I have a 5D, now give me an itemized equipment list (with Model numbers) PLEASE

[crobs808]

Bottom line... I want to shoot photos like this with my 5D (mk.1)...
http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/POTN%20Gallery/

Tell me what else I need...(literally give me an itemized list with model numbers of telescopes or parts I need, please). I will take the most economically sound/cheapest kit and go get it all and start shooting...I literally wanna be shooting this stuff by next week at the latest.

Equipment I currently have:
- Canon 5D
- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
- Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
- Canon 580 EX II Flash (irrelevant/useless for astro-photography, I know)

Thanks!
-C

[Sorarse]

I think you will find that it was more experience and technique that managed to capture and produce those images. I am not saying that there wasn't a lot of specialist equipment involved too, just that merely owning the equipment required is just one step to acquiring such fantastic photographs. And even if you had all the equipment right now, it would take you more than a week to learn how to use it all properly, assuming no prior knowledge of the techniques involved.

Heck, I've been trying to take photos of the stars and galaxies for several months now, and even if I had the same equipment that Nighthound uses, I still wouldn't be able to produce photos of the night sky that are even half as good as his.

I guess what I am saying is that it's not like you can buy the best set of golf clubs money can buy, and then expect to be able to play like Tiger Woods. The same is true of astrophotography. If you start off with expectations of producing images of the quality you refer to, you are going to be extremely disappointed. It's a very long and steep learning curve.

I have no wish to sound negative, or shoot down your enthusiasm, but it would be wise to temper your initial expectations, and maybe learn to walk before trying to fly.

[crobs808]

I think you will find that it was more experience and technique that managed to capture and produce those images. I am not saying that there wasn't a lot of specialist equipment involved too, just that merely owning the equipment required is just one step to acquiring such fantastic photographs. And even if you had all the equipment right now, it would take you more than a week to learn how to use it all properly, assuming no prior knowledge of the techniques involved.

Heck, I've been trying to take photos of the stars and galaxies for several months now, and even if I had the same equipment that Nighthound uses, I still wouldn't be able to produce photos of the night sky that are even half as good as his.

I guess what I am saying is that it's not like you can buy the best set of golf clubs money can buy, and then expect to be able to play like Tiger Woods. The same is true of astrophotography. If you start off with expectations of producing images of the quality you refer to, you are going to be extremely disappointed. It's a very long and steep learning curve.

I have no wish to sound negative, or shoot down your enthusiasm, but it would be wise to temper your initial expectations, and maybe learn to walk before trying to fly.

I know that technique is 80% and equi9pment is only 20%, but I shoot on manual whenever I shoot with any equipment, and I can find settings and get my techniques fast, I just do not know the physical hardware I need to shoot that kind of stuff. So, this is step 1 in a long process....get the hardware, THEN worry about technique and skill once I have the equipment.

I said I wanted to be shooting within a week, not shooting "good", lol. I just know that a Canon 5D and a 24-70 and a 50mm lens isnt all the hardware I need. I know I need more, and that is the equipment list I am asking for.

Thanks

[Nighthound]

Sorarse makes some very important points and offers wise advice.I can assure you that my images did not look they do now when I started out. I did a lot of online reading and had help from some very talented imagers along the way. If you are the bound and determined type like myself than there is no better way than to jump in and go for it. But I'm always cautious about suggesting to anyone that they go out and spend a bundle of money as a beginner. I admire your enthusiasm, it reminds me of how I was when I got started. Although I didn't have the gear I do now back then, I was able to learn the very important basics that led me to where I am now. I chose to test the waters a bit before diving in and it turned out to be a good choice for me.

If there are any shortcuts to deep-sky astrophotography I haven't found them and I don't personally know anyone who has. You may very well get into this and stay with it for many years but pacing yourself and setting realistic expectations will help you avoid becoming overwhelmed, frustrated and disappointed. I don't mean to sound like this is rocket science because it's obviously not, but it's not easy. As long as you approach it with that in mind, and with great patience and persistence you'll be producing images soon enough that will help fuel your enthusiasm toward your ultimate goals. The first time I saw a nebula on my computer screen that I had imaged, I knew there was no going back. :D

Deep sky imaging requires more patience and effort than any photo work I've ever done. It also requires technical skills at all stages of the process. Assuming that the mount you choose operates very accurately out of the box, there is much more that is required to get the performance from it that long exposure work requires. My mount took me about 1.5 years of fine tuning to get it to behave the way it does now. Each night out I spend almost two hours setting up at a dark site and a bit longer fine tuning my initial alignment before I even attach the camera for a test exposure. If you choose to autoguide then you'll need to have a laptop along and a secondary telescope/camera(Orion Starshoot as an example) to set up in tandem with your imaging telescope. We can talk more about that later. I'm only mentioning these things to be sure that you know there's much more to this type of imaging than meets the eye.

If you don't have knowledge of the layout of the night sky, you may want to spend some time researching it and also either find a star chart book or get a Planisphere to help you get started. You'll need to know the sky to perform your alignments before imaging. A Planisphere is a handy tool to have until you become very familiar with things.

I've rambled enough, and I hope you don't take my comments as discouragement because that's the last thing I'd want to do.

Here's my imaging gear:

Mount: Losmandy G-11 w/Gemini (comparable unit would be Celestron CGE)
Telescopes: Vixen R200SS (f/4) Newtonian, Takahashi Sky 90 II Refractor, Takahashi FS-60C Refractor
Guide camera: ATIK 16IC

There are many, many accessories needed including focal reducers, coma corrector(newtonian), dew control heater, power supplies, marine batteries, illuminted reticle and on and on... Accessories range from 10s of dollars to hundreds and they add up quick so budget them in as well.

Please don't hesitate to post questions along the way or even about gear, we're here to help.

[Catanonia]

Check out my web site in my link and the images.

I did exactly what you want to do and started out from scratch about 2 months ago.

Well so far my spend is over £3500 UK Pounds and my images are no where as good as the ones you posted.

I am a very very fast learner, a computer consultant, used DSLR's for a few years and had plenty of time. Some say I have moved VERY VERY quickly, but believe me there were alot of mistakes along the way.

How I did it is as follows.

SkyWatcher ED120 EvoStar Pro Refractor as main imager £1000
SkyWatcher ED80 Pro II refractor as a guide scope £300
Best mount / tripod I could get SkyWatcher EQ6 Pro with SynScan Goto £900
DSLR Canon 350D modded for astro work with Baader filter £400
DSLR camera Sony A700 £1200
ADM Dual Side by Side Saddle £150
Guide Rings £50
Guide camera £170
Filters £200
Laptop £xxxx
Cabling £50
Dew heaters £70
Observatory £600

and the list goes on.

Then add software



plus loads and loads of other bits over the last few months.

There are pictures and links on my site.

If you want to do it, have the money, then this is the bare minumum to have a fighting chance, but then you need the experience.


mmm, actually a lot more than £3500

Cat

[Jaxdialation]

Get a good refractor of around 100mm in aperture - I like the Tak 102
Get a good mount and tripod so you can leave the shutter open for at least 300 second exposures. Say perhaps a Tak EM-200
Get the adapters to mount the camera to the scope.

Total cost - $7,000 US

The best money you can spend is joining Cloudy Nights Forum and reading the DSLR imaging forum from end to end. Cost = free.

You have a decision to make. You can spend less money, and take a longer time to get good results - perhaps years. If you get hte equipment I outlined you should be able to get shoots as good as those you want within a year, assuming a moderate case of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder :) Severe cases can get there faster.

Bottom line... I want to shoot photos like this with my 5D (mk.1)...
http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Nighthd/POTN%20Gallery/

Tell me what else I need...(literally give me an itemized list with model numbers of telescopes or parts I need, please). I will take the most economically sound/cheapest kit and go get it all and start shooting...I literally wanna be shooting this stuff by next week at the latest.

Equipment I currently have:
- Canon 5D
- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
- Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
- Canon 580 EX II Flash (irrelevant/useless for astro-photography, I know)

Thanks!
-C

[Poe]

I'm interested in doing some astrophotography too, but not as deep space as crobs808. But I'd like to be able to mount a 5D + lens on an equitorial type system so that I can eliminate star trails. Is this possible? And what equipment would I need?

[Catanonia]

I'm interested in doing some astrophotography too, but not as deep space as crobs808. But I'd like to be able to mount a 5D + lens on an equitorial type system so that I can eliminate star trails. Is this possible? And what equipment would I need?

Yes, an eq5 or 6 mount and a remote shutter release is all you need along with an attachment to connect the camera to the mount.

[MintMark]

I'm thinking about getting an astrotrac for this (photography without star trails). Lots of places say the tracking is very precise (better than eq5 or eq6?) and the whole setup is described as very easy to use... portable, light, quick to set up and polar align.

I currently take constellation pictures from a fixed tripod and stack them, so this seems like the logical next step. It basically gives me a tracking camera tripod. It should allow me to use longer lenses and take pictures of some of the larger objects (andromeda galaxy, some clusters, etc). The galleries on the web suggest this can all be done with lenses up to 400mm, once you have decent tracking.

I still haven't made my final decision though... I think the other approach is a telescope on an eq5 and piggy backing.

I guess I don't want to make an expensive mistake :) Any more thoughts from anyone?

[Catanonia]

EQ5 and 6 are miles more precise than any astrotrac. However they are not portable, in fact they are VERY heavy.

Now a full astrotrac system with tripod, head and the astrotrac will set you back well over £800 UK pounds. For that you can get a top of range goto EQ6 Pro as I did.

But you will then need a guide scope and guide camera. A cheap scope will do as a guide, 60 - 80mm refractor will do and a guide cam such as QHY5 guide cam. Figure in another £400 for that and you are ready to go.


It comes down to portability. If it is static, then spend the money on a proper mountand scopes.

[MintMark]

Thank you for the clarification. When you mentioned guiding, I'm pretty sure that everything I read about the astrotrac's accuracy was comparing it to other mounts unguided.

What is it about the larger mounts that makes guiding necessary? Is it harder to have fine control of a larger mount? Or is it because they carry a heavier load? How can the astrotrac get away without guiding?

Sorry it's just more questions :)

[Nighthound]

The Astrotrac's limitations lie within its load capacity. This makes it a great portable rig AND a great rig for camera and short to moderate focal length lens imaging.

German equatorial mounts are more robust and can hold larger optics which means longer focal length options as well. That's where autoguiding comes into play. The higher the focal length, the more accurate tracking/guiding needs to be to accomplish long exposures with no sign of movement. With the gain in object scale of higher focal lengths comes more apparent guiding and/or mechanical error.

I highly recommend to anyone starting out to start by widefield(low focal length imaging), whether it be on a barn door tracker, Astrotrac or German equatorial mount. Between set up, polar alignment, imaging and processing you'll have plenty to keep you challenged for a while. The advantage of having a mount to start with is it will allow the addition of a scope or various scopes down the road.

[Catanonia]

Thank you for the clarification. When you mentioned guiding, I'm pretty sure that everything I read about the astrotrac's accuracy was comparing it to other mounts unguided.

What is it about the larger mounts that makes guiding necessary? Is it harder to have fine control of a larger mount? Or is it because they carry a heavier load? How can the astrotrac get away without guiding?

Sorry it's just more questions :)

AstroTrac may be comparable to an unguided EQ5/6 mount, but it all comes down to the operator.

As Steve said tho, the astrotrac will pretty much only be any good for a DSLR camera and lense. You will soon want to purchase a scope then the problems start as it starts to get heavy.

As Steve also said, as you 'zoom' in over 500mm then guiding needs to be bang on to a very small star.

Hence a guide scope with good 'zoom' such as an ED80 @ 600mm will give a nice clear crisp star at mag 10 or lower to guide on to give precise re-time adjustments which obviosuly the mechanical Astrotac cannot do.

It all comes down to your needs.

If you want to get scopes and go serious into imaging, then spend the money on a good mount.

If it is a passing phase and all you want is wide field type shots of the milky way and want it to be portable, then get the Astrotac.

I had the same choice, but was glad I spent the money on a mount as I was sure I wanted to have a good pernament setup with scopes.

See my signature for my webpage and images of my kit for some help

[MintMark]

Well, you two have certainly made me think again, which is good.

I can see that the astrotrac is a "dead end" in terms of imaging capability. I could only ever use it for a camera and then probably only up to 500mm focal length.

The alternative is a good eq mount, a guide scope, and an autoguider (which may or may not require a computer?). This has more possibilities, allowing a larger scope and photography at longer focal lengths.

The gallery on the astrotrac website has some impressive (to me) pictures taken with camera lenses up to 400mm and exposures up to 5 minutes, so I wouldn't say it is limited to wide field work only.

I have done some separate tests in my garden to see how long an exposure I can have before the sky background overwhelms the stars. It's about 20 seconds at ISO 1600 and f2.8 for the background to approach half way on the histgram. Even allowing for the fact that the tests were reasonably early on a summer evening (light and dusty) I can't imagine exposing for longer then 3 or 4 minutes at my location.

I don't think there's much point building an observatory here... it's looking like the portability of the astrotrac is a plus point.

Fingers crossed for tonight. It's a clear night after some rain and I'm going to try m31 with the 50mm 1.4 (even though it's not very high).

[Nighthound]

If you go the scope/EQ mount route then you can consider a Light Pollution filter. I use the Hutech LP filter and it works great. It eliminates 60-70% mercury vapor as well as other unwanted light and consequently makes color balance a lot easier in post process. Be careful in the selection, not all LP filters are for photographic use.

I'm in the same situation as you, not practical to build an observatory where I live now. I don't even bother imaging deep sky from home anymore, I travel almost an hour to darker skies.

[chris.bailey]

The Astrotrac is GOOD for a DSLR and up to 500mm! True but that covers a fairly high percentage of targets. The beauty of the Astrotrac is its sheer usability. My rig takes a hour or so to setup for an imaging session meaning I really have to garner some enthusiasm to do it. The Astrotrac can be up and running inside 10 minutes. sure it has some limitations but I have seen some awesome images taken with one.

[Jon Foster]

So what happened wit the original poster? Did he get a setup and start shooting yet?

Jon.

[Catanonia]

So what happened wit the original poster? Did he get a setup and start shooting yet?

Jon.

ran away when he realised how expensive it was :)

[Sorarse]

ran away when he realised how expensive it was :)

.....and, even with the right equipment, how difficult it is! :confused: