Which canon

[NCC-2893]

I can get a good deal on a couple dslr's The 550 and 1100d . While I realise they are pretty near entry level they are better than my point and shoot. I hear the new canon cameras are very good for low noise etc. regardless of price. Coupled with bulb setting and large iso to low noise ratio they seem to be the go. I reckon I should take the plunge and get into a bit of proper astro. Anyone else use so called "entry level dslr's" and consider themselves satisfied?
Any input greatly appreciated. Also, can an unmodified camera do the job ok? I presume that just means a filter has been removed. Is it easily done? Cheers.

[cometcatcher]

Satisfied? No one is ever satisfied. :)

Entry level DSLR cameras are not the best for astro imaging, but they are cheap and will get you started. They are a big step up from a point and shoot.

Unmodified entry level DSLR's have trouble with Ha nebula. The inbuilt filter really kills nebula shots, although using a nebula filter in the optical path helps, with an extended exposure time to compensate.

Modded versions with the standard filter removed makes them much more suitable for Ha astrophotography. The procedure is fiddly, personally I wouldn't do it.

Depends what you want to shoot to how suitable each version is.

[traveller]

Hi John, both canon 20d and 40d are good entry to mid level DSLRs.
20d can be had for $200-300 for body alone depending on shutter count etc. 40ds can be had for $400-500.
As a first mod, you can remove the IR filter, which will allow better Ha response as suggested below, but I'd personally learn first.
Bo

[Forgey]

Hi John, I have 2 1100D's 1 modded and 1 unmodded. I started out with afocal with a point and shoot camera held up to the eyepiece and then upgraded to the DSLR when they were on special at Harvey Norman.
Ive added some images i've taken with the modded 1100D and M42 orion was taken with unmodded 1100D

[jjjnettie]

I use a modded 20D and an unmodded 550D for my imaging.
The 20d can be used all year round but the 550D works best when the outside temp drops below 10C. Oh , you can still use it for Solar and Moon imaging all year round.
The 550D having movie mode, means you can do Planetary imaging as well.

[ZeroID]

From what I understand neither the 20D or 40D have LiveView which seems to be a feature from I think the 450D upwards ( although the 20Da supposedly has it ) Am I correct because I want to get a Caonon body but I need\want the LiveView feature for focussing and control during imaging. Trouble is the 450D over here second hand goes for $700-$800. Even the 20 D will fetch at least $400 +

[cometcatcher]

The 1100D entry level model has LiveView.

[rmuhlack]

I already had a 400D as a daytime camera, and so decided earlier in the year that i'd buy a second one for astro work. Picked up that second 400D together with a 18-55 IS zoom for $180 on ebay.

I removed the internal IR filter, and then fitted an Astronomik L EOS-clip filter. It doesn't have liveview, but I have found that with the Backyard EOS (BYE) software I dont really need it, as BYE provides a 'defacto' liveview on the laptop screen.

All up im pretty happy with this older entry level DSLR - a bit of image noise at warmer temps but thats to be expected for a non-cooled camera. A dedicated and cooled CCD would be great, but for a fraction of the price this still provides great performance. (All the shots on my astrobin page were taken with the modded 400D)

ps lots of ebay sellers will ship internationally. plenty of bargains out there ;)

[traveller]

Brent, 40D has live view http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d
it also has 14bit conversion as opposed to 12 bit in 20D, bigger pixel count and a larger LCD screen.
They come up a fair bit now on ebay as 60D starts to grow their market, hopefully their prices will come down a bit in NZ, but it's always risky buying things second hand of course.
Bo

[rcheshire]

There are some converted cameras for sale in Ice Trades. It's not too difficult to do yourself.

[swannies1983]

All my imaging up till now has been done with an unmodded 400D (check my posts). I have recently got my hands on a modded 30D. Even with very early testing, while the 400d looks to have less "thermal" noise (taken care of using dark files), the 30d has less high ISO noise. The removal of the Ha blocking filter makes a hhhhuuuggggeeee difference! For example, see the attached picture of Eta Carinae. It's only a combination of 10x1min subs. So much detail that I could not get with my 400D.

[Octane]

As I mentioned to Brent in another thread, the 40D is the bare minimum you'd want nowadays.

1. It was the first Canon DSLR with a 14-bit sensor; and,
2. It has Live View (press the set button).

I used to use a modified one as a second body for weddings. I would use Click White Balance in DPP, and, simply convert the images to monochrome if the colour didn't look right.

H

[swannies1983]

I wouldn't necessarily say the part in bold :P. There are loads of great images out there taken from earlier models. Heck, I see some images from 300Ds that would give newer models a run for their money. But this is probably more to do with processing.

Yes a 14-bit sensor is a bonus but I also wouldn't say live view is a critical determining factor. I guess I am a bit biased as my 400D doesn't have live view so I don't know what I'm missing. I simply focus with a bahtinov mask which only takes a few minutes.

Each to their own :)

[NCC-2893]

A lot of good points and info. zero alluded to the ridiculous second hand prices we have to pay over here and he's dead right.The 1100D goes for 1100 bucks new but you pay 600 for an older 1000D . The 550D is 1400 new. Crazy stuff. As I can get the 550 for 1000 I think that is my preference at this stage. Iv'e seen the pics the 1100D can do and theyr'e not too shabby . So the 550D with the larger pixel count should be better.:question: I think I read somewhere The 550D is the entry-level version of the prosumer 7D model, from a couple years back, while the 1100D is the new entry level. Thanks again. By the by, This live view that suddenly seems the new thing. isn't it the same as looking at the lcd screen? A little puzzled. cheers.

[swannies1983]

Live view is like a video of what you are looking at. It is useful when you want to focus in real time. You can also zoom in which also helps when focusing. Question: How sensitive is live view? Can you only use it to focus when bright stars are in the FOV?

[NCC-2893]

Yes Swannies,,two good questions. I keep thinking of when I'm looking at my old camera's lcd and trying to see any stars let alone focus on them.:(

[swannies1983]

According to here (http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/FOCUS/Live_View_Focusing.HTM)

First of all, realize that Live View is not that sensitive. It's really made for bright scenes encountered in normal daytime photography. You're not ever going to be able to see a nebula or galaxy on Live view, but it definitely can be used for astrophotography by focusing on stars. How faint of a star that you will be able to focus on will depend on the aperture and focal ratio of the lens, and the camera settings.

Others who use it will let you know how really useful it is.

[Octane]

After having imaged with a 300D, 350D and then a 40D over the last 7 years, I would reiterate, that at a minimum, if you want a good quality piece of hardware, something that will withstand the elements a little more than the xxxD and xxxxD systems, the 40D will give you a great start.

If you've never used Live View, you really don't know what you're missing. Constantly having to take an image, and then zoom in on it on the LCD or on your laptop, making an adjustment, and then doing the whole process again, was a right royal pain in the arse.

With Live View, a bright star, a Bahtinov Mask and the Bahtinov Grabber software, you can reach focus in as little as 20 seconds.

If a Bahtinov Mask is not available, then Live View on a laptop using EOS Utility's Remote Shooting feature, zoomed in at 200% on a bright star, auto focus enabled on the camera, using the fine/course grained focus controls through the software, you could reach focus within a matter of minutes by erring on the right side of chromatic aberration on a star.

I don't know about you, but, my imaging time was limited by work, weather and the fact that I don't have a backyard to set my gear up in; as a result, Live View was a godsend.

In the end, each to their own, as you said.

H

[swannies1983]

Thanks for clearing the Live View question up. How bright does a star need to be to be able to see it using Live View? Have there been any times that there hasn't been a bright enough star for you to focus on?

Cheers

Dan

P.S. I don't have a permanent setup, have a 2 year old and a newborn so my imaging time is also limited. But I don't consider the 2 mins it takes to focus without using Live View to be a problem....but that's just me.

[jjjnettie]

A bright star is never too far away.
In all the time I've been using the 550D, only twice have I not had a bright enough star to focus on. So all I did was find one in my finder scope, slew to it, focus, then go back to my target.
On longer focal lengths I imagine it would be more of an issue.

[cometcatcher]

In the short time I've had my DSLR, I've not had a problem finding a star bright enough for LiveView. If it's visible at 1x it's visible at 10x.

Point and shoot cameras use LiveView as standard. I didn't know some DSLR's don't have it. I reckon the LiveView on my point and shoot is more sensitive to low light than the one on my DSLR, but you can't zoom in on it like the DSLR.

[JB80]

I use the 450D, it has all you need apart from video capture.
It is supposed to be one of the better models in dealing with noise although I don't know how they hold up against the newer models.

One thing to note no matter which model you get is if you plan on using a LP filter with it then finding a bright star becomes much more difficult, it helps if Venus is out type of brightness. And the focus point has changed when using the LP filter, take note and maybe mark down where the focus is set to save future focus issues.

[NCC-2893]

That low pass filter you mention. Is that what I would use in lieu of modding the camera? I think the 550D I'm looking at is just a new model of yours Jarrod. I think that may be the one i want especially if I want to keep the price down. And after seeing what Swannies 400D and Paula's 1100D can do,seems ok to me.

[swannies1983]

I think JB is talking about a light pollution filter.

[Merlin66]

Just to clarify...
The newer Canon's >450D are fitted with two internal filters. A colour correction filter (close to the chip) and an Anti-alias/dust filter at the front.
Removing the Colour correction filter enhances the response to Ha.
The anti-alias filter is also a UV-IR cut filter.
Hope this helps.

[JB80]

Yes I meant a Light Pollution filter, sorry I should of probably been a bit more specific but if you are in a urban situation it's a purchase that you may end up considering and they do work quite well.
Basically what I have is one of these type of filters for light pollution... http://www.astronomik.com/en/clip-filter-system.html

I suppose there is no real need to over complicate things as you will know if you need one or not fairly quickly it's just focussing was being mentioned and this is something that may need to be considered but probably not at this point.

I think the 550D would be a good purchase, I have only used my 450 and 20D so can't exactly comment on other models but it's a decent camera. This link has a little bit more info on the two models as a comparison...
http://ghonis2.ho8.com/450Dto550Dcomparison/450Dto550Dcomparison.html

[Forgey]

Have a look at this chart, Canon DSLR comparisons for Astro Imaging http://ghonis2.ho8.com/DSLRcomparison.html (http://ghonis2.ho8.com/DSLRcomparison.html)
And these links compares the 550 and 1100d http://ghonis2.ho8.com/T3iReview/T3iReview.html and http://ghonis2.ho8.com/T3review/T3review.html

[2stroke]

Simple get a digi 4 1100D if your broke or 550/600 if your got the cash, then a 650 digi 5, after that i would head for a 5d mark II ect, in my dreams. I would not bother with a POS, outdated, flogged out 20D/40D, its old tech loaded with heaps noise, some of these people i swear still use type writers. Also note these older camera's have a worse shutter life and a pron to death earlier then there new couter parts. Use google and learn for your self, theres to many keyboard cowboys in this thread.

These old camera's maybe great over base level modern cameras for terrestrial work where focus points count and features, but suck hard against noise, lifespan, mp, sensor spec ect of base level modern cameras. I swear you people will be telling people to buy a apple IIe next because its better built then a modern desktop hahaha

My rant over LMFAO

[Octane]

Noise schmoise, keyboard cowboys, etc.

I'll let these images, taken with my now-sold 40D do the talking.

The Constellation of Scorpius (http://users.tpg.com.au/octane2/Mangrove_Mountain_20090718_Scorpius .html)
The Tarantula Nebula (NGC 2070) in Dorado (http://users.tpg.com.au/octane2/Border_Stargaze_-_Wymah_Valley_20090822_Tarantula.ht ml)
The Sculptor (NGC 253) in Sculptor (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Cootamundra/Cootamundra_20090920_Sculptor.html)
The Pleiades (M45) in Taurus - Mark II (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Lostock/Lostock_20091016_M45.html)
The Butterfly Cluster (M6) and Ptolemy's Cluster (M7) in Scorpius (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Cootamundra/Cootamundra_20091024_M6_M7.html)
The Belt and Sword of Orion in Orion (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Cootamundra/Cootamundra_20091024_Sword_Belt_Ori on.html)
The Orion Nebula (M42), de Mairan's Nebula (M43) and The Running Man Nebula (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Cootamundra/Cootamundra_20100109_M42_M43_NGC_19 77.html)
NGC 4945 in Centaurus (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Snake_Valley/Snake_Valley_20100313_NGC_4945.html )
NGC 6188 in Ara - Mark II (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Snake_Valley/Snake_Valley_20100313_NGC_6188.html )
The Southern Pinwheel Galaxy (M83) in Hydra (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Snake_Valley/Snake_Valley_20100313_M83.html)
The Lambda Centauri Nebula (IC 2944) in Centaurus (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mrozycka/Snake_Valley/Snake_Valley_20100314_IC2944.html)

The images of M45 and M42, out of the whole lot, are ones that are most affected by noise. The Orion one in particular was shot on a summer's night that was 26 degrees at midnight.

I will reiterate that a spectrum-enhanced 40D is a magnificent system for astrophotography (for someone not able to afford the latest tech, or isn't after a cooled CCD).

H

[swannies1983]

At the end of the day, it's whatever you can afford. Us astrophotographers always want something better.

[jjjnettie]

Both these images were taken with a Canon 20D. One modified, the other plain vanilla.
The one from the unmodded camera was short listed for last years Royal Observatory Greenwich Astronomy Photographer of the Year award.

When the weather is too warm to use the Canon 550D, I can always count on the 20d for relatively noise free images.
It's a great camera, very robust and I expect to get years more use out of it.

[MrB]

Wow, I think H's avatar says it all.

[jjjnettie]

:thumbsup: :rofl:

[Octane]

Problem? ^^^:D

H

[loki78]

As one of the resident 60Da owners MrB, how is that coming along? Happy with it? Where do you place the noise on that compared to the others discussed here?

[MrB]

Hi Jon,
I have only really had one session with it, and then the conditions weren't great, but I am very happy with it so far.

See the link below for what I've had a chance to do with it to date, all are single exposures(no stacking, no calibration) and done at 1600 ISO.
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=92560

[NCC-2893]

Sod it ,I'm going with the 550D. After much thinking and reading (thanks for those cool links Paula) At the moment money talks. And I figure the 550 is basically canons old 7D and at 18 mpixel cant be too bad for a first camera. If I get the bug;) and have to upgrade in a year or two so be it. It's been a riveting thread and helped me heaps so thanks all. I have to say also I cant get over the quality of all the photos you've linked. If I get half way there i'll be rapped. Just a couple things more (for now) The lenses that you get with the camera , I'd imagine wouldn't be top quality. Is that reflected in the fact they seem to have aperture of 3.5 - 5.6. in the 18-55mm lense? Not as low as say 2.8, or does it not matter. Thanks again.

[jjjnettie]

I replaced my 18-55mm lens (which isn't good, but isn't bad) with a Tamron 18-200mm lens. For me it's perfect as a day to day lens, the focal range is just awesome. :) And for just over $200 a bargain. :D If I go on a walk I need no other lens, except maybe my Tamron 90mm macro if I'm keen. :)
So if you buy the camera body only and the Tamron for your every day lens, you'll be very happy.

I'm assuming you're on a budget like myself here. If you have the $$ then there is some lovely L glass out there. :)

[loki78]

Whats the price difference between the 550D and the 600D as the 600D seems to perform better on tests and I don't think there is much diff in the price at all is there?

The 18-55mm lens is fine to start with I've taken some milky way shots with it in polluted skies at 18mm and just step it down a bit - it's a good starter lens.

[NCC-2893]

well, the 600D would be a hundy dearer than the 550D. Whether or not ot has lens or not. Say I can get the body only, would it be better doing that, then spend the money to get a decent zoom,like jjjnettie suggests. Because it never really occured to me that I could just get the body,then sort the lens out. I'm very interested in this. If I'm wanting to eventually target deep sky stuff,multiple exposures, stacking etc. What would the one lens be that you guys would want. Is zoom important? Or is deep sky generally wide field.This is really interesting stuff. Cheers. (edit) jon your suggestion about the 600D had me looking on line and I see one in Auckland cameras that has the 600D body for 900. Thats way cheaper than anywhere else. Retail for the 1100D with lens kit is 1150 odd dollars over here so it's not out of the way. Just gets me back to the lens question again .

[jjjnettie]

The zoom lens is great for day time work and I have used the Tamron 18-200 for some DSO work. See image below.
What is best for astro work is a Prime lens.
The most popular for the budget conscious is the Canon Nifty Fifty F1.8. It has it's faults, coma being a big one, but you can work around that in Photoshop or just by framing the image around it. But at around $130, you won't find a better, cheaper lens.
My next favourite is the Tamron 90mm Macro. It gives stunning images both in daytime Macros as well as wide field Astro work. You can pick them up 2nd hand, if you're lucky, for around $350.

[NCC-2893]

Thanks jjj. I will be using it prime on the scope of course. But I will be using it by itself first,guided somehow or other. so want a good lens for multiples on say m42 for arguments sake. I had a quick look on the net re. the 90mm macro and was mightily impressed. It always seems counter intuitive to me seeing a macro lens used for other things like portraits etc.
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=45&p=4 I think i can see which way I'll be going. 550D or 600D body with separate lens. There'll be more lenses later but which one for starters. Do you use zoom at all when imaging nebula's and suchlike? For instance jjjnettie, how much zoom on that cool pic of Antares.

[jjjnettie]

The image above was taken at full zoom.
I'm totally biased toward that 18-200 Tamron.
If I had to get rid of all my lenses, bar one, it would be the one I would keep. (though it would almost kill me to get rid of the Tammy 90mm)

I'm interested to hear what others have to say on the topic though. :)

[MrB]

As Nettie says, primes are the best option. The manufacturers have to make compromises opticaly to get zooms to work at all focal lengths, but modern zooms are very good.
Another option for lenses is the old M42 mount manual focus primes with an EOS adaptor. All the shots in my link above were shot on 1950's, 60's and 70's glass. With careful purchasing, you can get 5 or 6 mint condition lenses for the same outlay as one decent modern lens.
Obviously they aren't as convenient for terrestrial work being manual focus, but many of them are as sharp as, if not sharper, than what is available today with the exception of $1000+ glass like Canon's L series.
Some of them are still considered excellent lenses today.
Stick to the better known brands like Nikkor, Leica, Carl Zeiss, Contax etc, though there are a few examples of one type of lens that goes by many generic brand names that have a cult following (like the 55mm f1.2 Revuenon/Rokinon/Yashinon/Chinon etc etc, all the same lens, made by Tomioka)

Check out the Manual Focus lens forums Here (http://forum.manualfocus.org/) and Here (http://forum.mflenses.com/) to get an idea of what is good.
Sadly though, due to the increased popularity of these lenses since the advent of DSLR's and now the the Sony NEX's, demand and therefore prices have jumped considerably, but good clean examples can still be had for a good price on Ebay. Ignore all the way overpriced 'Buy It Now' examples, they are sellers preying on the inexperienced.

[NCC-2893]

Yes, makes a lot of sense. Good quality lenses are always good quality.So it stands to reason there will be a lot of good glass out there at good prices. This is good stuff. I mean I started off simply wanting opinions on what cheap dslr to buy,now I'm happy getting a body and now thinking second hand lenses. I have heard,any old body will do in a pinch but good quality lenses make the camera.. What Simon said is correct I guess . Good glass is always going to maintain value. By the way, those links Simon,jeez, lenses, i never new it was so involved. i'm so used to my point and shoots ,who needs to worry about lenses. This is another world. Kind of exciting.:thumbsup:

[cometcatcher]

I think 2 stroke has a fair point here also NCC-2893. Have a look at the shutter failure for different Canon models at this page. http://www.ideiki.com/astro/EOS.aspx

And if you buy one second hand, you don't know how many shutter clicks it's already had. You could be buying a camera ready for death at the next click, if the previous owner was snap happy.

[JB80]

You can always ask a seller for the shutter count before purchase. Not as straight forward as it should be but I feel if someone wants to sell their camera then they should be prepared to go to the effort to find out.

[Octane]

There's also software which lets you determine shutter actuations.

My point was that if someone was on a budget-conscious path, then, something like the 40D would be stellar. 14-bit system, Live View, decent high ISO performance (particularly when taking many sub-exposures and calibrating accordingly).

If one has the budget to stretch to the newer offerings, then, of course, go for it!

H

[traveller]

I just picked up a used 40d from someone who upgraded to a 60d. He actully preferred the 40d as it had 3 user presets. Anyway, I will give it a go soon.
Bo

[rmuhlack]

I second MrB's suggestion re older manual focus primes with an EOS adapter. I have recently purchased three inexpensive Nikkor AI manual focus primes (50mm, 135mm, 200mm) & combined with a suitable Nikon-EOS adapter (~$20 (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=92666)) the optical quality is superb - for both daytime and astro work - and far far superior to my other standard canon zooms.

[ZeroID]

An interesting bunch of opinions here. Hadn't realised the 40D had Live View and seemed a good option ( Thanks Humayun). I will check out the prices on that model. As I earlier mentioned my real target here is to get a better focussing method and the bahtinov\bright star\liveview seems the best way to go. My eyes are not what I'd wish them to be and trying to peer at a small LCD screen magnified or not on some silly angle just doesn't work for me. I am lucky I made the UTA on SK II rotatable so I can normally get it at least somewhere comfortable.
I will also motorise and gear down the focusser via probably a stepper motor system so I can control from the desk.
As has been said, $$$ are the governing force here, I cannot justify (afford) $1000's on the latest and risk pulling filters etc out but I'll find $4-500 at a pinch and work from there.
In the meantime the KM 7D is working well enough to experiment and learn.

[ZeroID]

Hmm, NZ prices ...!! 40D is in the $500 + range as well and that's the reserve !!. This is getting frustrating.
Think I'll have to wait till I've sold the project car, can't afford to roll cage it now anyway.

[loki78]

Well a few questions to go with this thread, where do ppl in Aus generally get their cameras modded? Are they all ship to the US jobs or are their local people who do it?

Also, is the 650D likely to become a new entry level standard now it has the DIGIC5 chip in it which from what I've read is significantly less noisy than the DIGIC4? A Modded 650D I would think would come out cheaper than their 60Da and be much more effective?

[DJT]

Just a quick weigh in. I am the proud owner of a Canon 20D and a 30D, both modded, both performing really well when you treat them as a DSLR and a great way to learn the ropes.

I would though caution against buying anything earlier than a 30D if you are using Windows 7 as there are no drivers available for the 20D which makes integrated capture management, say with APT, Backyard EOS, DSLR Shutter or Nebulosity 3 a no go and whilst Live view is good, if you are pointing straight up at the heavens on the butt of a refractor, its a darned site easier using a laptop to get your focus sorted than live view (unless of course you have the swivel widget for the screen)


There are workarounds to get images onto a PC running Windows 7 with the 20, but its a faff and all you will be able to do is get images onto the PC.

From what I can tell, and from what I knew when I worked for them, Canon has a 7 year obsolesence policy on updates to software and parts manufacture.

So, check first on the Windows drivers website that your Camera drivers for the Windows version you are on are actually available if you are buying pre-loved modded cameras.