NEX-5N Astrophotography - Saturn Technique

RustierOne

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Solutions
11
Reaction score
1,052
Location
USA, OR, US
Here’s one of my first Saturn images with the NEX-5N. It’s a bit soft and has a color fringe from stacking. But I wanted to share my technique with the forum so that others can try, while Saturn is favorably placed this spring. The sky was hazy, with a tendency to form dew, and the air was not very steady. The corrector plate on the telescope has quite a bit of dust on it, since I very rarely clean it (dust is not that much of a problem, but scratches are permanent).





Here's my equipment and technique:

Celestron C-11 telescope, 2790mm f/10 w/ 9mm Plossl used eyepiece projection, Losmandy G-11 mount, Sony NEX-5N, attached to telescope with adapter (model BNEX, $58 from Telescopeadapters.com), shutter priority, 1/5 sec, speed priority continuous mode, 4 megapixel, fine, ISO 1600. Of the 410 JPEG images, the best 150 were stacked and processed with Registax 6. Resulting image was cropped with minimal post processing in Photoshop Elements.

Here's the device I made to keep the shutter release button depressed (sort of cave man style). The clamp 4-inch clamp, various screws, thread tap and bit will run less than $20.





The white nylon screw fits in a hole (in the metal plate and yellow plastic insert) threaded to match. I've found that it works just fine without the metal plate, only utilizing the threads in the yellow insert. A short section of aquarium air hose slit endwise protects the back of the camera from being scratched by the clamp bar. Here's how the whole thing looks on the camera.









With the clamp attached, access to the menu button and lower programmable button is easier using a lead pencil or other stylus. But as can be seen, the monitor can be tilted for easy viewing. To start the exposures (after carefully focusing), you just need to turn down the nylon screw until the camera begins taking images. Likewise at the end of the shots, just back the screw out until the shutter stops.

I was very pleased with how little noise was produced by the NEX-5N. Using the method described is not the best due to excessive use of the mechanical shutter. I don't know what its rated life might be. But cranking off hundreds or thousands of single shots will use up whatever life it may have at an advanced rate. While it would be better to used the 1080P HD movie mode (approx. 2 megapixels), I found that by using JPEGs (which Registax handles just fine), I didn't have to deal with converting AVCHD or MP4 movies to AVI format for Registax. Perhaps the biggest challenge is getting focus right with the live image smearing around due to atmospheric seeing. I have had some success using a Bahtinov mask to aid in focusing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahtinov_mask

This mask can be purchased from various sources. I wish all who try astrophotography with the NEX cameras much success! Keep the rest of us posted as to what works for you.

--
Russ
 
I'm confused about the use of the clamp. is there a reason you wouldn't do a bulb mode shot with a remote? seems to me that would be less shake and probably cheaper (cheapy remote on amazon is like $6-10)
 
I'm confused about the use of the clamp. is there a reason you wouldn't do a bulb mode shot with a remote? seems to me that would be less shake and probably cheaper (cheapy remote on amazon is like $6-10)
--
The reason for not using bulb is, he is taking over 400 short duration images and stacking them. Using bulb for a long duration image would build up a lot of noise. The stacking software also automatically sorts out the bad images due to poor atmospheric conditions. Stacking also helps alleviate the problems caused by light pollution. Usually bulb mode is only used in astrophotography for bright objects like the moon, and long exposures for faint deep sky objects. There is even software available now that will stack faint deep sky images. The biggest advantage of stacking over bulb mode is being able to discard the images in a series that were recorded when the "seeing" was bad. With bulb everything get recorded in the image.
 
Very nice setup!. I would love to get into this style of photography if I had the time to devote to it.

What is the reason to use 4mp fine? Does it had to do with the stacking software? Theoretically, you would think a higher mp would be better?
 
The other issue being addressed with using the clamp to depress the shutter is that in the mode menu, remote commander or continuous shooting can be chosen - but not at the same time. It would be nice if the NEX cameras had a threaded hole in the shutter button like the old film cameras had for a cable release (which could be locked open).
--
Russ
 
I used the 4 megapixel size for a couple of reasons.

First, in most cases 8 or 16 MP is not needed since the resolution of the image is limited, not by camera resolution, but by the atmospheric "seeing". When stars are twinkling a lot (poor seeing) that indicates the air is a turbulent mix of differing temperatures which distorts the image at any instant. There are brief instants when the seeing will be steadier. Images captured during those times will used to form the final stacked image, with the poorer ones being discarded by Registax.

Second, the lower pixel count enables a higher frame rate. This allows one to capture a lot more individual images in a given time.

When my technique (focusing) improves and on nights of improved seeing, I will be using 8 or 16 MP. I will also be experimenting with using a higher magnification eyepiece (maybe a 4 or 6mm) to project a larger image onto however many megapixels are present.
--
Russ
 
Below are some pictures of the whole setup.













Below is a view of the camera and adapter. Inside the smooth black tube is an eyepiece which projects a magnified view onto the sensor. The adapter can also be used "prime focus" without the eyepiece, using the telescope's focal length of 2790mm. Used in that mode, the image of a planet would be very small.





While this telescope is medium large (11-inch aperture), good results are possible with smaller telescopes in the 4 to 9-inch range. Below are a couple of pictures with a Celestron 8 and an old (noisy) Olympus C5050. I believe that the NEX cameras are capable of much better results, due to much lower noise at high ISO, as well as superior movie and continuous shooting modes.









Check out the spectacular results at:

http://www.damianpeach.com/
--
Russ
 
It would be nice if I could use the remote with continuous shooting mode. But you choose one or the other. You are right about the possibility of some vibration using the clamp. In practice I find that 2-3 frames at the beginning and at the end of the run are unusable. But I just exclude these from the set I send to Registax, or just let the program weed these out as of poor quality. As Creeker stated in his post, what is need with planetary imaging is not longer exposures (as with bulb mode and remote) but more individual short exposures to "freeze" those brief moments when the image is sharp. I want to experiment with using higher ISO (like 3200 or 6400) to enable moving up to a quicker shutter speed from the current 1/5 second. The trade-off will be increased noise.
--
Russ
 
Very nice shots and good background info. Thanks.

Compupro
 
Luebke wrote:

Nice pictures and good info. Please keep posting results of the combo.
Thanks for the kind comment. This past summer, I've been occupied with barn-door tracker images of the Milky Way. Since Jupiter is now becoming well-placed again, its time to try some more planets. Now if it would just stop raining.

Best regards,
Russ
 
I had no idea "consumer" gear could capture planets that distant. Do you mind sharing what one of the individual "good" JPEGs look like?
 
Very nice work.

I had a telescope as a kid and loved it, but it was no where as nice as yours.
 
compupro wrote:

Very nice shots and good background info. Thanks.

Compupro
Thanks for the kind comment and for viewing my posts. For your info, there is a very nice Astrophotography forum where there's a lot of good discussion.


Best Regards,
Russ
 
Luebke wrote:

Nice pictures and good info. Please keep posting results of the combo.
Thanks for the kind comment and for viewing my posts. For your info, there is a very nice Astrophotography forum where there's a lot of good discussion.

Best Regards,


Russ
 
Your results are great but I guess Jupiter and Saturn would benefit from less color saturation (then the images looks more natural and a bit sharper too).

Seems like you have pretty stable atmospheric conditions with far less turbulence than at my nothernly latitude...
 
TwinTurboJosh wrote:

I had no idea "consumer" gear could capture planets that distant. Do you mind sharing what one of the individual "good" JPEGs look like?
Thanks for the kind comment and for viewing my posts. For your info, there is a very nice Astrophotography forum where there's a lot of good discussion.

As for a good JPEG, I usually don't keep the JPEG images after processing with Registax. And once leaving that program, I have little means to find out which images that it considered the best. All I know is that it rates each frame for quality. It then (in a sense) reorders them from best to worst. I decide where the cut-off is, beyond which the worst are excluded from further processing. I did find some Saturn JPEGs which were used for the following image (cropped from full frame). The camera (Olympus C5050, 5MP) was used "afocal", attached to a Maxview-40 eyepiece, which would give 50X with the telescope (2000mm focal length). I don't know how much the camera was zoomed with its own lens.

Celestron-8 w/ Olympus C5050, Subset of 361 images taken 4-1-08, processed w/ Registax 4.0
Celestron-8 w/ Olympus C5050, Subset of 361 images taken 4-1-08, processed w/ Registax 4.0

Here's a random selection (of varying quality) of some of the individual JPEGs (5 megapixel) fed into Registax:

This one when zoomed in shows a trace of the Cassini Division in the rings (on left side)
This one when zoomed in shows a trace of the Cassini Division in the rings (on left side)

This one shows a bit of Cassini Division on both sides.
This one shows a bit of Cassini Division on both sides.

This a rather average looking JPEG
This a rather average looking JPEG

So you can see how powerful Registax can be. The individual JPEGs can be pretty bad, but the program takes the best, aligns and stacks. The signal (image details keep being reinforced, while the noise tends to average to zero. Its amazing.

Best Regards,
Russ
 
Last edited:
davect01 wrote:

Very nice work.
I had a telescope as a kid and loved it, but it was no where as nice as yours.



Thanks for the kind comment and for viewing my posts. For your info, there is a very nice Astrophotography forum where there's a lot of good discussion.

Best Regards,
Russ
 
Trollmann wrote:

Your results are great but I guess Jupiter and Saturn would benefit from less color saturation (then the images looks more natural and a bit sharper too).

Seems like you have pretty stable atmospheric conditions with far less turbulence than at my nothernly latitude...
Thanks for the kind comment and for viewing my posts. For your info, there is a very nice Astrophotography forum where there's a lot of good discussion. I tend to monitor activity in that forum more than the NEX Talk forum.


Saturation is one of those things where personal preference comes into play. I tend to like saturation turned up quite a bit. As for atmospheric conditions, I live in Oregon, USA, which tends to have somewhat poor seeing. There are rare nights where it can be good to excellent. But Registax will work with what you have and produce some amazing results.

Your northern latitude will of course place the planets lower in the sky than for myself. This year Jupiter is having a good apparition for us northern hemisphere observers. Its not only a bit closer than most years, but also further north in the sky. Its a good opportunity to try planetary imaging





Best Regards,
Russ
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top