Do you think the other guys are taking photos of us? Maybe with a RebelXT?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
350D does the Milky Way
- Thread starter kiwi2
- Start date
kiwi2
Veteran Member
OMG! You have to put up with a search light as well!! Do you have a dark sky site you can travel to?
I just got this one of M42 tonight from my back yard...
Stacked two 2 minute, ISO 1600, 1200mm f/8 exposures.
I still reckon I can get it better yet if I try from my dark sky site.
--
images hosted by http://www.PhotoShare.co.nz
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
I just got this one of M42 tonight from my back yard...
Stacked two 2 minute, ISO 1600, 1200mm f/8 exposures.
I still reckon I can get it better yet if I try from my dark sky site.
--
images hosted by http://www.PhotoShare.co.nz
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
kiwi2
Veteran Member
Sorry, I didn't this until now.
Ummm.... I think the dark sky really helped as I could increase the brightness without increasing any unwanted light pollution at the same time. I also increase the shadows slider when converting the RAW in Elements 3 to increase the black point and help keep good contrast.
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Andre Oliveira
Leading Member
$1000 is not cheap. It´s just not expensive enough...
--
Andre
--
Andre
Hi kiwi2,
I was wondering if you could answer a question for me. Does the EQ5 mount detach from the supplied tripod and if so, what size thread does it use? I was wondering if it could be fitter to a standard camera tripod.
Great shots by the way.
I was wondering if you could answer a question for me. Does the EQ5 mount detach from the supplied tripod and if so, what size thread does it use? I was wondering if it could be fitter to a standard camera tripod.
Great shots by the way.
Andre Oliveira
Leading Member
Is this the original vegetation or there were trees sometime in the past?
--
Andre
--
Andre
SelNZ
Senior Member
SelNZ
Senior Member
Looked like the lake front at Wanaka. Havn't been to Waihola, havn't been to the SI since 94, must make the effort. Thanks
--
Sel ................
s9500, E550
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/%7Eselorme/photos.html
Thats fantastic.
As an example of what can be done without a tracking device, but with quite dark skys, here is a picure I took in the Dolomites. It is done on a 300D with the Sigma 15mm fisheye at f2.8, iso1600, 30sec. I didn't even use a tripod and instead rested the camera in the rocks. 30sec is about the limit of the 15mmFE before trails start to show. In the non-resized version the stars are actually very short trails and of course even more noise is even more noticable.
Al
As an example of what can be done without a tracking device, but with quite dark skys, here is a picure I took in the Dolomites. It is done on a 300D with the Sigma 15mm fisheye at f2.8, iso1600, 30sec. I didn't even use a tripod and instead rested the camera in the rocks. 30sec is about the limit of the 15mmFE before trails start to show. In the non-resized version the stars are actually very short trails and of course even more noise is even more noticable.
Al
Tacboy99
Active member
As far as I know there has never been larger vegetation, only tussocks, vairous species of hebes and general ground cover etc. Generally the area is just too exposed for new zealand trees (and dry for that matter - 400-500mm/yr), windy, snow on ground 3 months of the year, semi permafrost in winter - you get the story
startling beautiful in the right light, tussocks have a very soft velvety texture and there are several lakes or tarns in the area which make the photos very easy to take. For those familar with Otago, been in this area it is pretty apparent why Otago sporting colours are blue and gold. Probably the best thing about it is the absolute isolation, very few tracks/roads into area and frankly not many people know the area is there.
See DOC (department of conservation) website
http://www.doc.govt.nz/Explore/001~Other-Places/012~Otago/Te-Papanui-Conservation-Park/index.asp
Going to change in a couple of years - there are 3 proposed windfarms representing some 1600MW of generation proposed for the area so I guess you can imagine what 600 80m high windmills will look like...
startling beautiful in the right light, tussocks have a very soft velvety texture and there are several lakes or tarns in the area which make the photos very easy to take. For those familar with Otago, been in this area it is pretty apparent why Otago sporting colours are blue and gold. Probably the best thing about it is the absolute isolation, very few tracks/roads into area and frankly not many people know the area is there.
See DOC (department of conservation) website
http://www.doc.govt.nz/Explore/001~Other-Places/012~Otago/Te-Papanui-Conservation-Park/index.asp
Going to change in a couple of years - there are 3 proposed windfarms representing some 1600MW of generation proposed for the area so I guess you can imagine what 600 80m high windmills will look like...
dciobota
Leading Member
I do a bit of astrophotography work as well, but I've never been to a dark site like yours. Beautiful image, very good detail and processing as well. NZ is on my must see tour of the world, some day when I have the money. ;-)
Daniel
--
----------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/dciobota
Daniel
--
----------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/dciobota
dciobota
Leading Member
Sorry to hijack the thread a little, but I notice so many replies from folks that want to wet their feet at this kind of photography but don't want to spend a fortune on it.
Telescope mounts. While the expensive ones are really nice, for wide and medium field pics of the sky you don't need a fancy one. Here's a link to a camera mount that can do star tracking. You'll also need to add the electronic drive listed as an accessory on the page:
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=296&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=6&iSubCat=24&iProductID=296
All this will set you back about US$100, about the same as the kit lens. This little mount can be used with wide to medium lenses (wouldn't try anything bigger than say 135mm) which will give you plenty of interesting objects to photograph in the sky. Also, this little gem can be mounted on a tripod as well, how cool is that!
How to use the mount. You will have to learn a little about the sky, things like constellations for example. Also, you will have to learn how to spot Polaris, which is the closest bright star to the celestial north pole. So, before starting to photograph, you must align the mount with the celestial north. There are several places on the web that explain polar alignment, here's a nice intro one that explains how these mounts work as well:
http://www.starizona.com/basics/polarg1.html
So, once you've aligned, turn on the electric drive and the mount automatically follows the sky. Then, all you have to do is move the camera around to an interesting part, and click to your heart's content.
A few words on exposure. For starters, iso300-400 works best, at it has little noise and is easily manipulated in post processing. Stay away from 100 (in long exposures it causes glow effects in the image) or 800-1600, as those are generally pretty noisy. As you gain experience and interest, there are ways to combine multiple exposures to combat noise and allow very deep sky images (providing you have a deep sky).
That's the other thing. As pointed out, you need fairly dark skies. I live in the center of an 8000 pop town with some major factories around the outskirts. Consequently, I cannot see a whole lot of stars, let alone the milky way. But, if you look at my site you'll see some deep sky pics, most of them (except the milky way, not very good ones) taken from my back yard.
Hope this helps you get started in this hobby, but I must warn you, once you're hooked there's no going back!
Daniel
--
----------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/dciobota
Telescope mounts. While the expensive ones are really nice, for wide and medium field pics of the sky you don't need a fancy one. Here's a link to a camera mount that can do star tracking. You'll also need to add the electronic drive listed as an accessory on the page:
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=296&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=6&iSubCat=24&iProductID=296
All this will set you back about US$100, about the same as the kit lens. This little mount can be used with wide to medium lenses (wouldn't try anything bigger than say 135mm) which will give you plenty of interesting objects to photograph in the sky. Also, this little gem can be mounted on a tripod as well, how cool is that!
How to use the mount. You will have to learn a little about the sky, things like constellations for example. Also, you will have to learn how to spot Polaris, which is the closest bright star to the celestial north pole. So, before starting to photograph, you must align the mount with the celestial north. There are several places on the web that explain polar alignment, here's a nice intro one that explains how these mounts work as well:
http://www.starizona.com/basics/polarg1.html
So, once you've aligned, turn on the electric drive and the mount automatically follows the sky. Then, all you have to do is move the camera around to an interesting part, and click to your heart's content.
A few words on exposure. For starters, iso300-400 works best, at it has little noise and is easily manipulated in post processing. Stay away from 100 (in long exposures it causes glow effects in the image) or 800-1600, as those are generally pretty noisy. As you gain experience and interest, there are ways to combine multiple exposures to combat noise and allow very deep sky images (providing you have a deep sky).
That's the other thing. As pointed out, you need fairly dark skies. I live in the center of an 8000 pop town with some major factories around the outskirts. Consequently, I cannot see a whole lot of stars, let alone the milky way. But, if you look at my site you'll see some deep sky pics, most of them (except the milky way, not very good ones) taken from my back yard.
Hope this helps you get started in this hobby, but I must warn you, once you're hooked there's no going back!
Daniel
--
----------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/dciobota
Richard King40278
Leading Member
Excellent stuff.
Here's a VERY lucky shot taken during the Leonoids meteor shower a few years back. This was shot with a Nikon Cool Pix 990 (ancient lol) I was just sitting on the beach pressing the shutter release with an exposure of about 1/2 second and got lucky.
Orion Shot Through the Heart.
--
My 'stuff'
http://www.pbase.com/rking401
Here's a VERY lucky shot taken during the Leonoids meteor shower a few years back. This was shot with a Nikon Cool Pix 990 (ancient lol) I was just sitting on the beach pressing the shutter release with an exposure of about 1/2 second and got lucky.
Orion Shot Through the Heart.
--
My 'stuff'
http://www.pbase.com/rking401
Richard King40278
Leading Member
I have two of those. I thought everyone had at least one of those. LOL
--
My 'stuff'
http://www.pbase.com/rking401
--
My 'stuff'
http://www.pbase.com/rking401
kiwi2
Veteran Member
Indeed, that looks like a good way to go without having to spend a lot.
And to answer earlier question... no, I don't think you could mount a EQ5 head to a camera tripod. It weighs 11kg (with the counterweight) and many people already complain that the supplied legs are to spindly. The head is attached to the base with a 12mm bolt.
It isn't something you could go hiking with.
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
kiwi2
Veteran Member
This pic shows the colour better I think...
(Otago's colours; http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/nz-ot.html )
"Visitors who wish to drive within the park must travel on the formed track in a 4WD vehicle. Vehicles must carry a winch or some form of extraction device, in case of boggy conditions"
Oops...!! I didn't realise that. Although I was prepared to hightail it out of there at the first sign of rain in my GTi
Oh well... looking on the bright side - they could make nice foreground subjects in some scenic Milky Way shots in the future???
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
kiwi2
Veteran Member
That was very lucky! Just about every time I have the camera imaging a region of sky... I am usually looking up hoping some big bright meteor will streak through the frame!
Imagine what it would look like with a DSLR at ISO 1600 !
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Imagine what it would look like with a DSLR at ISO 1600 !
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
kiwi2
Veteran Member
I like that foreground silhouette and glow on the distant horizon. Very creative and artistic.
I hope to do some scenic shots with nice starry skies myself soon. Even have a Sigma 10-20mm on order at the moment for that kind of stuff.
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
I hope to do some scenic shots with nice starry skies myself soon. Even have a Sigma 10-20mm on order at the moment for that kind of stuff.
--
If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Thanks.
I mainly posted it to show others in this thread that if one doesn't have a tracking system (but they do have dark skys) that by using wider apetures and high iso one can still capture a lot of stars and the milky way. I later reprocessed this image and made it a bit brigher, gave it a cleaner orange/yellow on the horizon (different WB) and applied some careful noise reduction (so as not to eliminate faint stars) and it made a very nice 8x12" print, surprising me considering it used the lens wide open and at high iso.
(This web sized image has no noise reduction, just RAW to jpeg, resize and light sharpening)
Al
I mainly posted it to show others in this thread that if one doesn't have a tracking system (but they do have dark skys) that by using wider apetures and high iso one can still capture a lot of stars and the milky way. I later reprocessed this image and made it a bit brigher, gave it a cleaner orange/yellow on the horizon (different WB) and applied some careful noise reduction (so as not to eliminate faint stars) and it made a very nice 8x12" print, surprising me considering it used the lens wide open and at high iso.
(This web sized image has no noise reduction, just RAW to jpeg, resize and light sharpening)
Al
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum