Nice one Richard, especially from within the city!
Thanks, James. DSLRs are great for wide views of the galaxy. My mount was not polar aligned and star trails were evident after 20 seconds. Still, a usable image!
Light pollution doesn’t look at bad at all Richard
What do you think of the Milvus 35? I’ve been thinking about getting one.
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the comment. The Milvus 35mm, F1.4 is a stunning lens (should see my daylight photos in Hobart). However, I think coma-type artefacts are visible at extreme edges until about F3.5. Some vignetting too. It even cost a bit more than my Zeiss Milvus 135mm F2 (bought them both at the same time). The Milvus 135 is ridiculously sharp and shows no artefacts (even at F2 you have to strain to see any aberrations).
It is hard to explain but, when you take pictures with these lenses they seem to deliver a brighter, punchier image (and I think tests show that they have better light transmission at any aperture than their competitors). reviews talk about the superior micro-contrast of the 35mm too.
Sorry, I'm raving now, but the silk-smooth focus make these lenses a joy to use; you won't go wrong with the 35mm Milvus.
Meanwhile, I am at a crossroads: will buy either the ZWO ASI 071MC Pro or the ZWO ASI 294 MC Pro OR the ZWO ASI 094 MC Pro (the full frame one you have). I will definitely go for an OSC camera to start with and have therefore ended up with these 3 on my shortlist. The 094 is expensive, though. What are your thoughts? For imaging, I will be using the WO GT 102 F6.9 refractor with the WO reducer/flattener 8 (.72)- weighs a tonne.
I agree Zeiss lenses do have something special about them. I have always found them worth the extra cost.
The image is very good but has too much magenta and blue in it. So it would be more natural looking correcting that magenta bias.
I don't know if you have Photoshop but I find Photoshop's auto colour tool works very well sometimes (other times it seems to make the colours too green).
I agree Zeiss lenses do have something special about them. I have always found them worth the extra cost.
The image is very good but has too much magenta and blue in it. So it would be more natural looking correcting that magenta bias.
I don't know if you have Photoshop but I find Photoshop's auto colour tool works very well sometimes (other times it seems to make the colours too green).
Greg.
Hi Greg,
Thanks for the advice (I like your Milky Way panorama on the Nightscapes page too!
I did process the image in PS CC 2019, but I must say, I have never used 'Autocolour', preferring to use the colour mixer with its separate channels. I'll give it a try!
What are your thoughts on the Fornax star tracker, by the way?
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the comment. The Milvus 35mm, F1.4 is a stunning lens (should see my daylight photos in Hobart). However, I think coma-type artefacts are visible at extreme edges until about F3.5. Some vignetting too. It even cost a bit more than my Zeiss Milvus 135mm F2 (bought them both at the same time). The Milvus 135 is ridiculously sharp and shows no artefacts (even at F2 you have to strain to see any aberrations).
It is hard to explain but, when you take pictures with these lenses they seem to deliver a brighter, punchier image (and I think tests show that they have better light transmission at any aperture than their competitors). reviews talk about the superior micro-contrast of the 35mm too.
Sorry, I'm raving now, but the silk-smooth focus make these lenses a joy to use; you won't go wrong with the 35mm Milvus.
Meanwhile, I am at a crossroads: will buy either the ZWO ASI 071MC Pro or the ZWO ASI 294 MC Pro OR the ZWO ASI 094 MC Pro (the full frame one you have). I will definitely go for an OSC camera to start with and have therefore ended up with these 3 on my shortlist. The 094 is expensive, though. What are your thoughts? For imaging, I will be using the WO GT 102 F6.9 refractor with the WO reducer/flattener 8 (.72)- weighs a tonne.
Cheers,
Richard
I get the feeling that there isn't many lens' below 50mm that don't some aberrations until stopped closer to F/4. The Otus 55mm being one of the very few exceptions.
At the moment I have a Milvus 50mm and an older 15mm F/2.8 and I've been thinking I need something to fill in the gap between those and have my eyes on the 35mm Milvus.
I do have an APO Sonnar 135mm F/2 and it's brilliant! I have found that there is a fair snap increase from going from F/2 to F/2.2 and it doesn't get a huge amount better from F/2.8.
If you're thinking about the ASI071 I would suggest going with the QHY variant however. I've heard of FAR too many stories of icing issues when cooling the ASI071 in particular, not so much on the 294 and only on the 094 when cooling too fast (which I've experienced). As long as you cool it over 10 minutes it cools without frosting.
Hi Greg,
Thanks for the advice (I like your Milky Way panorama on the Nightscapes page too!
I did process the image in PS CC 2019, but I must say, I have never used 'Autocolour', preferring to use the colour mixer with its separate channels. I'll give it a try!
What are your thoughts on the Fornax star tracker, by the way?
Cheers,
Richard
Fornax Lightrack ii is quite good. It needs a 12 volt power supply. I found usb cables that have a built in 12 volt step up circuit in them cheaply on ebay. So I use a USB power pack and this cable to power it.
A few oddities about it to get used to. One is if the power is interrupted when you turn it back on it defaults to northern hemisphere and you have to reselect southern hemisphere. That wrecked a few images. But luckily I check my images routinely anyway to check focus, tracking etc is working. Also the USB power pack has blue lights in it and I could see that lighting up the foreground a bit in some subs! Masking tape should fix that.
Its quite accurate. Smartphone compass and an inclinometer is good enough to get tight stars 1 minute at 14mm. I have a Polemaster that fits it to get accurate polar alignment. I am not sure it will handle the Redcat 51 lens, perhaps with accurate polar alignment.
Polarie tracker is very good too. I've pimped mine up to include some accessories and a counterweight shaft. Lightrack though is the mount I am using at the moment. I recommend it overall. I am using the Star Adventurer wedge which is cheap but a tad lightweight but strong enough for lens imaging and it adjusts quite easily.
Thanks, Peter. Yeah, it's embarrassing saying Hobart is a city.....As for the image above, I took Greg's advice, used 'Autocolour' and it worked well (bluer without the magenta).
Fornax Lightrack ii is quite good. It needs a 12 volt power supply. I found usb cables that have a built in 12 volt step up circuit in them cheaply on ebay. So I use a USB power pack and this cable to power it.
A few oddities about it to get used to. One is if the power is interrupted when you turn it back on it defaults to northern hemisphere and you have to reselect southern hemisphere. That wrecked a few images. But luckily I check my images routinely anyway to check focus, tracking etc is working. Also the USB power pack has blue lights in it and I could see that lighting up the foreground a bit in some subs! Masking tape should fix that.
Its quite accurate. Smartphone compass and an inclinometer is good enough to get tight stars 1 minute at 14mm. I have a Polemaster that fits it to get accurate polar alignment. I am not sure it will handle the Redcat 51 lens, perhaps with accurate polar alignment.
Polarie tracker is very good too. I've pimped mine up to include some accessories and a counterweight shaft. Lightrack though is the mount I am using at the moment. I recommend it overall. I am using the Star Adventurer wedge which is cheap but a tad lightweight but strong enough for lens imaging and it adjusts quite easily.
Greg.
Thanks for the great info, Greg. I am tempted to get a tracker for nightscapes, although a dedicated Astro camera is first priority (still tyre kicking about it, despite having a shortlist of 3). Those FLI Proline cameras certainly deliver brilliant image quality....Wish I could afford one of those.
Your advice on the 'Autocolour' tool in PS was spot on. I have attached a tiny copy of the rejigged image. Much less magenta and more realistic colour. Thanks for that!
I get the feeling that there isn't many lens' below 50mm that don't some aberrations until stopped closer to F/4. The Otus 55mm being one of the very few exceptions.
At the moment I have a Milvus 50mm and an older 15mm F/2.8 and I've been thinking I need something to fill in the gap between those and have my eyes on the 35mm Milvus.
I do have an APO Sonnar 135mm F/2 and it's brilliant! I have found that there is a fair snap increase from going from F/2 to F/2.2 and it doesn't get a huge amount better from F/2.8.
If you're thinking about the ASI071 I would suggest going with the QHY variant however. I've heard of FAR too many stories of icing issues when cooling the ASI071 in particular, not so much on the 294 and only on the 094 when cooling too fast (which I've experienced). As long as you cool it over 10 minutes it cools without frosting.
Hi Colin
You are right about the 'snap' from F2 to F2..2; my Milvus 135 is exactly the same lens as the Apo, but just has added weather seals. A corker of a lens. You will not be disappointed with the Milvus 35. When you look at the images it produces, it's like someone has lifted an invisible veneer of mistiness from the scene, delivering an image of striking clarity and contrast.
Thanks for the advice on the 3 cameras. Not sure what the QHY version of the ASI 071 is, but I'll look into it. I do recall several people saying that QHY have quirky and sometimes unreliable software, though. The ASI 071 did have the problem you referred to, but is that in the latest model??
Quite a spectacular framing that Richard and the colour balance in the second version is good
Mike
Thanks, Michael.
Hope to graduate to some deep sky imaging soon, once I have made up my very confused mind about which camera to buy So many conflicting opinions on cameras (including OSC ones).
Cheers
Thanks, Peter. Yeah, it's embarrassing saying Hobart is a city.....As for the image above, I took Greg's advice, used 'Autocolour' and it worked well (bluer without the magenta).
I wish I had a city sky like that. Beautiful view.