Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Started Apr 9, 2020 | Discussions
zurubi Contributing Member • Posts: 542
Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?
 zurubi's gear list:zurubi's gear list
Sony a7R III Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR +6 more
nighthiker Regular Member • Posts: 485
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Hi!

That tracker was discussed a while ago in this forum but can’t find it right now. Also - at least - two good reviews in the internt from Peter Zelinka and Amazingsky.

An interesting light & affordable option for light equipment with (U)WA lenses with additional options for timelaps. But not so good if you want to use heavier and narrower lenses for e.g. deep sky.

OP zurubi Contributing Member • Posts: 542
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

nighthiker wrote:

Hi!

That tracker was discussed a while ago in this forum but can’t find it right now. Also - at least - two good reviews in the internt from Peter Zelinka and Amazingsky.

An interesting light & affordable option for light equipment with (U)WA lenses with additional options for timelaps. But not so good if you want to use heavier and narrower lenses for e.g. deep sky.

Thanks, I’ll search the forum. I mostly shoot MW with wide angles so that could be OK I guess.

 zurubi's gear list:zurubi's gear list
Sony a7R III Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR +6 more
starman1969
starman1969 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,414
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

I know someone who had one but we couldn't get it to work. I suggested he try it out during the day to get used to it first. From what I have heard it is very good.

-- hide signature --

Steve

 starman1969's gear list:starman1969's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Epson Stylus Pro 3880 +1 more
nighthiker Regular Member • Posts: 485
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Hi!

Try this thread with the links in it:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63558109

hha1 Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

zurubi wrote:

nighthiker wrote:

Hi!

That tracker was discussed a while ago in this forum but can’t find it right now. Also - at least - two good reviews in the internt from Peter Zelinka and Amazingsky.

An interesting light & affordable option for light equipment with (U)WA lenses with additional options for timelaps. But not so good if you want to use heavier and narrower lenses for e.g. deep sky.

Thanks, I’ll search the forum. I mostly shoot MW with wide angles so that could be OK I guess.

For MW wide angle shots you don't need a tracking device, you need a good tripod. Use the rule of 400. With a 21 mm lens on a fullframe DSL or mirrorless, the exposure can be as long as 400/21=20 seconds. I got the best results with 30sec and a 14mm lens with my Z6. If you insist on a longer exposure, stack frames and register them in sequator. The  foreground can be excluded from the registration and will stay sharp.

hha

OP zurubi Contributing Member • Posts: 542
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

hha1 wrote:

zurubi wrote:

nighthiker wrote:

Hi!

That tracker was discussed a while ago in this forum but can’t find it right now. Also - at least - two good reviews in the internt from Peter Zelinka and Amazingsky.

An interesting light & affordable option for light equipment with (U)WA lenses with additional options for timelaps. But not so good if you want to use heavier and narrower lenses for e.g. deep sky.

Thanks, I’ll search the forum. I mostly shoot MW with wide angles so that could be OK I guess.

For MW wide angle shots you don't need a tracking device, you need a good tripod. Use the rule of 400. With a 21 mm lens on a fullframe DSL or mirrorless, the exposure can be as long as 400/21=20 seconds. I got the best results with 30sec and a 14mm lens with my Z6. If you insist on a longer exposure, stack frames and register them in sequator. The foreground can be excluded from the registration and will stay sharp.

hha

Yes @hha1, I do all that. I was thinking to avoid all the hassle with a small tracker that I can take on hikes. Maybe I should forget about that and stick to stacking.

 zurubi's gear list:zurubi's gear list
Sony a7R III Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR +6 more
nighthiker Regular Member • Posts: 485
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Hi!

Well, 400/focal length is a little bit optimistic and will result in most cases in short star trails. A more complex exposure calculator with background explanations can be found here: https://www.lonelyspeck.com/advanced-astrophotography-shutter-time-calculator/

We have had here a discussion about tracking and the tital was like: Will you ever go back after using a tracker and nearly all answers were No

A stacker allows for a much better quality (lower ISO, longer exposure, smaller aperture if required) and there are now affordable and light trackers for any purpose - from UWA to telephoto lens - on the market.

Personally I stack several tracked frames to improve s/n and to remove satellite tracks etc.

Digitaliz
Digitaliz Regular Member • Posts: 429
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

I have it. Good for UA. Not so good for 2min with Sigma 135. Too many images that are not so good. Bad tracking

/Stefan

 Digitaliz's gear list:Digitaliz's gear list
Tamron 15-30mm F2.8
hha1 Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

nighthiker wrote:

Hi!

Well, 400/focal length is a little bit optimistic and will result in most cases in short star trails. A more complex exposure calculator with background explanations can be found here: https://www.lonelyspeck.com/advanced-astrophotography-shutter-time-calculator/

We have had here a discussion about tracking and the tital was like: Will you ever go back after using a tracker and nearly all answers were No

A stacker allows for a much better quality (lower ISO, longer exposure, smaller aperture if required) and there are now affordable and light trackers for any purpose - from UWA to telephoto lens - on the market.

Personally I stack several tracked frames to improve s/n and to remove satellite tracks etc.

I agree with you that 400/focal length is optimistic, 100/focal length is more realistic with a 24 Mp DSLR. but this is for a beginner getting started. Sooner or later he will see the problem, and get a tracker. He will have more issues that elongated stars for the first few attempts without and with a tracker.

nighthiker Regular Member • Posts: 485
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Digitaliz wrote:

I have it. Good for UA. Not so good for 2min with Sigma 135. Too many images that are not so good. Bad tracking

/Stefan

That is exactly what I got from the amazingsky / Alan Dyer review (https://amazingsky.net/tag/move-shoot-move/). Affordable, light and with a good pay load of 3kg, but not too precise. So very good suitable for ultra-wide angle (UWA) work, probably up to 50mm or so, but not for telephoto lenses or deep sky. For my standard 30 sec exposures with a 35/1.4 lens on a 'non-nodal' pano-head (total weight around 2kg) it's nearly perfect. I like the low weight (hiker!), I love the easy-to-use laser pointer (N-hemisphere) and I dislike the small build-in battery as 5 hrs runtime can be short for long & cold winter nights.

In principle you only need a MSM for (U)WA work and  a Fornax Light Track for the rest 

Digitaliz
Digitaliz Regular Member • Posts: 429
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

nighthiker wrote:

Digitaliz wrote:

I have it. Good for UA. Not so good for 2min with Sigma 135. Too many images that are not so good. Bad tracking

/Stefan

That is exactly what I got from the amazingsky / Alan Dyer review (https://amazingsky.net/tag/move-shoot-move/). Affordable, light and with a good pay load of 3kg, but not too precise. So very good suitable for ultra-wide angle (UWA) work, probably up to 50mm or so, but not for telephoto lenses or deep sky. For my standard 30 sec exposures with a 35/1.4 lens on a 'non-nodal' pano-head (total weight around 2kg) it's nearly perfect. I like the low weight (hiker!), I love the easy-to-use laser pointer (N-hemisphere) and I dislike the small build-in battery as 5 hrs runtime can be short for long & cold winter nights.

In principle you only need a MSM for (U)WA work and a Fornax Light Track for the rest

Or Skywatcher Adventurer pro or SAM

/Stefan

 Digitaliz's gear list:Digitaliz's gear list
Tamron 15-30mm F2.8
nighthiker Regular Member • Posts: 485
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

Hi!

Just back from a night trip to a mountain shelter and found that the MSM laser pointer isn’t working in sub zero (C) temperatures any more. Its due to the battery and putting the pointer into my chest pocket solved the problem after a while. Just for your info. The additional peep hole safted that shoot.

tradesmith45 Senior Member • Posts: 2,142
Re: Has anyone tried/tested this MSM tracker?

nighthiker wrote:

Hi!

Just back from a night trip to a mountain shelter and found that the MSM laser pointer isn’t working in sub zero (C) temperatures any more. Its due to the battery and putting the pointer into my chest pocket solved the problem after a while. Just for your info. The additional peep hole safted that shoot.

Have the same problem w/ a generic green pointer.  Using Li batteries helps but if its really cold, yes pocket the batteries to keep them warm.

 tradesmith45's gear list:tradesmith45's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Olympus E-M1 II Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T100 Fujifilm X-T3 +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads