#1  
Old 24-06-2008, 10:36 AM
niko's Avatar
niko
Registered User

niko is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 1,053
Canon 400D - any good for astrophotography

Hi gang,

would a Canon EOS 400D be any good for astrophotography?

thanks in advance for any comments

niko
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24-06-2008, 10:40 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,760
Yes, definitely. It's pretty much exactly the same as the 350D which is great.

If you can afford it, the 450D or 40D is even better.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24-06-2008, 02:10 PM
Bloodbean's Avatar
Bloodbean (Troy)
Registered User

Bloodbean is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 134
Niko,

Having gone from a Canon 400D to a 450D I'd highly recommend the 450D over the 400D for the ease of focusing using the Liveview feature. When connected to a laptop focusing on stars becomes much much easier and far less time consuming.

Troy
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24-06-2008, 02:45 PM
Zuts
Registered User

Zuts is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,830
Hi,

I took the attached image with an unmodded 400D, so basically they are fine astro cameras, even better when modded.

However if i was just starting out i would look for a modded 350D. This will give a far better red response on nebulas. Also it will work with all the laptop type focussing tools, like DSLR focus in which case who cares about live view. Unfortunately this software does not work with 400, 450D's.

If you are patient you should be able to get a modded 350D for around 600 to 650 AUD, less than the price of a 400D.

A modded 350D will take far better astro photos than an unmodded 400D or 450D.

Paul
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (EtaWeb.jpg)
173.3 KB177 views
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24-06-2008, 07:44 PM
dcalleja's Avatar
dcalleja
Registered User

dcalleja is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 515
Guys
While we're at it, I'm looking at getting a 450D on the weekend. I've never really followed the threads on how to get setup to use it for imaging. What kit do I need (or do you recommend) to get it up and going?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 28-06-2008, 05:51 PM
darrellx's Avatar
darrellx (Darrell)
Registered User

darrellx is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kulgun, Queensland
Posts: 278
Hi Zuts

I am very impressed with the photo you posted. I have just started to dip my toe into the imaging waters, and I have a 400D. But I can get nowhere near what you have shown.

I would be very interested in some info on how you did it - how many images were stacked; duration of the exposures; software you use for the processing.

Thanks
Darrell
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 29-06-2008, 02:16 AM
Zuts
Registered User

Zuts is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by darrellx View Post
Hi Zuts

I am very impressed with the photo you posted. I have just started to dip my toe into the imaging waters, and I have a 400D. But I can get nowhere near what you have shown.

I would be very interested in some info on how you did it - how many images were stacked; duration of the exposures; software you use for the processing.

Thanks
Darrell
Hi Darrell,

That was taken a while back, if i remember correctly

Televue 85, 0.8 reducer on EQ6
Meade ED 80 guide scope, guided with PHD.
12 by 5 minute subs, 3 or 4, 5 minute darks, no ICNR
Stacked in DSS with basic levels and curves in PS2

Any photo will look OK as long as you observe the following:-

(1) Spend time on the focus, if it's not well focussed the stars will look horrible and so will the photo. I used to spend about 20 minutes focussing with a program called FocusAssist and an on screen magnifier.

(2) Get polar aligned at a FL greater than the imaging FL. In my case I would spend about 40 minutes drift aligning with a final iteration using a Barlow. If you arnt decently polar aligned the photo will look horrible with bloated stars and trailing.

(3) Use a flattener, pointy stars at the edges detract from any image.

(4) On the average setup, EQ6, always use autoguiding. If you dont autoguide you are wasting your time as you wont be able to go for more than a minute without star trailing which will ruin the photo.

(5) Try to never go less than 5 minute subs. 10 minutes is better but it depends on your alignment if you can achieve this.

(6) For DSO's never take less than 60 minutes of data. The more data the less noise and it will be easier to process.

(7) Always take darks and flats. Though the above image had no flats it would be better if i took them.

It sounds a lot but the basics are

FOCUS
GOOD POLAR ALIGNMENT
AUTO GUIDING
AS MUCH DATA AS POSSIBLE
DARKS/FLATS

If you get these basics right your images may not be great but they will be good.

Cheers
Paul

Last edited by Zuts; 29-06-2008 at 02:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 07:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement