Orion with an "L" of a lens

[strgazr27]

I finally got a chance to get the 70-200 f/4 setup on the mount last night. This was shot at 200mm f/4 and is 30 5 minute exposures with my Self Modded 40D. This is an amazing piece of glass! I'm honestly considering making the move to the 100-400 L at this point.

As usual, comments welcomed!

Clear Skies!

30X300 sec
Modded 40D with CLS/CCD filter
Hypertuned EQ6
AT66/SSAG and MAximDl v 5 for autoguiding
Images Plus, Registar and PSCS2\

http://strgazr27.zenfolio.com/img/v5/p517015029-4.jpg

[Celestron]

Great shot bobby ! Caught the HH also .

[bowtie`]

Gorgeous shot and a great example of what *standard* lens can do! I know that Nighthound has mentioned this before but I will repeat it. The 100-400 is a fine lens but due to it being a zoom, it does have some CA issues. Nothing that hampers teresstial view but in the high contrast astro shots will make it's self known. Being a zoom it has a sweet spot somewhere around 200mm. I would consider long primes if I were in your shoes. Especially if your mount can handle the weight. With a prime your IQ will be better. True using a prime you will not have the variable framing but I bet you would like the increased quality both in color and resolution. If you are looking for something bigger possibly the 300 f/2.8 or maybe even the 400.

[strgazr27]

Gorgeous shot and a great example of what *standard* lens can do! I know that Nighthound has mentioned this before but I will repeat it. The 100-400 is a fine lens but due to it being a zoom, it does have some CA issues. Nothing that hampers teresstial view but in the high contrast astro shots will make it's self known. Being a zoom it has a sweet spot somewhere around 200mm. I would consider long primes if I were in your shoes. Especially if your mount can handle the weight. With a prime your IQ will be better. True using a prime you will not have the variable framing but I bet you would like the increased quality both in color and resolution. If you are looking for something bigger possibly the 300 f/2.8 or maybe even the 400.

B,

Thanks for that info. The CA issue would really bother me so that precludes the use of that lens. I have spent the better part of the day researching and it really looks like the 300 f/2.8 would be a real sweet spot.

Ohhh the money........:(

[bowtie`]

B,

Thanks for that info. The CA issue would really bother me so that precludes the use of that lens. I have spent the better part of the day researching and it really looks like the 300 f/2.8 would be a real sweet spot.

Ohhh the money........:(

Your welcome. I hope I did not come across as bashing the 100-400. I own the 100-400! I really like the lens and for daytime stuff it is fantastic. It always comes down to the moolah though. :cry: I have my wishlist containing a 500 prime but the way things are now this is only *wishing upon a star*.

[Celestron]

B,

Thanks for that info. The CA issue would really bother me so that precludes the use of that lens. I have spent the better part of the day researching and it really looks like the 300 f/2.8 would be a real sweet spot.

Ohhh the money........:(

Back when i used film a Pentax SMC 300mm Prime lens was a sweet spot also ! I still have it but haven't used it in a long while :( .

[GrahamS]

that's lovely.

i recently got out my tripod, pointed the camera up, and got a nice photo.













of some white dots.

obviously my 'setup' if it can be called that, is very basic, and it was my first go. but in that hour of freezing temps, i learnt a lot.

knowing where all the buttons on your camera in the dark are, is a good thing to learn :)

with a static tripod, anything over 10 seconds was showing motion blur on the stars, however even at just 10 secs, with the iso wound up reasonably high, they were bright enough to see, so how did you have 30 300 second exposures and not masssively over expose the stars? one 300 sec exposure would be a white screen the way i was doing it.

i must be getting old. i find as much interest in this section, as i do in glamour and nude................;)

[Karl Johnston]

That is absolutely AMAZING ... I wonder how to do this stuff, I'll have to read into it more. What's the black splotch (black hole?:D) upper right hand corner

[gary88]

Excellent shot!

[Adrena1in]

Absolutely beautiful, and seriously makes me wonder whether my next "lens" investment is going to be a small APO or a Canon "L" lens of some sort. The lens would be more pricey, but a lot more useable in every day life.

One thing though, and this is just a personal thing...I would have tried to frame it differently...get the Horsehead more into the frame, because there's nothing of particular interest in the bottom left, and the Horsehead region is a little cut-off.

[babuszka]

Beautiful!

[lukman]

Very nice!!!

[awelsh]

Dude, once you use the 300/2.8 for astrophotos you won't want to use any other lens. It's a beast though, 6 lbs! You can pick up used 300/2.8 non-IS lenses for ~$2400... I know it's a lot of cash, but in the face of a new one for $4100, it's a bargain.

Other good choices are the 100/2.0, and the 200/2.8 L, both under $700 used. The 200 can be used at f/2.8 with a flat field, and the 100 I think needs stopping down to f/2.8. But I tell ya, there's nothing like shooting at f/2.8 :) Way more subs in one night, fo' sho'!

I like your image a lot, I only wish you had slewed your scope a little further north to get the horsehead out of the right corner of the image and into the overall composition.

[le_R]

That is absolutely AMAZING ... I wonder how to do this stuff, I'll have to read into it more. What's the black splotch (black hole?:D) upper right hand corner

it's the Horsehead Nebula (B33 aka IC434)



strgazr27 > colors are a bit strange, but great shoot ! very nice FWHM.
Maybe you should have to also target the HorseHead.
Have a try a 70mm to get the Barnard's loop.

[superdiver]

simply amazing!

what odes 30X300 mean? 30 shots at 300 sec each? How do you put them together (stack them, a concept I still dont understand how to do)?

[Nighthound]

Nice work once again Bobby. I'm seeing an aqua-green cast in the highlights on my monitor. Deep for an hour and a half.

The 100-400L would leave you wanting not only because of the CA(something not unique to the 100-400 in the L family) but also because I find the sweet spot with the lens around 200-250mm. I love the lens for daytime, very versatile for birding especially.

Andrew's suggestion for the 300 is a great one. That's one I'd really like to own.

I'm working on my long-awaited 500L(f/4) and if all goes well will be in my hands this weekend. It'll be mainly a daytime lens since the Sky 90 has that FL covered, got a feeling I'll give it an astro test though. :D

[rgallie]

Very impressive. Like the color.

Rodney

[ejicon]

that's beautiful