#1  
Old 25-03-2008, 02:39 PM
tornado33
Registered User

tornado33 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,931
Canon 450D for less than a grand here

This mob is offering the Canon 450D for $999. This will be my next camera for sure. Use it as is for a while and then when Hutech gears up to mod them, do so, although Hutech's pricing for pre-modded cameras is very competitive, even if one has to pay GST on top
Only $1095 USD for a new modded 400D
http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/canon.htm
User supplied cameras are $650, which is over 1/2 the price of a new camera, plus postage both ways. Central DS cooling would be great too, but at $1400 USD for a user supplied camera thats above my affordability.

Looks like the most cost effective option is to wait for Hutech to start selling new modded 450D's and get one of those.
Scott
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 25-03-2008, 02:46 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
hmm very interesting. I think i'll be getting a modded camera sometime around mid-year, so by then hopefully the modded 400D will be a few hundred dollars cheaper.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-03-2008, 04:49 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
opinions....?

Hi all and anyone - I've dreaded asking this question in some ways; not because of fear of asking, rather information overload and a plethora of (possible) conflicting opinions!

This thread on specifically the Canon 450D seemed a good place to start my quest; seeing that a Canon 450D is, from discreet enquiring, a (possibly) very good option for my intents.

I am a complete novice at astro-imaging (not technically completely true; but my last forays were 30 or so years ago with SLR's and emulsion film, so I'd discount that!)

My primary focus (excuse the pun) will be naked eye objects (not through the scopes) taken with a camera mounted on either my HEQ5 Pro mount or on my Round Table EQ platform. Wide lenses will be utilized to capture various sky sections, with many of my shots around and within the Milky Way regions - clear, sharp images with good tonal rendition and compositional interest/dynamics is my objective (I envisage incorporating terrestial landforms into some compositions - though obviously with "soft" night effects.)

The camera would be used down the track for imaging through the scopes; but that is not its' primary purpose.

My initial questions are these: How would the 450D handle these situations and what are the mods that are touted for DSO imaging, and their particular relevance to my prime purpose for this camera?

Whilst have a "basic" understanding of DSLR's my only other understanding is the need for specific filters and of course adaptors for DSO imaging - Id be interested to know how this applies to my intended initial prime useage: also, with regards to companies such as Hutech, just what is the extent of the "mods" they carry out to them to enhance their astro-imaging capabilities?

Thanking anyone for their input, regards, Darryl.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25-03-2008, 05:23 PM
Hagar (Doug)
Registered User

Hagar is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,646
If you wan't to mod your camera you could give Peter Tan a try, his prices are very reasonable.
http://www.tan14.com/gears.htm
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 26-03-2008, 08:35 AM
ozstockman (Mike)
Registered User

ozstockman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Kenmore Hills, Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 392
If you guys want 450D for less than $1000 check www.ebay.com You can always find a great deal there. Something like this CANON EOS Kiss X2 (Rebel XSi, 450D) DC (Body Only) for just US$899.

cheers,

Michael
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 26-03-2008, 04:09 PM
citivolus's Avatar
citivolus (Ric)
Refracted

citivolus is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Carindale
Posts: 1,178
A reminder on Canon warranties: US purchased cameras have a North America only warranty, while US purchased lenses have a worldwide warranty.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 27-03-2008, 12:46 AM
EzyStyles's Avatar
EzyStyles (Eric)
I HATE COMA!

EzyStyles is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokatha man View Post
Hi all and anyone - I've dreaded asking this question in some ways; not because of fear of asking, rather information overload and a plethora of (possible) conflicting opinions!

This thread on specifically the Canon 450D seemed a good place to start my quest; seeing that a Canon 450D is, from discreet enquiring, a (possibly) very good option for my intents.

I am a complete novice at astro-imaging (not technically completely true; but my last forays were 30 or so years ago with SLR's and emulsion film, so I'd discount that!)

My primary focus (excuse the pun) will be naked eye objects (not through the scopes) taken with a camera mounted on either my HEQ5 Pro mount or on my Round Table EQ platform. Wide lenses will be utilized to capture various sky sections, with many of my shots around and within the Milky Way regions - clear, sharp images with good tonal rendition and compositional interest/dynamics is my objective (I envisage incorporating terrestial landforms into some compositions - though obviously with "soft" night effects.)

The camera would be used down the track for imaging through the scopes; but that is not its' primary purpose.

My initial questions are these: How would the 450D handle these situations and what are the mods that are touted for DSO imaging, and their particular relevance to my prime purpose for this camera?

Whilst have a "basic" understanding of DSLR's my only other understanding is the need for specific filters and of course adaptors for DSO imaging - Id be interested to know how this applies to my intended initial prime useage: also, with regards to companies such as Hutech, just what is the extent of the "mods" they carry out to them to enhance their astro-imaging capabilities?

Thanking anyone for their input, regards, Darryl.
Hi Darryl, answering your pm. here goes.. you might have noticed i don't really do widefield astrophotography so i'll try my best to answer some of your questions. If you intend to use a normal 450D for DSO or milky way etc for widefield stuff through a camera lense, a relative good fast focal ratio lense might be required which might set you back $$$$. I believe the HEQ5 has an autoguiding port. To do long exposures, you will need to utilise this with a guide cam and also a guidescope more $$$$. Before rushing into the autoguiding stuff, get yourself used to taking short expo shots with the 450d if you go ahead to purchase this.
In regards to Hutech mods, they simply replace the original internal IR filter with one of their own either a clear glass or a UV/IR filter which doesn't block the H-Alpha wavelength thus a modified DSLR will capture roughly 8 - 10 times more photons than a stock standard one. The difference between a clear glass version and a UV/IR filter version is that the clear glass version you can take infrared photos with an additional infrared filter. To take normal pics, you will additionally need a front mount UV/IR filter.
I don't know much about the actual procedure into replacing the filter as i havent done one myself yet, but it will be similiar to this:

http://astro.ai-software.com/article.../mod_350D.html

If you live in light polluted suburb, it might be best to purchase a light pollution filter such as the IDAS LPS2 (From Hutech). The only adapter you will need is the camera adapter which either can be screwed into a dovetail, guidescope rings etc.

Ask away if you like.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 27-03-2008, 12:07 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by EzyStyles View Post
Hi Darryl, answering your pm. here goes.. you might have noticed i don't really do widefield astrophotography so i'll try my best to answer some of your questions. If you intend to use a normal 450D for DSO or milky way etc for widefield stuff through a camera lense, a relative good fast focal ratio lense might be required which might set you back $$$$. I believe the HEQ5 has an autoguiding port. To do long exposures, you will need to utilise this with a guide cam and also a guidescope more $$$$. Before rushing into the autoguiding stuff, get yourself used to taking short expo shots with the 450d if you go ahead to purchase this.
In regards to Hutech mods, they simply replace the original internal IR filter with one of their own either a clear glass or a UV/IR filter which doesn't block the H-Alpha wavelength thus a modified DSLR will capture roughly 8 - 10 times more photons than a stock standard one. The difference between a clear glass version and a UV/IR filter version is that the clear glass version you can take infrared photos with an additional infrared filter. To take normal pics, you will additionally need a front mount UV/IR filter.
I don't know much about the actual procedure into replacing the filter as i havent done one myself yet, but it will be similiar to this:

http://astro.ai-software.com/article.../mod_350D.html

If you live in light polluted suburb, it might be best to purchase a light pollution filter such as the IDAS LPS2 (From Hutech). The only adapter you will need is the camera adapter which either can be screwed into a dovetail, guidescope rings etc.

Ask away if you like.

Cheers.
Thanks very much for responding Eric, the project with night sky imaging has been developing for a while now: given a boost by a chance connection with a planetarium fella over here, the article in the last S&T, and RB's "emu on the march" image posting.

I understand that a good, fast, wide angle lens (maybe more than one) is going to cost bucks!

Firstly, apropos guiding: I'm wondering how long these exposures would need to be - whilst I understand RB's emu was a quick trial, the 210 seconds he ran it for wouldn't seem to me a long exposure: I'm pretty good with my aligning/tracking on the HEQ5 and don't see, say 5 mins or more, as any problem without auto-guiding.

Would I be correct to presume that with such a wide field, and with relatively short exposures, guidance should be less critical? Manual guidance correction is something that, although really rusty with, I handled ok with emulsion film, way back when.

I may use either the HEQ5 Pro or my new Round Table EQ Platform, both of which I am confident of being able to track accurately with, once I make some mods etc.

Speaking of mods, I read through the article your link provided, and although I'm familiar with electronics and dismantling/reassembling things, the though of doing it to a brand new camera worries me, to say the least!!! Are there people here in Australia who do these mods, rather than having to send to the US?

Reading your reply, and the link article, it would seem that fitting internally the appropriate UV/IR filter would make the camera compatible for my intended usage and any subsequent DSI via my scope, but render it inoperable for day photography.

Putting a clear glass filter in internally, means that the addition of a UV/IR filter on the outside of the lens I use enables me to use it for my purposes; but would require a filter fitted via an adaptor for DSI using the scope - seeing I'd be removing that lens for afocal use - and if I wanted to use it for daytime shots I'd need to take the UV/IR filter I've put onto the outside of my lens off, and substitute it with an external job similar to the original that I've had removed from the internals?

I'm presuming the UV/IR filter that I could screw onto the outer of the camera lens may be different physically to the types that fit adaptors for DSI - or are they the same animals?

I have a Baader 2" semi apo UV/IR filter that is touted as excellent for DSO imaging with DSLR's but I have no idea whether it could be fitted to the outside of a wide camera lens bought for my prime purpose - it possibly could fit in a 2" adaptor for imaging through the scope but then I'd imagine the distance settings for everything in the equipment "train" could be unbalanced?

Finally, taking exposures and stacking are, I presume, still available for me to enhance my shots via the (wide) camera lens method - but is there a program etc that I can use to "scrub" any unwanted meteor/satellite trails out with?

Enough! - I've overloaded myself, let alone any expectations from you Eric: but I'd be mighty glad if you could respond to the above, in your own time, if you would be so kind.

Cheers, Darryl.



The sky around here is good, but I would be taking these shots out in the bush in very dark locations.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 27-03-2008, 12:36 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Hi Darryl,

I've taken some shots in the past with my Sony Cybershot sitting on a tripod on top of my EQ platform. They're great for widefield shots and you're right, that at short focal lengths, tracking inaccuracies don't really show up as much until your exposures are quite long.

Ideally you'll want guiding though, with the camera piggybacked on an ED80 or similar on an EQ mount (HEQ5/EQ6).

This image and this image were both taken in this fashion, but without guiding.

The camera was just mounted onto the EQ mount or piggybacked, but I had no guiding at the time. They were 5 minute exposures and in the full size versions there is some minor trailing.

Nowadays when I do the same thing (hopefully at SPSP next weekend) i'll be guiding at the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 27-03-2008, 02:29 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
Iceman's widies.....

Hi Mike - some great shots there, and quite similar in many ways to the type that I'm thinking of! One of the issues I'll also need to determine is just how much DSLR images can be blown up for high quality "prints" - I occasionally work with professional photographers and labs documenting stuff of mine who should be able to provide that info: but they're not "astro heads."

I've pm'd Eric to twist his arm (again!) for some more answers to my second posting - but I'd be most gratefull for your answers (or anyone else's for that matter) on my many questions.

Notice yours were done with a canon 350D - was it modded with the below mentioned filters? Any other thoughts/comments/info for me re my previous post?

Did you experience the need to remove any meteor/satellite trails and if so, how?

Re guiding, as I said, I'm confident of my set-up/manual correction skills over short exposures (though this would necessitate piggy-backing the camera on a scope to give me that capability) - and rather than an ED80 etc I'd feel at home with either of my scopes with an illum reticle - even thought about that finder with the sophisticated illum reticle that Erick commented on in the Japanese site: or at least having another excuse to buy it!

My comments in my EQ platform thread and the "dob slo-mo controls" are all about these considerations - slow, manual corrections, and compliment the "adjustable base" for the RTP base that I'm now designing (as long as it doesn't become a "leaning tower of Pisa" is my chief concern! The HEQ5 Pro is the fail-safe back up to all this.

Please let's know what you think!?!

Cheers, Darryl.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 29-03-2008, 06:41 PM
EzyStyles's Avatar
EzyStyles (Eric)
I HATE COMA!

EzyStyles is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,208
Hi Darryl,

In regards to the clear/glass or the UV/IR filter, if you are planning to do IR daytime shot, then the clear glasss is the way to go otherwise if not, then i probably go with the UV/IR one so you don't have to buy an additional front UV/IR filter later on down the track.

You'll find some relevant info here between the two as well as front filters.

http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/canon/index.htm

cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 29-03-2008, 08:04 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
clear Vs UV/IR

Thanks for that Eric - Hagar mentioned Peter Tan, so I sent him an email and he's quite happy, it seems, to do the mods; he can purchase the camera, make the mods and forward it - though he says sourcing the appropriate thickness clear filter for the internal may be a problem.

Haven't got down to prices yet; what are people's experiences of Peter and his pricing?

Am most probably leaning towards an internal UV/IR mod as I don't envisage using the camera for ordinary day stuff really.....

Can someone give me a bit of a technical explanation as to how the "live view" enhances the LCD image (its' brightness, I'm assuming, in my ignorance) to enable better focussing?

I have some sort of dumb concept of a continuous image feed to the LCD "building the image intensity" up - but what's the facts?

Regards, Darryl.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 29-03-2008, 08:08 PM
EzyStyles's Avatar
EzyStyles (Eric)
I HATE COMA!

EzyStyles is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 3,208
Hi Darryl, yes I have heard Peter Tan in HK does the mod for rather quite cheap. The replacement filter Baader UV/IR can be purchased from ALpine Astro for $88 US:

http://www.alpineastro.com/filters/uv_ir_cut_specs.htm

im not sure about the same thickness with the 450d , but the 400d and the 40d is the same.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 31-03-2008, 11:40 AM
tornado33
Registered User

tornado33 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,931
What interests me about the 450D is its Live View, allowing real time accurate focusing. Also its newer sensor, and the fact my old 300D that I use for daytime photography is getting long in the tooth.
Scott
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 31-03-2008, 12:51 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
How....?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornado33 View Post
What interests me about the 450D is its Live View, allowing real time accurate focusing. Also its newer sensor, and the fact my old 300D that I use for daytime photography is getting long in the tooth.
Scott
So Scott - "Live View" - how does it work, ie the theory/technicals, relative to image focus on units without this feature?

Cheers, Darryl.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-04-2008, 09:03 PM
netwolf's Avatar
netwolf
Registered User

netwolf is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,905
Liveview does help cut down the extra shutter clicks wasted on focusing. But i would prefer this feature on say a 20D or 30D camera. As the 6mp and 8mp sensors i think are far better for DSO imaging than the 10+. Remember they are packing in more pixels into the same area meaning the pixels are smaller. Until the start increasing the sensor size this pixel increase does not seem worth it. The 40D is the boundary line i think for Astro DSLR's until the sensor sizes are increased. The best bet is a 350d/20D/30d modified for Astro use.

Regards
Fahim
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-04-2008, 03:47 AM
citivolus's Avatar
citivolus (Ric)
Refracted

citivolus is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Carindale
Posts: 1,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwolf View Post
The 40D is the boundary line i think for Astro DSLR's until the sensor sizes are increased.
That or we start to bin to compensate.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-04-2008, 01:21 PM
tornado33
Registered User

tornado33 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,931
to be fair, though the pixel count is higher in the 450D, so is the effeciency. Bigger and better microlenses, and overall better effeciency in the semiconductor means the high QE of the 450D is very good for imaging even with the smaller pixels. Canon strives like all DSLR makers to get the most noise free images possible particularily under low light, in fact this is the battleground of camera makers now, who can make the most sensitive camera. I think that at the end of the day, a modded 450D will outperform a 30D, 20D, 350D and 300D.

Ive once used a SBIG CCD camera, it too has a "live view" where you select an area and zoom in, taking many shots/second, allowing real time very accurate focusing. With the DSLR though one might need to slew to a reasonably bright star to do it, but it will have to be better than taking separate images then inspecting them to see whats best focus, less wear and tear on the mechanicals like shutter and mirror too.
Scott
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-04-2008, 05:16 PM
Kokatha man
Registered User

Kokatha man is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by tornado33 View Post
Ive once used a SBIG CCD camera, it too has a "live view" where you select an area and zoom in, taking many shots/second, allowing real time very accurate focusing. Scott
Well, up till now, no-one's answered my question directly on an explanation of the "live view" feature of the 450D that incorporates both a technical and functional analogy: but tornado 33's 2nd para is what I was looking for (but had already discovered for myself before reading his post!)

The 450D does what his experience of using the SBIG ccd demonstrated- it provides a grid dividing any composition into (approx) 30 image frames that one can focus into, to attain aforementioned benefits.:thumb sup:

Methinks some other peoples' wafflings about pixels etc can sometimes betray a lack of real understanding of actual function mechanics.....:r ofl:

Cheers, Darryl.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-04-2008, 06:26 PM
Bassnut's Avatar
Bassnut (Fred)
Narrowfield rules!

Bassnut is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4,771
Darryl

The "live view" is simply a fast image update with the mirror up (much faster than SBIG focus mode BTW), it has no other function for astro pics other than for focus, has no effect on long exposure imaging what so ever, different mode, it can be viewed on the cam LCD or on a PC via USB . The short exposures in live view mean it is not very sensitive, but I have found focusing on bright stars (even if you have to slew away to find one) is an absolute snack, a very worthy feature. Yes, pixel size is a factor in well depth and QE, but massive oversampling has proved to be a bonus, despite the math.
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 02:32 AM.

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