Quoted By: >>3688433

rate my fixed pattern noise

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:31:21 No.3688431 Report

Quoted By:

>>3688424
no no, I mean your dslr mirror, when you take a picture it has to move out of the way first, this creates vibration in the camera. Most dslr have a feature where you can tell it to bring the mirror before taking the shot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:35:06 No.3688433 Report

Quoted By: >>3688443

>>3688425
feelsbadman, I was so disappointed the first time I tried out my tracker. I still need to do some tests to figure out how to minimize it. but we haven't had a clear night since.

fixed pattern noise really look like shit. It honestly makes my untracked shots look better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Jul 2020 00:52:52 No.3688443 Report

Quoted By:

>>3688433
i guess the solution is dithering. but i don't have a tracker, so i would have to shift my tripod by hand every shot

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Autosave001.jpg, 628KiB, 2208x1542

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 03:47:28 No.3690006 Report

Quoted By:

Helios 44M4 58mm @ 2.8, ISO 1600, 34x 30s exposures.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO comet 200mm final.jpg, 2MiB, 2882x1913

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 03:50:10 No.3690009 Report

Quoted By:

SMC Takumar 200mm @ 5.6, ISO 1600, 16x30s exposures, Canon 550D

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 04:02:31 No.3690020 Report

Quoted By: >>3690027 >>3690062

>>3685930
with all these stacked images, is there any reason to use a mechanical shutter versus and electric, so you dont wear it out prematurely? i wouldnt think that rolling shutter would be a problem here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 04:07:14 No.3690027 Report

Quoted By: >>3690029 >>3690062

>>3690020
I cant say. I don't think a few hundred pictures will make much of a difference on a shutter with several hundred thousand actuations rated. If you have a tracking mount, no rolling shutter should not be an issue at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 04:09:28 No.3690029 Report

Quoted By: >>3690037

>>3690027
>few hundred pictures will make much of a difference on a shutter with several hundred thousand actuations rated
no, but if you're doing 20 per picture, and have no idea what you're doing so you do this a lot, you could quickly end up with far more than a few hundred clicks

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 04:13:39 No.3690037 Report

Quoted By:

>>3690029
yeah fair enough. I do it whenever a special event comes up (Comets, meteor showers, unusually clear/dark skies). I've probably put 2,000 actuations from astrophoto alone. My few hundred shots was more per trip, my end tally from neowise was 320 pics total. As long as electronic shutter mode doesn't limit your raws to 10-12 bit like some older cams do, you should be fine shooting full electric.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO r_neowise_2_stacked_web.jpg, 431KiB, 1284x2196

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 05:12:52 No.3690062 Report

Quoted By: >>3690398

>>3690020
I'm not super familiar with how the electric shutter works but at the top of my head, I think the biggest advantage would be that it eliminate vibrations.
As for the shutter / mirror wear, like >>3690027 says, I think it would be minimal. At least when you're doing tracked shots, 1 shot every 30sec
which can go as high as 5min, it's pretty minimal.
I'm sure I average more shots per minute walking around during the day and taking pictures. And this completely goes out the window as soon as you start doing anykind of fast photography like sports or birds in flight.

with this one, I was out for probably an hour, and I took probably 50 shots max.

27x30sec subs
iso 800
canon EF 70-200mm USM L

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 17:55:25 No.3690398 Report

Quoted By:

>>3690062
What tracker did you use?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches