dark current noise

[clengman]

Nice! Thanks!

So I made my own, "slim" adapter by combining parts of two completely different adapters. I'll try posting some photos of it later.

Here it goes. Some photos first:


From left to right: home-made adapter, store bought adapter, barlow lens with filter on one end and T thread on the other


E-PL1 with the big adapter


and with the home-made adapter, a pretty big difference

[ATTACH alt="And with the barlow lens attached, ready to be mounted onto the telescope (1.25" nosepiece)"]1261156[/ATTACH]
And with the barlow lens attached, ready to be mounted onto the telescope (1.25" nosepiece)


Top-down view of home-made T-ring


and a side view, where it's clearly visible it's been hacked together from two different adapters

So, the base for this slim T-ring is a cheap chinese L39 to Micro 4/3 lens mount adapter. This is the outer shell. I choose this one specifically, because I knew (from the photos) that it was a two part thing with the actual L39 screw mount being a separate part held in place by three little screws (one of which is visible in last photo). I figured I could simply replace that internal part with analogous part from another T-Ring, effectively replacing that L39 tread with T thread.

That donor adapter was Kipon's T-Ring for Sony Alpha DSLRs, which was the first camera I mounted onto my telescope. It was also a two piece adapter with the T-threaded part held in place by three screws, so it was trivial to extract it. However, that little bugger was slightly too large to fit into it's new home, so I had to sand it down to appropriate diameter. And as illustrated, it was also a bit thicker, so it's not flush with the outer shell, but it doesn't matter. I've had no problems with it so far, and I was even using it in freezing temperatures.

 

[alexisgreat]

Wow this is a lot of work you did, I took pictures of your pictures ;-) and printed them out to make a guide for myself to follow. Are there major advantages to using a small body for astrophotography with a telescope? I'm also considering getting one of the larger "EM" bodies (possibly the EM-5 Mk 1) because it is weatherproof and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source and was wondering whether being weatherproof and a larger body is a benefit or a detriment for AP? I also have heated dew strips if dew becomes an issue, not sure if dew is a good reason to get a weather resistant body or lens. I use UV protectors on my lenses.

--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/

 

[alexisgreat]

I wanted to compliment you again on some great ingenuity here, I also wanted to add that I think you can also use 1.25" filters, you could screw them where the barlow goes (and if the barlow is threaded for filters use both together also.) I wonder what the minimum distance from filter to focal plane would be with your set up?

 

[Astrotripper]

I wanted to compliment you again on some great ingenuity here,

Thanks

I also wanted to add that I think you can also use 1.25" filters, you could screw them where the barlow goes (and if the barlow is threaded for filters use both together also.)

Yes, I think I mentioned that before. Also, the chrome part of the tube is also screwed on and can be replaced by one from one of the Sky-Watcher eye-pieces. I earlier wrote that it's shorter, but when I checked now, it turns out I was wrong, it's simply the exact same part. Looks like all the kit accessories Sky-Watcher made for the telescope I have are made to share as much parts of their construction.

I wonder what the minimum distance from filter to focal plane would be with your set up?

The distance from the base of the custom T-ring, to the end of the barlow lens tube (where you would screw the filter on) is 65mm. It's about 55mm alone, without a T-ring. So it's a pretty long thing, much longer than a dedicated threaded nosepiece that you linked to earlier.

 

[Astrotripper]

Wow this is a lot of work you did, I took pictures of your pictures ;-) and printed them out to make a guide for myself to follow. Are there major advantages to using a small body for astrophotography with a telescope?

Less chance of flexing. And in general, less annoying operation. I've been attaching a DSLR to my telescope as well, and a switch to smaller and lighter Olympus body was a welcomed change for me.

I'm also considering getting one of the larger "EM" bodies (possibly the EM-5 Mk 1) because it is weatherproof

Once you attach that camera to a telescope, the weather proofing goes out the window. The body itself will still be, so you don't have to worry as much, but the connection with the scope won't and having water seep through the mount is the last thing you want. And depending on your telescope type, you may have the sensor exposed directly to the elements. So no, weather sealed camera is not a get-out-of-jail card when major dew hits you.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

and was wondering whether being weatherproof and a larger body is a benefit or a detriment for AP?

The larger the body, the more problems you'll potentially face with flexing and balancing. Using a cheap and small E-PL6 to get into astrophotography is fine. However, investing in more expensive, high-end Micro 4/3 camera for that purpose makes no sense whatsoever.

I also have heated dew strips if dew becomes an issue, not sure if dew is a good reason to get a weather resistant body or lens. I use UV protectors on my lenses.

Now, if you would like to do wide field astrophotography without a telescope, just with a lens, then a weather sealed camera and lens can be a big deal.

 

[alexisgreat]

I wanted to compliment you again on some great ingenuity here,

Thanks

I also wanted to add that I think you can also use 1.25" filters, you could screw them where the barlow goes (and if the barlow is threaded for filters use both together also.)

Yes, I think I mentioned that before. Also, the chrome part of the tube is also screwed on and can be replaced by one from one of the Sky-Watcher eye-pieces. I earlier wrote that it's shorter, but when I checked now, it turns out I was wrong, it's simply the exact same part. Looks like all the kit accessories Sky-Watcher made for the telescope I have are made to share as much parts of their construction.

I wonder what the minimum distance from filter to focal plane would be with your set up?

The distance from the base of the custom T-ring, to the end of the barlow lens tube (where you would screw the filter on) is 65mm. It's about 55mm alone, without a T-ring. So it's a pretty long thing, much longer than a dedicated threaded nosepiece that you linked to earlier.

Thanks, I'm trying to figure out if there is any way I can get the filter close enough to the sensor of the E-PL6 to avoid vignetting. At f/10 it needs to be 54mm from the sensor, at f/6.3, 35mm.

 

[alexisgreat]

Wow this is a lot of work you did, I took pictures of your pictures ;-) and printed them out to make a guide for myself to follow. Are there major advantages to using a small body for astrophotography with a telescope?

Less chance of flexing. And in general, less annoying operation. I've been attaching a DSLR to my telescope as well, and a switch to smaller and lighter Olympus body was a welcomed change for me.

Thanks, this will be my main use so I think I should stick to the ligher camera. My CCD imager weighed 11 oz and I was fine with that, the E-PL6 weighs 11.5oz so just about the same. The EM-5 weighs 15 oz, while it doesn't sound like a huge difference, on a single armed Nexstar 8 SE mount that can make a different, dont you think?

I'm also considering getting one of the larger "EM" bodies (possibly the EM-5 Mk 1) because it is weatherproof

Once you attach that camera to a telescope, the weather proofing goes out the window. The body itself will still be, so you don't have to worry as much, but the connection with the scope won't and having water seep through the mount is the last thing you want. And depending on your telescope type, you may have the sensor exposed directly to the elements. So no, weather sealed camera is not a get-out-of-jail card when major dew hits you.

I have dew strips and a dew heater for everything from my 8" telescope to 60mm refractor to 1.25" eyepieces. Can I use the dew heater and dew strips on the camera-lens combo when it is not attached to the telescope in lieu of getting a weatherproof body? Hopefully that would work.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

and was wondering whether being weatherproof and a larger body is a benefit or a detriment for AP?

The larger the body, the more problems you'll potentially face with flexing and balancing. Using a cheap and small E-PL6 to get into astrophotography is fine. However, investing in more expensive, high-end Micro 4/3 camera for that purpose makes no sense whatsoever.

I also have heated dew strips if dew becomes an issue, not sure if dew is a good reason to get a weather resistant body or lens. I use UV protectors on my lenses.

Now, if you would like to do wide field astrophotography without a telescope, just with a lens, then a weather sealed camera and lens can be a big deal.

Wide starfield astrophotography is a major interest for me, but I'm wondering if using dew heaters and heated dew strips can make getting a weather sealed body or lens unnecessary.

I wrote this in another thread regarding high ISO/long exposure noise but your idea of making an alternate power source got me thinking......When will major camera manufacturers wake up and offer at least optional TEC cooling for all non-point and shoot cameras? It is simply done and will cause a major reduction in noise. Maybe we can make it ourselves and provide cooling for our cameras to reduce noise even further (especially at higher temps- I am specifically thinking of imaging in the summer when it is in the 70s here all night.)

 

[Astrotripper]

I wonder what the minimum distance from filter to focal plane would be with your set up?

The distance from the base of the custom T-ring, to the end of the barlow lens tube (where you would screw the filter on) is 65mm. It's about 55mm alone, without a T-ring. So it's a pretty long thing, much longer than a dedicated threaded nosepiece that you linked to earlier.

Thanks, I'm trying to figure out if there is any way I can get the filter close enough to the sensor of the E-PL6 to avoid vignetting. At f/10 it needs to be 54mm from the sensor, at f/6.3, 35mm.

In that case, the filter threaded male/female T-adapter that you linked here before is your safest bet. If you can make a T-ring similar to mine, you should be able to sqeeze that filter below 40mm distance from the sensor (if my guesstimates are right).

Oh, and for a telescope like that Nexstar of yours, you don't have to worry much about the length of all the junk you put between the camera and the telescope. I'm pretty certain catadioptric telescopes like that have a much longer range of focus adjustments than the Newtonians. And there's no problem with the tube obstructing the primary mirror. I've used some crazy long solutions on my little Maksutov and was able to achieve focus without problems.

So yeah, just get the male/female T-adapter that takes your filter and put it between your T-ring and nosepiece (or whatever it's called). A standard Micro 4/3 T-ring will be a bit too long (it's 35mm long from base to end) to clear those 54mm, but that should be enough to get you going.

But I have to warn you, at f/10, even the Moon will require very high ISO to keep the shutter fast enough. As for imaging deep sky objects at long exposures, you definitely could use that focal reducer to get it down to f/6.3.

 

[alexisgreat]

I wonder what the minimum distance from filter to focal plane would be with your set up?

The distance from the base of the custom T-ring, to the end of the barlow lens tube (where you would screw the filter on) is 65mm. It's about 55mm alone, without a T-ring. So it's a pretty long thing, much longer than a dedicated threaded nosepiece that you linked to earlier.

Thanks, I'm trying to figure out if there is any way I can get the filter close enough to the sensor of the E-PL6 to avoid vignetting. At f/10 it needs to be 54mm from the sensor, at f/6.3, 35mm.

In that case, the filter threaded male/female T-adapter that you linked here before is your safest bet. If you can make a T-ring similar to mine, you should be able to sqeeze that filter below 40mm distance from the sensor (if my guesstimates are right).

Oh, and for a telescope like that Nexstar of yours, you don't have to worry much about the length of all the junk you put between the camera and the telescope. I'm pretty certain catadioptric telescopes like that have a much longer range of focus adjustments than the Newtonians. And there's no problem with the tube obstructing the primary mirror. I've used some crazy long solutions on my little Maksutov and was able to achieve focus without problems.

So yeah, just get the male/female T-adapter that takes your filter and put it between your T-ring and nosepiece (or whatever it's called). A standard Micro 4/3 T-ring will be a bit too long (it's 35mm long from base to end) to clear those 54mm, but that should be enough to get you going.

But I have to warn you, at f/10, even the Moon will require very high ISO to keep the shutter fast enough. As for imaging deep sky objects at long exposures, you definitely could use that focal reducer to get it down to f/6.3.

Thanks! So you have a MAK too? To complement my 8" SCT, I also have an ETX-90RA, 90mm MAK. I think the E-PL6 may be the only interchangeable lens camera still made that the tabletop equatorial mount of that telescope can handle!

I know you said I shouldn't worry about all the junk between the camera and telescope, but should I still definitely leave the correct image diagonal out? The only reason I was thinking of using it is for imaging near the zenith it will rotate the camera 90 degrees so the camera isn't near the base of the mount.

--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/

 

[RedOctobyr]

First off, thank you to everyone who has contributed. This is a really interesting thread, I've learned a bunch, though I need to go back and re-read some of it

I'm not an astrophotography person, but I've enjoyed just taking some simple pictures of the sky at night, and have tried some stacking with my last camera. It couldn't do exposures >60 sec, and dark-frame-subtraction couldn't be disabled, so making star trails was very clumsy.

My E-M5ii has been much more flexible so far, I've had fun with using Live Composite, and I want to try time-lapse at night.

I understand some Pentax (I think) bodies can use the IS to actually move the sensor (or lens?), acting like a simple and limited tracking mount, to reduce making trails during a single exposure. I think that's pretty cool

If Olympus could use their IBIS to manage that, it could be really nice. It would presumably require observing the sensor's output during the exposure, to look for points of light that are moving, rather than using the gyros.

When will major camera manufacturers wake up and offer at least optional TEC cooling for all non-point and shoot cameras? It is simply done and will cause a major reduction in noise. Maybe we can make it ourselves and provide cooling for our cameras to reduce noise even further (especially at higher temps- I am specifically thinking of imaging in the summer when it is in the 70s here all night.)

This makes me curious. I have never looked into this for cameras, and your statement implies this has been done, and is manageable.

But TECs, like Peltier coolers, are often flat plates. They work by drawing electricity to make one of their sides cooler, while making their other side warmer, and overall generating more heat. They're not very efficient, and you need a way to effectively dissipate the heat from the warmer side, otherwise they stop being effective.

So this would increase overall power draw, and would presumably require an effective heatsink on the warm side. I imagine you couldn't use a fan to help remove the heat, due to vibration.

Is this actually as simple as was implied? I don't know, maybe it is, but it doesn't seem to me that it would be trivial. Overall, you'll make the camera warmer, you need to fit more items into the body, and you need a way to effectively get rid of the extra heat that you're adding.

 

[Astrotripper]

The EM-5 weighs 15 oz, while it doesn't sound like a huge difference, on a single armed Nexstar 8 SE mount that can make a different, dont you think?

No idea. It looks big and sturdy, so should probably handle it.

I have dew strips and a dew heater for everything from my 8" telescope to 60mm refractor to 1.25" eyepieces. Can I use the dew heater and dew strips on the camera-lens combo when it is not attached to the telescope in lieu of getting a weatherproof body? Hopefully that would work.

It's a good idea for sure. I've had some star-trails and night time-lapse sessions ruined by dew fogging my lens. It won't replace weather sealing, but you can always cover up the camera itself with something so it would not get wet.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

Now, if you would like to do wide field astrophotography without a telescope, just with a lens, then a weather sealed camera and lens can be a big deal.

Wide starfield astrophotography is a major interest for me, but I'm wondering if using dew heaters and heated dew strips can make getting a weather sealed body or lens unnecessary.

You can get by with it if you're careful.

I wrote this in another thread regarding high ISO/long exposure noise but your idea of making an alternate power source got me thinking......When will major camera manufacturers wake up and offer at least optional TEC cooling for all non-point and shoot cameras? It is simply done and will cause a major reduction in noise. Maybe we can make it ourselves and provide cooling for our cameras to reduce noise even further (especially at higher temps- I am specifically thinking of imaging in the summer when it is in the 70s here all night.)

It simply makes no sense for consumer cameras. And especially for Olympus, that has sensor floating around in the assembly. How do you efficiently cool something that you cannot make contact with? And where do you get the power to cool it? And how do you get the excessive heat out of the camera. And what good is all this for an intended user of the camera?No, it's simply not feasible, and the payoff is simply not worth it.

The proper solution is to follow the trend that takes place in mobile electronics. Smaller, faster, more efficient, more integrated chips that drain less power and produce less heat. Instead of cooling, try to produce less heat.

 

[Astrotripper]

But I have to warn you, at f/10, even the Moon will require very high ISO to keep the shutter fast enough. As for imaging deep sky objects at long exposures, you definitely could use that focal reducer to get it down to f/6.3.

Thanks! So you have a MAK too?

Yeah, I got a SkyWatcher Virtuoso that came with tiny little 90mm MAK that's rather useless. But I also got a slightly larger 102mm one that I could actually use to image the moon and sun (with proper solar filter of course). For example something like this:

see it on flickr

or this:

see it on flickr

To complement my 8" SCT, I also have an ETX-90RA, 90mm MAK. I think the E-PL6 may be the only interchangeable lens camera still made that the tabletop equatorial mount of that telescope can handle!

Well, the problem here will probably be the shutter shock. No idea how your telescope will play along, but that little 90mm MAK I have is so susceptible to shutter shock, that even very fast shutter speeds are useless. It's basically completely useless for astrophotography unless you use fully electronic shutter (or you shoot video for later stacking, but video from Olympus cameras is very bad for this).

I know you said I shouldn't worry about all the junk between the camera and telescope, but should I still definitely leave the correct image diagonal out? The only reason I was thinking of using it is for imaging near the zenith it will rotate the camera 90 degrees so the camera isn't near the base of the mount.

If the camera can fit there, it's not a problem. That's when that tilting screen fill come in useful. But if it can't fit, than I guess you won't have much choice but to try.

Either way, don't be afraid to experiment. Just try both ways and see how it goes. There's nothing better than first hand experience.

 

[alexisgreat]

The EM-5 weighs 15 oz, while it doesn't sound like a huge difference, on a single armed Nexstar 8 SE mount that can make a different, dont you think?

No idea. It looks big and sturdy, so should probably handle it.

Even my E-520 seems a bit large to me, but I just got my E-PL6 and it looks really small, I am pressing the buttons with my finger nail rather than my finger lol. I just hope nothing on this camera is fragile and prone to break.

The camera has an IR blocker in the front doesn't it to protect the sensor from dust when you change the lens?

I have dew strips and a dew heater for everything from my 8" telescope to 60mm refractor to 1.25" eyepieces. Can I use the dew heater and dew strips on the camera-lens combo when it is not attached to the telescope in lieu of getting a weatherproof body? Hopefully that would work.

It's a good idea for sure. I've had some star-trails and night time-lapse sessions ruined by dew fogging my lens. It won't replace weather sealing, but you can always cover up the camera itself with something so it would not get wet.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

In that thread he mentioned USB "power packs" I'm really curious about what that might be.

Now, if you would like to do wide field astrophotography without a telescope, just with a lens, then a weather sealed camera and lens can be a big deal.

Wide starfield astrophotography is a major interest for me, but I'm wondering if using dew heaters and heated dew strips can make getting a weather sealed body or lens unnecessary.

You can get by with it if you're careful.

I wrote this in another thread regarding high ISO/long exposure noise but your idea of making an alternate power source got me thinking......When will major camera manufacturers wake up and offer at least optional TEC cooling for all non-point and shoot cameras? It is simply done and will cause a major reduction in noise. Maybe we can make it ourselves and provide cooling for our cameras to reduce noise even further (especially at higher temps- I am specifically thinking of imaging in the summer when it is in the 70s here all night.)

It simply makes no sense for consumer cameras. And especially for Olympus, that has sensor floating around in the assembly. How do you efficiently cool something that you cannot make contact with? And where do you get the power to cool it? And how do you get the excessive heat out of the camera. And what good is all this for an intended user of the camera?No, it's simply not feasible, and the payoff is simply not worth it.

The proper solution is to follow the trend that takes place in mobile electronics. Smaller, faster, more efficient, more integrated chips that drain less power and produce less heat. Instead of cooling, try to produce less heat.

I'm not really sure how easy it is to do but on Cloudy Nights and Astromart I've seen '"modded" DSLR on sale from time to time that the previous owner made TEC cooling for. I never actually did it myself but when I corresponded with the people who made it they said it was relatively easy. One problem they did mention though is that you have to be careful about dew- when you cool a camera down it becomes more prone to dew- so they did what is known as regulated cooling.

 

[alexisgreat]

First off, thank you to everyone who has contributed. This is a really interesting thread, I've learned a bunch, though I need to go back and re-read some of it

I'm not an astrophotography person, but I've enjoyed just taking some simple pictures of the sky at night, and have tried some stacking with my last camera. It couldn't do exposures >60 sec, and dark-frame-subtraction couldn't be disabled, so making star trails was very clumsy.

My E-M5ii has been much more flexible so far, I've had fun with using Live Composite, and I want to try time-lapse at night.

I understand some Pentax (I think) bodies can use the IS to actually move the sensor (or lens?), acting like a simple and limited tracking mount, to reduce making trails during a single exposure. I think that's pretty cool

If Olympus could use their IBIS to manage that, it could be really nice. It would presumably require observing the sensor's output during the exposure, to look for points of light that are moving, rather than using the gyros.

Indeed this is the "Astrotracer o-GPS" and it's supposed to be good for exposures up to 20 minutes. I was considering getting that and the Pentax K-50 before I found out that body is very prone to dust even though it is "weatherproof." It's dust preventing mechanism isn't as good as Olympus's (plus the body weighs a pound and a half.) I would love for Olympus to develop an accessory like this, you would only need a firmware update and to attach this accessory on the hot shoe to do it!

When will major camera manufacturers wake up and offer at least optional TEC cooling for all non-point and shoot cameras? It is simply done and will cause a major reduction in noise. Maybe we can make it ourselves and provide cooling for our cameras to reduce noise even further (especially at higher temps- I am specifically thinking of imaging in the summer when it is in the 70s here all night.)

This makes me curious. I have never looked into this for cameras, and your statement implies this has been done, and is manageable.

But TECs, like Peltier coolers, are often flat plates. They work by drawing electricity to make one of their sides cooler, while making their other side warmer, and overall generating more heat. They're not very efficient, and you need a way to effectively dissipate the heat from the warmer side, otherwise they stop being effective.

So this would increase overall power draw, and would presumably require an effective heatsink on the warm side. I imagine you couldn't use a fan to help remove the heat, due to vibration.

Is this actually as simple as was implied? I don't know, maybe it is, but it doesn't seem to me that it would be trivial. Overall, you'll make the camera warmer, you need to fit more items into the body, and you need a way to effectively get rid of the extra heat that you're adding.

I'm not really sure how easy it is to do but on Cloudy Nights and Astromart I've seen '"modded" DSLR on sale from time to time that the previous owner made TEC cooling for. I never actually did it myself but when I corresponded with the people who made it they said it was relatively easy. One problem they did mention though is that you have to be careful about dew- when you cool a camera down it becomes more prone to dew- so they did what is known as regulated cooling.

 

[alexisgreat]

But I have to warn you, at f/10, even the Moon will require very high ISO to keep the shutter fast enough. As for imaging deep sky objects at long exposures, you definitely could use that focal reducer to get it down to f/6.3.

Thanks! So you have a MAK too?

Yeah, I got a SkyWatcher Virtuoso that came with tiny little 90mm MAK that's rather useless. But I also got a slightly larger 102mm one that I could actually use to image the moon and sun (with proper solar filter of course). For example something like this:

see it on flickr

or this:

see it on flickr

To complement my 8" SCT, I also have an ETX-90RA, 90mm MAK. I think the E-PL6 may be the only interchangeable lens camera still made that the tabletop equatorial mount of that telescope can handle!

Well, the problem here will probably be the shutter shock. No idea how your telescope will play along, but that little 90mm MAK I have is so susceptible to shutter shock, that even very fast shutter speeds are useless. It's basically completely useless for astrophotography unless you use fully electronic shutter (or you shoot video for later stacking, but video from Olympus cameras is very bad for this).

Both are very sharp and detailed! Did you use manual focus?

Wow did you use a mylar solar filter?

Can I just use the timer with the E-PL6 and avoid shutter shock with the telescope? I set antishock to 1/8 sec since there is no 0 sec option There isn't an electronic shutter either (at least I have not found any option for it.)

I know you said I shouldn't worry about all the junk between the camera and telescope, but should I still definitely leave the correct image diagonal out? The only reason I was thinking of using it is for imaging near the zenith it will rotate the camera 90 degrees so the camera isn't near the base of the mount.

If the camera can fit there, it's not a problem. That's when that tilting screen fill come in useful. But if it can't fit, than I guess you won't have much choice but to try.

Either way, don't be afraid to experiment. Just try both ways and see how it goes. There's nothing better than first hand experience.

I bought a customizable lcd protector for the camera that you have to cut to fit the screen (which is good because the screen has a nonstandard aspect ratio) but I see it came with a piece of nylon already attached- should I just leave this on and not use the protector unless the original nylon protecting the lcd falls off? I noticed the touch screen still works. I'm still looking for the options for setting the touch screen to only change the focus point rather than also release the shutter and the one for the level gauge- I haven't found either yet.

--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/

 

[Astrotripper]

But I have to warn you, at f/10, even the Moon will require very high ISO to keep the shutter fast enough. As for imaging deep sky objects at long exposures, you definitely could use that focal reducer to get it down to f/6.3.

Thanks! So you have a MAK too?

Yeah, I got a SkyWatcher Virtuoso that came with tiny little 90mm MAK that's rather useless. But I also got a slightly larger 102mm one that I could actually use to image the moon and sun (with proper solar filter of course). For example something like this:

see it on flickr

or this:

see it on flickr

To complement my 8" SCT, I also have an ETX-90RA, 90mm MAK. I think the E-PL6 may be the only interchangeable lens camera still made that the tabletop equatorial mount of that telescope can handle!

Well, the problem here will probably be the shutter shock. No idea how your telescope will play along, but that little 90mm MAK I have is so susceptible to shutter shock, that even very fast shutter speeds are useless. It's basically completely useless for astrophotography unless you use fully electronic shutter (or you shoot video for later stacking, but video from Olympus cameras is very bad for this).

Both are very sharp and detailed! Did you use manual focus?

Yes, there is no other way with a telescope (not without a computer connected to the setup at least).

Wow did you use a mylar solar filter?

Don't know what that is. I used a cheap Baader filter that you buy by the sheets. Looks like a piece of aluminium foil. Used it on my telescope (home-made holder made by previous owner of the telescope), my binoculars, photographic lenses and finder scope. There are two types, one for visual observing and one for photography (obviously, you should never look at sun through the thinner, photography version of the filter).

Can I just use the timer with the E-PL6 and avoid shutter shock with the telescope? I set antishock to 1/8 sec since there is no 0 sec option There isn't an electronic shutter either (at least I have not found any option for it.)

If you scope is anything like mine, then no. There should be no problems with the big one (Nexstar), though (at least I would expect so).

I know you said I shouldn't worry about all the junk between the camera and telescope, but should I still definitely leave the correct image diagonal out? The only reason I was thinking of using it is for imaging near the zenith it will rotate the camera 90 degrees so the camera isn't near the base of the mount.

If the camera can fit there, it's not a problem. That's when that tilting screen fill come in useful. But if it can't fit, than I guess you won't have much choice but to try.

Either way, don't be afraid to experiment. Just try both ways and see how it goes. There's nothing better than first hand experience.

I bought a customizable lcd protector for the camera that you have to cut to fit the screen (which is good because the screen has a nonstandard aspect ratio) but I see it came with a piece of nylon already attached- should I just leave this on and not use the protector unless the original nylon protecting the lcd falls off? I noticed the touch screen still works.

Never cared for that stuff, never used such things on anything, even my phone.

I'm still looking for the options for setting the touch screen to only change the focus point rather than also release the shutter

Not sure how it works on E-PL. On my E-M10, there's a small icon on the left edge of the screen that you can touch to change the mode. If it's not there, I have no idea, read the manual.

and the one for the level gauge- I haven't found either yet.

Change display mode with Info button, one of those should be level gauge. If not, read the manual to learn if that feature is even there or how to enable it.

 

[Astrotripper]

The camera has an IR blocker in the front doesn't it to protect the sensor from dust when you change the lens?

No idea. Never had any problems with dust, and I change the lenses all the time and occasionally had the sensor completely exposed when the camera was mounted to my newtonian telescope.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

In that thread he mentioned USB "power packs" I'm really curious about what that might be.

No idea.

I'm not really sure how easy it is to do but on Cloudy Nights and Astromart I've seen '"modded" DSLR on sale from time to time that the previous owner made TEC cooling for. I never actually did it myself but when I corresponded with the people who made it they said it was relatively easy. One problem they did mention though is that you have to be careful about dew- when you cool a camera down it becomes more prone to dew- so they did what is known as regulated cooling.

Yep, read about such mods as well. Some very impressive stuff. But individual mods of DSLRs by hardcore modders for very specific uses is very different to mass produced device for general consumer. And the level of difficulty drastically increases as you have to deal with a much more tightly packed camera like most of the mirrorless cams. Not to mention that floating sensor.

 

[RedOctobyr]

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

In that thread he mentioned USB "power packs" I'm really curious about what that might be.

No idea.

If you read through the thread linked above, you'll see that in it, I posted a link to *another* thread, which is where the USB power bank was discussed in more detail. That other thread is:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3938674

That person is using a fairly-special USB power bank with an adjustable voltage output. He set it to 8.4V output (within the range of output for Olympus batteries, and likely also Panasonic), and made a setup to allow feeding that to his camera.

If you want more info on options for longer runtimes, at least for Olympus cameras, read through those two threads. I made a simpler setup that what faithblinded did, but in his thread (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3939601#forum-post-56938637 ) I posted info on my setup.

It gave me 8 hours of time-lapse when I tested it, on my E-M5ii, up from about 2.5 hours on the Olympus battery. If I needed it to run longer, I could make a larger battery pack, or add a second pack in parallel with the one I already built.

 

[alexisgreat]

The camera has an IR blocker in the front doesn't it to protect the sensor from dust when you change the lens?

No idea. Never had any problems with dust, and I change the lenses all the time and occasionally had the sensor completely exposed when the camera was mounted to my newtonian telescope.

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

In that thread he mentioned USB "power packs" I'm really curious about what that might be.

No idea.

I'm not really sure how easy it is to do but on Cloudy Nights and Astromart I've seen '"modded" DSLR on sale from time to time that the previous owner made TEC cooling for. I never actually did it myself but when I corresponded with the people who made it they said it was relatively easy. One problem they did mention though is that you have to be careful about dew- when you cool a camera down it becomes more prone to dew- so they did what is known as regulated cooling.

Yep, read about such mods as well. Some very impressive stuff. But individual mods of DSLRs by hardcore modders for very specific uses is very different to mass produced device for general consumer. And the level of difficulty drastically increases as you have to deal with a much more tightly packed camera like most of the mirrorless cams. Not to mention that floating sensor.

AT I just used the camera for a short while and it sure heated up quick (I'm not using the grip, I suspect the metal body is conducting heat quite efficiently!) On the positive side, a warm camera means less chance of dewing. I haven't seen a huge increase in noise, I set dark frame subtraction to always on (I know that's not always recommended but I wanted to see the effect) and AUTO ISO to 200-3200. Noise filter is on Standard.

--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/

 

[alexisgreat]

and can use an ac adapter as an alternate power source

That's nice, I was not aware of that possibility. But you could still make your own solution for that problem, as described here by another forum member.

Excellent, so there's a solution to making an alternate power source for the E-PL series of cameras?

I'm guessing a similar thing can be done for any camera, really. But I'm not really good at stuff like this, can't even say how hard/easy that would be.

In that thread he mentioned USB "power packs" I'm really curious about what that might be.

No idea.

If you read through the thread linked above, you'll see that in it, I posted a link to *another* thread, which is where the USB power bank was discussed in more detail. That other thread is:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3938674

That person is using a fairly-special USB power bank with an adjustable voltage output. He set it to 8.4V output (within the range of output for Olympus batteries, and likely also Panasonic), and made a setup to allow feeding that to his camera.

If you want more info on options for longer runtimes, at least for Olympus cameras, read through those two threads. I made a simpler setup that what faithblinded did, but in his thread (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3939601#forum-post-56938637 ) I posted info on my setup.

It gave me 8 hours of time-lapse when I tested it, on my E-M5ii, up from about 2.5 hours on the Olympus battery. If I needed it to run longer, I could make a larger battery pack, or add a second pack in parallel with the one I already built.

Thanks, this is very inventive- I always wanted to do something like this and not be tied to OEM batteries as my only source of power.