Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 6 votes, 5.00 average.
  #21  
Old 09-05-2011, 10:01 AM
pmrid's Avatar
pmrid (Peter)
Ageing badly.

pmrid is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bribie Is.
Posts: 3,124
Hi Jeanette, that lateral streaking is the same noise I get in my new 1000D. It makes the era a complete waste of money. Canon should be embarrassed to present this sort of rubbish for sale.
Peter
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-05-2011, 11:25 AM
blink138's Avatar
blink138 (Pat)
Registered User

blink138 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: perth w.a.
Posts: 2,226
hello guys
reading with interest, what about a modified 50d?
pat
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-05-2011, 11:33 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
After playing with various Canons almost exclusively for Astrophotography over the past 6 years it has come to my attention that the present load, and I empahsize Load, of Canons are not worth the photons they collect when it comes to AP. I'm not talking about file formats, though its true they can be worked around (but shouldn't have to) and while Tiffs are acceptable they are not the astronomy standard, the noise from this bunch is unacceptable for astrophotography. My recommendation for anyone that wants to get into OSC imaging and can not get hold of one of the earlier models is to get a dedicated OSC camera and start from there.

JM2CW
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-05-2011, 11:59 AM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 16,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmrid View Post
Hi Jeanette, that lateral streaking is the same noise I get in my new 1000D. It makes the era a complete waste of money. Canon should be embarrassed to present this sort of rubbish for sale.
Peter
I'm glad to hear it's not just me Peter. I was beginning to doubt my processing skills.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-05-2011, 01:08 PM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
I love my wee 550D for daytime stuff (+ HD video is very cool) but my 40D is now the dedicated Astro cam - that said it's a very different beast from its stock counterpart...cooled and modded by Central DS. When I got this done I convinced myself that it would easily double as a day/astro DSLR.
The added weight/bulk put pay to this. I'm very happy with the Astro 40D performance, but in retrospect an OSC CCD would have probably been the wiser option.

Cheers
Doug
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-05-2011, 01:09 PM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjnettie View Post
I'm glad to hear it's not just me Peter. I was beginning to doubt my processing skills.
You do pretty well with your 550D from what I've seen jjj
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-05-2011, 03:12 PM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 16,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugnsuz View Post
You do pretty well with your 550D from what I've seen jjj
Cheers Doug,
it's great for Lunar and Solar work, but the only half decent image I've pulled out of it was the M104 one from the other week. The background was very blotchy.
Any other images I've posted of late have been taken through Ponders' modded 20D that he kindly lent me. (what will I do when I have to give it back in a few days.....wahhhhh)
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-05-2011, 03:42 PM
Moon's Avatar
Moon (James)
This sentence is false

Moon is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,147
Interesting discussion.

If you read THIS thread you would get a totally different opinion.
My experience with the 500D has been mixed. Sometimes the pics are so noisy, I just can't use them. Here is one I was really disappointed with. Click on the image to zoom in and you will see what I mean.
http://deepspaceplace.com/show.php?id=ngc1976b

I have a few hunches what's going on, but I don't have the evidence to back it up. One day if I have the time and energy, I'll look into it again.

James
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-05-2011, 06:53 PM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moon View Post
Interesting discussion.

If you read THIS thread you would get a totally different opinion.
My experience with the 500D has been mixed. Sometimes the pics are so noisy, I just can't use them. Here is one I was really disappointed with. Click on the image to zoom in and you will see what I mean.
http://deepspaceplace.com/show.php?id=ngc1976b

I have a few hunches what's going on, but I don't have the evidence to back it up. One day if I have the time and energy, I'll look into it again.

James
for half an hour at f5 that doesn't seem so bad to me.. sure it's heavily stretched which is showing the noise, but there's a fair bit of faint detail there for a relatively short exposure time. was it taken in summer?.. warmer temps are definitely worse. will be interested to hear your theory sometime!

I think the 40D/450D does (must?) have the edge with larger pixels.. technology gains (eg gapless microlenses) since then maybe haven't quite beaten the inherent noise downside to smaller pixels. but from what i've seen (which is only a little) i'd be happy playing with any of the models since then too. the 60D and 7D looked nice with the recent subs i've seen from them..

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 13-05-2011, 07:25 PM
BlackWidow's Avatar
BlackWidow (Mardy)
Seeing Stars

BlackWidow is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Adelaide Australia
Posts: 610
Well guys. I decided to take the advice of most and not purchase a Newer Canon DSLR (550D) I took the advice left that a QHY8 might be a better choice as I already own a 300D that I can use for piggy back shooting. I purchased it from a fellow IIS'er and an waiting for it to arrive in the post. Can't wait to give it a try. Still trying to get my alignment and guiding down pat so I will work on that over the next week. Then the learning of the new camera software and we should be getting better shots very soon. I have just purchased Alignmaster so that should help instead of drift.. Hope to post some pictures soon so you can poke sticks at them and pressure me into doing better LOL..

Thanks all for your advice. This site helps people make better choices suited to thier needs..

Regards
Mardy
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 13-05-2011, 07:28 PM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 16,726
I'm so glad you decided not to buy the camera.
Honestly, you would have been very disappointed.
I hope you have many happy hours with your new camera.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 14-05-2011, 12:32 AM
Visionoz's Avatar
Visionoz (Bill)
Registered User

Visionoz is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 714
Hi Mardy

Great to hear that you've decided to cut your teeth on a OSC - the QHY8 which I'm sure you'll be very happy with the results!

I personally was a bit disappointed with my modded 40D results during last summer when I had shots that had the colorful streaks that JJJ showed! And luckily I picked up a used Orion SSDSI Pro v1 at the right price from here when I was about to send my 40D to Central DS. I have since just used the Orion SSDSI a few weeks ago using Nebulosity2 and it's very easy once everything is set up ready to run - you in fact just run it over and over again using the program - I believe my CCD is similar to the QHY8 and here's the result of my first light for it: Click Here

Good photon-capturing mate!

HTH
Cheers
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 14-05-2011, 09:03 AM
RobF's Avatar
RobF (Rob)
Mostly harmless...

RobF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,509
The other nice thing about CCDs if the extra headroom the extra few bits give you (usually 16 bit versus 12/14 bit DSLR). Gives a bit more leeway to show sensitive objects without burning out the highlights, albeit with a bit more processing work. All the best with the QHY!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 17-05-2011, 01:18 PM
BlackWidow's Avatar
BlackWidow (Mardy)
Seeing Stars

BlackWidow is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Adelaide Australia
Posts: 610
Thank You

Thanks all for your help. I have just got back from a flying trip today to find my QHY8 has arrived. Can't wait to try it!. Thanks bill for the image it looks great and gives me some hope now of getting some better images. Once I have had time to play around with it i will post an image. Only if it's a good one! LOL..


Thanks again
Mardy
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 20-05-2011, 05:18 PM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
for anybody still watching this thread.. here's a quick sample (50 percent resize) of a shot taken with somebody else's Canon 550D on my Tak Epsilon 160 scope. 5 minutes, ISO400, f3.3. Ambient temp around 10C.

http://philhart.com/files/IMG_2723_resize.JPG

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 20-05-2011, 09:26 PM
CoolhandJo's Avatar
CoolhandJo (Paul)
Registered User

CoolhandJo is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,307
That shows what you can get!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 20-05-2011, 09:40 PM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 16,726
So why am I getting that lateral noise then?
I use the same processing techniques with all the cameras.
I've changed setting in DSS to try to compensate.
I've tried ICNR, High ISO noise reduction.
Manual darks.
etc etc
Believe me, I've tried my very hardest to get good data out of this camera, to no avail.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 20-05-2011, 10:21 PM
Moon's Avatar
Moon (James)
This sentence is false

Moon is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,147
Phil,

Of course we are still reading! That image looks great - was it calibrated?

Like Jeanette I don't fully understand why some images look so noisy. For sure high ISO is one cause. Anything above ISO 400 and the noise seems out of control.

I have also noticed that DeepSkyStacker wants to create diagonal banding in noisy areas.

M83, ISO400, 600 Sec, Canon 500D, f/7.5 Refractor, 50% resize - not processed.

James
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (m83sm.jpg)
205.3 KB170 views

Last edited by Moon; 20-05-2011 at 10:26 PM. Reason: added 50% resize
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 20-05-2011, 11:35 PM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
believe it or not, that image is a JPG straight off the camera! no calibration or anything!

it's a lot easier to get an impressive image on a bright object working at f3.3 but from what i've seen there's not that much difference between the last few Canon SLRs.

i really don't think the ISO setting makes that much difference above say ISO400. either you amplify the signal and noise in the camera with a higher ISO or you do it in software starting with a lower ISO. you're at unity gain by about 800 and even a little bit less makes bugger all difference.. eg in this test:

http://philhart.com/content/astropho...xposure-length

can you try something similar with your camera (just varying ISO) and see a bigger difference?

the 20D is a good camera.. big pixels.. but i can't explain why you're seeing a bigger difference than i would expect?

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 21-05-2011, 07:52 AM
toc's Avatar
toc (Tim)
Registered User

toc is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mill park, Victoria
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjnettie View Post
So why am I getting that lateral noise then?
I use the same processing techniques with all the cameras.
I've changed setting in DSS to try to compensate.
I've tried ICNR, High ISO noise reduction.
Manual darks.
etc etc
Believe me, I've tried my very hardest to get good data out of this camera, to no avail.
Im starting to think you might have a dud sensor - I have a canon 7D, and I dont see any banding at ISO's of about 400 and above. Strangely I see some slight banding at low ISO's...
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 09:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement