Tried out my new camera

rfdesigner wrote in post #16260880
You need to process your images.. there's more in them than you can see at first glance.

I had a very quick process and there's a lot more stars in there as well as lots of JPEG artifacts.

Did you take RAW frames?

Derek

No I'm not shooting in raw. I was going to try that next, but it's been very overcast here at night the past few days. I've heard it makes a huge difference. Does it?

Also I was wandering how many people use liveview when focusing for a night shot? And does it work?

Live view helps a whole heap. RAW is essential, you will end up processing images to reveal things you can't see in the RAW frame, JPEGs delete those faint details, This is where Canon is leagues ahead of Nikkon (Nikkon RAW isn't RAW, they meddle)

EDIT: Apparently people have Auto focused on streetlights > 1000x focal length away, so a 50mm lens requires ~ 50m or 150ft minimum distance. I've even seen a comment that someone used AF with a 200mm on a 2nd mag star.. cameras must be getting better

Derek

I have a Canon 50D and when I go any slower than 2 seconds exposure I start getting weird noise and colors or maybe it's putting out artifacts. Time for an upgrade. The camera is from 2009.


Family Portraits San Antonio

rfdesigner wrote in post #16261851
I'm looking at using my old praktica 50mm f1.8 lens with a cheap adapter.. an old FD lens would be fine so long as it's optically still fine.

The FD lens won't reach infinity focus on an EF body without an additional lens in the adapter. The eBay FD adapters are single element, uncoated lumps of <bleep>.
The Praktica lens should work well and it's the same M42 thread as the Pentax 50mm f/1.4 that you can still get at a good price and is sharp to the corners wide open.

Steve.

SteveInNZ wrote in post #16262934
The FD lens won't reach infinity focus on an EF body without an additional lens in the adapter. The eBay FD adapters are single element, uncoated lumps of <bleep>.
Steve.

Thanks for correcting me.. I hadn't realised the canon film cameras focused nearer than my old Praktica, I'd assumed they'd all be the same, so would leave enough back focus for an adapter.

Derek

richphotosinsa wrote in post #16262220
I have a Canon 50D and when I go any slower than 2 seconds exposure I start getting weird noise and colors or maybe it's putting out artifacts. Time for an upgrade. The camera is from 2009.


Family Portraits San Antonio

It all depends on ISO, and if you're shooting RAW or JPEG

(if shooting JPEG you'll raise the noise a bit and JPEGging will remove it.. raise the noise a bit more and JPEGging will allow it through so you'll see a step in quality)

..but eventually you will be magnifying the thermal noise in your sensor... plus the odd hot pixel. That's physics, not necessarily a dud camera, and any new camera will do the same but to a slightly lesser extent.

Derek

rfdesigner wrote in post #16261851
For AP you don't need autofocus.. it doesn't work, you have to manually focus, so you can use old lenses.

I'm looking at using my old praktica 50mm f1.8 lens with a cheap adapter.. an old FD lens would be fine so long as it's optically still fine.

50mm f1.8s are pretty universal and have been made for a long time with good optics.

Using the FD to EOS adapter, will you not lose at least one stop?

If you care about sharpness of stars in the corners you'll be wanting to stop it down anyway. Wide open is not normally a good idea.. (L lenses included)

take a look at

http://www.astrosurf.c​om/buil/telescopes.htm

The review of the 85mm f1.2 shows even that needs stopping down to f1.6 to get round stars.

rfdesigner wrote in post #16264751
If you care about sharpness of stars in the corners you'll be wanting to stop it down anyway. Wide open is not normally a good idea.. (L lenses included)

take a look at

http://www.astrosurf.c​om/buil/telescopes.htm

The review of the 85mm f1.2 shows even that needs stopping down to f1.6 to get round stars.

Yes I understand stopping down from wide open is an advantage, the point I was getting at is that the adapter itself will cause a loss of light before the aperture is stopped down. That's all.

the jimmy wrote in post #16265195
Yes I understand stopping down from wide open is an advantage, the point I was getting at is that the adapter itself will cause a loss of light before the aperture is stopped down. That's all.

I quite understand you don't want to throw any photons in the bin. Can I just ask what adapter you were thinking of.

I was thinking of something along the lines of this:

http://www.ebay.co.uk …unt-adapter-/190894519263

Which of course means not using a FD lens as pointed out to me earlier. Which ought to induce no or minimal vignetting. It sounds like we're both making sense in our own minds.. but are thinking of different things.

EDIT:

Right.. I've been a bit more thorough: M42 is a suitable type that will work with canons 44mm back focus distance, as M42 is lightly longer, so leaves space for an adapter. I just checked on Ebay and in the UK I could get an M42 50mm f1.8 lens + adapter for canon for £20 + postage.

rfdesigner wrote in post #16265304
I quite understand you don't want to throw any photons in the bin. Can I just ask what adapter you were thinking of.

I was thinking of something along the lines of this:

http://www.ebay.co.uk …unt-adapter-/190894519263

Which of course means not using a FD lens as pointed out to me earlier. Which ought to induce no or minimal vignetting. It sounds like we're both making sense in our own minds.. but are thinking of different things.

Perhaps we were speaking of different things. In your post #15 you mentioned using a FD lens, I presumed you meant with an EOS camera, and my comment was concerning that, using a FD lens with a digital EOS camera body which would require the FD to EOS adapter.