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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 15-09-2005, 07:55 AM
Iddon's Avatar
Iddon
Registered User

Iddon is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 226
Best lens for DSO with Canon 300D

G'day guys (and gals),

took some shots last night with the 300D with the 55mm lens. Am looking at the 75-300mm lens.

Can anyone advise if this lens is a good choice for astro work in piggyback ? Any better options ??

My intent is to do piggyback work for a few months, and then to eventually move to a-focal on the wedge with the Lx200.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 15-09-2005, 08:08 AM
acropolite's Avatar
acropolite (Phil)
Registered User

acropolite is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Launceston Tasmania
Posts: 9,019
I doubt that the 75-300 would be any better. The 50mm f1.8 standard canon lens is inexpensive and quite a good lens for the money.. (I assume by 55mm lens you mean the 18-55 standard kit lens) I think ponders has the 50mm so he may be able to give you more specific info. The Canon L series lenses would certainly be a better option but I've seen lots of reports of poor QC. Striker has just bought an L series 17-40, it would be worth asking him how it performs on astro photos.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15-09-2005, 08:08 AM
gbeal
Registered User

gbeal is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,345
Hi Grant,
wow this will open up a can of worms.
Don't forget that with the appropriate adaptor you can also use Nikon lenses, and the older ones are quite good, and also quite reasonable.
Gary
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15-09-2005, 08:19 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Hi Grant. I have 3 zoom lenses and one fixed focal length lens. The three zooms are 28-90, 35-80 and 80-200 and the fixed is 50mm. All the zooms are around f/4 to f/5.6 and the 50 is f/1.8 None of the zoom lenses do a particularly good job, although the 35-80 probably does the best job. They are all achromatic lenses so I get the dreaded blue "ring around the star". The 50, although still and achro, doesn't show anywhere near the chromatic aberation the zooms do, plus I'm able to get a sharper image more easily. The 50 f/1.8 is a relatively inexpensive lense, so maybe consider a 50, and if you can afford it, something in the 135 f/2.8 and a 2X teleconverter. I found the zooms a real pain in the but to get good focus on, plus I had to be very careful if I reversed direction in my focus I didn't shift my zoom.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 15-09-2005, 09:07 AM
Iddon's Avatar
Iddon
Registered User

Iddon is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 226
thanks guys - I did mean prime focus above as eventual aim (not a-focal)

I am looking at a 75-300 for normal day use, so the astro work with it is a secondary application really. From the sounds of it, piggyback at 50mm is ideal for the wide fields, and for any zoom work just going prime focus is the go.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 15-09-2005, 09:57 AM
gbeal
Registered User

gbeal is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,345
Just remember that with "most" DSLR's the focal length is subject to a 1.5x or so multiplication. So the 50mm becomes about 75mm.
Unless you are getting the very best zoom (in Canon this is the "L" series stuff) you may be better off with the primes as Paul has said. Try a few though.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 15-09-2005, 10:34 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Think about a 2X or 3X teleconverter too Grant. Or another lense in the 135 - 200 range. 50mm to 2000mm is a big jump in focal length and there are lots and lots of objects that you will want to get closeer to than with a 50 but 2000 (even 1260mm (2000 with 6.3 Focal Reducer)) will be too close.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 15-09-2005, 11:49 AM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iddon
G'day guys (and gals),

took some shots last night with the 300D with the 55mm lens. Am looking at the 75-300mm lens.

Can anyone advise if this lens is a good choice for astro work in piggyback ? Any better options ??

My intent is to do piggyback work for a few months, and then to eventually move to a-focal on the wedge with the Lx200.
G'day Grant,

I'm basically interested in the same thing and here's whats been suggested to me.
Two good Canon lenses for astro are the:

1: 85mm f/1.8 USM for a semi-wide field.

2: EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM (visit http://www.panther-observatory.com/telescopes.htm )

Another factor to keep in mind is the focal ratio of your lens when doing astro. These f/2.8 and below are more suited for this type of work.

At the moment I use the EF-S 10-22mm lens for wide field.
This is the Milky Way shot I took recently.
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ead.php?t=3850

I'm still researching the best options though, coz I havn't done any real DSO yet with the 300D.

Hope this helps.

RB
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 15-09-2005, 12:07 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
I received very similar information when I first started looking RB. Yes I looked at the 85 f/1.8 but at around $700 I couldn't justify it over the $150 for the 50mm when first starting out. I even looked at the 50mm f/1.4 lense, but again at around $700 too much.And the 200 at $1300 was way over the top I guess it just depends on how much money you've got to spend. Then of course theres the 85mm f/1.2 L at around $3000 All great lenses apparently.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 15-09-2005, 12:12 PM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders]
I received very similar information when I first started looking RB. Yes I looked at the 85 f/1.8 but at around $700 I couldn't justify it over the $150 for the 50mm when first starting out. I even looked at the 50mm f/1.4 lense, but again at around $700 too much.And the 200 at $1300 was way over the top I guess it just depends on how much money you've got to spend. Then of course theres the 85mm f/1.2 L at around $3000 All great lenses apparently.

Shhhhh Paul,

I was hoping Grant would buy them so I can borrow them.

Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 15-09-2005, 12:16 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
In that case he should be looking at the 300mm as well
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 15-09-2005, 12:23 PM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders]
In that case he should be looking at the 300mm as well

Yeah and this will be me if he lends it to me:

RB
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 15-09-2005, 04:53 PM
avandonk's Avatar
avandonk
avandonk

avandonk is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,786
Yes you can't beat a prime lens as there are to many compromises in a zoom.

Here are a couple of examples 300mm F2.8L and 85mm F1.8.With crops from each to show detail.Carina taken with the 300mm.

Bert
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Combine1_PS01_crop22.jpg)
124.9 KB35 views
Click for full-size image (Combine1_PS01_small.jpg)
128.1 KB36 views
Click for full-size image (Combine2_DF_01_PSHOP_GX_02_800_4.jpg)
148.4 KB38 views
Click for full-size image (Combine2_DF_01_PSHOP_GX_02_crop3a.jpg)
148.8 KB32 views
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 15-09-2005, 05:33 PM
Striker's Avatar
Striker (Tony)
Whats visual Astronomy

Striker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,062
I want one of these.

Canon 135mm "L" series F2

http://www.canon.com.au/products/cam...5mmf2iusm.html
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 15-09-2005, 07:43 PM
avandonk's Avatar
avandonk
avandonk

avandonk is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker
I want one of these.

Canon 135mm "L" series F2
Very nice lens and with a 1.4x converter becomes a 190mm F2.8.The 1.4x converter does not degrade the image.The 2x a small amount.

bert
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 17-09-2005, 07:30 PM
Iddon's Avatar
Iddon
Registered User

Iddon is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 226
looking around for a prime lens (say 135 or 200mm), but the only ones I can find are the L series at about 3x the price I was originally considering.
Can anyone point me to one ?
Are any other lense makes useable on the Canon ?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 17-09-2005, 08:26 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
Hope this comes out clearly enough. If it doesn't let me know if you want me to email you the full chart (400KB) These are just the prime lenses in the EF series off the chart.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (EOS-chart.jpg)
44.2 KB32 views
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 17-09-2005, 09:39 PM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders]
Hope this comes out clearly enough. If it doesn't let me know if you want me to email you the full chart (400KB) These are just the prime lenses in the EF series off the chart.
Just a dumb question from me Paul, but I assume they are called Prime lenses because they are not a zoom lens. Is this correct? Or are they refered to as fixed lenses? If not then why are they called Prime?
Well that's a few questions.....



PS thanks for the chart. Did you take this shot on your kitchen table? you've got quite a collection
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 17-09-2005, 09:47 PM
avandonk's Avatar
avandonk
avandonk

avandonk is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iddon
looking around for a prime lens (say 135 or 200mm), but the only ones I can find are the L series at about 3x the price I was originally considering.
Can anyone point me to one ?
Are any other lense makes useable on the Canon ?
Best bang for buck is the Canon 85mm F1.8 USM

bert
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 18-09-2005, 07:04 AM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
RB, I'm not sure why they are called primes, most likely because they are of fixed focal length.

I wish they were all in my quiver I'll see if I can track down where I got the image from initially. I've only the saved jpeg on file
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 03:34 AM.

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