Revisited Milky Way Nightscape + MFT capability considerations

jimboyvr wrote:

If you really care about night sky shots buy a full frame like a used canon 6d. Literally night and day difference from even the best m43 at 1/5th the cost.

If you're buying a camera with the primary focus of astrophotography you be crazy to buy anything other than a dedicated astro camera these days. They're not that much more expensive than a consumer photography camera but you get a better form factor, appropriate filter stack, and most importantly integrated sensor cooling.

whumber wrote:

jimboyvr wrote:

If you really care about night sky shots buy a full frame like a used canon 6d. Literally night and day difference from even the best m43 at 1/5th the cost.

If you're buying a camera with the primary focus of astrophotography you be crazy to buy anything other than a dedicated astro camera these days. They're not that much more expensive than a consumer photography camera but you get a better form factor, appropriate filter stack, and most importantly integrated sensor cooling.

Those are for deep space on which I agree

For night scapes which is what I shoot a dedicated astro camera is  not a good choice because normally they don’t have a screen

Lu1Wang wrote:

idk why are you keep focusing on the minor technical details that matter the least instead of working on your PP more, especially your colour grading for low light shots.

I don’t understand the meaning of anything you wrote

am not sure I want to  actually

whumber wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

I am not sure how you are so confident this isn't while others are. Or perhaps nobody has looked at backlit scenes.

Either way I would not stop taking some images because my camera has a problem with the scene but would change the camera so the conclusion is the same

It's absolutely a weakness of the E-M1ii/iii/X, it's just that it's not coming from the PD pixels but other design considerations.

There was a very competent German guy who showed me some nice patterning examples of EM1MKII when I asked him why he was using an EM10 on facebook but as I got rid of the camera very shortly after I did not bother keeping the links

I will see if I can find it but my advice at this point would change from use a contrast detect camera to use a panasonic camera if the issue is also with the coating

If you create a master dark, for example, from the E-M1ii you'll see a very distinct signature of the PDAF pattern on the sensor if you stretch it to an extreme, no question about that.

400% view of E-M1iii master dark pushed +8 stops.

I suspect that this is the pattern that you saw from the German individual. This is the same pattern you'll see in certain glaring flare conditions except there you won't need to do any kind of extreme push to induce it. These are all very different from the diffraction grating pattern you showed though which shows up on plenty of non-PDAF patterns.

I posted that because I have deleted the hundreds of abort frames I took at the time

that was the leftover of a set of cases that made me sell the camera

well at the very end we are at the same point don’t use either of EM1MKII/X/III

we just need the EM5III then the advice avoid PDAF camera is 100% accurate?

Interceptor121 wrote:

you can see horizontal lines more prominent in the first image a tad higher than the tallest mountain those are not present in the other image from the PEN-F

Actually, no I can't see any pattern in this image in the region you've drawn the green lines on.  I inspected the tif at 200-800% on a Ritena display & see nothing.

I'm still of the opinion that this is a non-issue for starry landscapes.

Interceptor121 wrote:

whumber wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

I am not sure how you are so confident this isn't while others are. Or perhaps nobody has looked at backlit scenes.

Either way I would not stop taking some images because my camera has a problem with the scene but would change the camera so the conclusion is the same

It's absolutely a weakness of the E-M1ii/iii/X, it's just that it's not coming from the PD pixels but other design considerations.

There was a very competent German guy who showed me some nice patterning examples of EM1MKII when I asked him why he was using an EM10 on facebook but as I got rid of the camera very shortly after I did not bother keeping the links

I will see if I can find it but my advice at this point would change from use a contrast detect camera to use a panasonic camera if the issue is also with the coating

If you create a master dark, for example, from the E-M1ii you'll see a very distinct signature of the PDAF pattern on the sensor if you stretch it to an extreme, no question about that.

400% view of E-M1iii master dark pushed +8 stops.

I suspect that this is the pattern that you saw from the German individual. This is the same pattern you'll see in certain glaring flare conditions except there you won't need to do any kind of extreme push to induce it. These are all very different from the diffraction grating pattern you showed though which shows up on plenty of non-PDAF patterns.

I posted that because I have deleted the hundreds of abort frames I took at the time

that was the leftover of a set of cases that made me sell the camera

well at the very end we are at the same point don’t use either of EM1MKII/X/III

we just need the EM5III then the advice avoid PDAF camera is 100% accurate?

Sure...if you're regularly pushing your shots by 8 stops and don't plan on taking any black frames.

whumber wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

This pattern is not related to the PDAF points, you can get the same behavior from old DSLRs under the right conditions. It's related to diffraction patterns that form within the sensor stack. There's a good discussion about it here.

Image taken with a T2i (Taken by Jerry Lodriguss)

Interesting link/read.  Thank you whumber.