Another mosaic using bog standard zoom lens and unmodified Canon 1100D.
Apart from crappy stars that are produced by this lens, I'm pleasantly surprised with the detail in the rest of the image.
Canon 1100D unmodified - 75 to 300 zoom at f/ 6.3 - ISO 800.
Piggy backed on HEQ Pro 5 mount, orion mini guider.
Which version of the standard 70-300 is that? There seems to be a few below the 'L' series, the III, III USM, the IS USM, and the EF 70-300mm DO IS USM (from cheapest to dearest)
I have the IS USM but haven't used it for Astropics yet so I will be interested to see the results.
I tend toward old manual focus lenses for the sky because the Auto's have such a small travel distance from close to infinity and it can be a bit hard to manually focus them. The are loose to focus too once the motors disengaged, so I prefer the firmer manuals where you might need to turn the focus ring through more than a whole turn to get focus.
I'm shocked at how much detail you have there in the nebulosity, in particular around the horsehead. I wasn't managing to squeeze that much out of some 5min 1600ISO 6D subs I did recently yet you're using 30s
The only CC I'd have is to de-noise some more maybe, and to balance the processing of the two frames - seems quite obvious one FOV has significantly more stars than the other ?
Nothing bog standard about the result! Superlative as usual.
Thanks Lewis!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryp
Another superb image, Justin
Thanks Laurie!
Quote:
Originally Posted by atalas
Nice Pic Justin.
Thanks Louie!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulus
Nice photo Justin with very nice colour.
Which version of the standard 70-300 is that? There seems to be a few below the 'L' series, the III, III USM, the IS USM, and the EF 70-300mm DO IS USM (from cheapest to dearest)
I have the IS USM but haven't used it for Astropics yet so I will be interested to see the results.
I tend toward old manual focus lenses for the sky because the Auto's have such a small travel distance from close to infinity and it can be a bit hard to manually focus them. The are loose to focus too once the motors disengaged, so I prefer the firmer manuals where you might need to turn the focus ring through more than a whole turn to get focus.
Trevor
Thanks Trevor!
It's the standard EF 70 to 300mm kit lens that came with the camera.
I agree about the loose focus, it can be challenging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerg
I'm shocked at how much detail you have there in the nebulosity, in particular around the horsehead. I wasn't managing to squeeze that much out of some 5min 1600ISO 6D subs I did recently yet you're using 30s
The only CC I'd have is to de-noise some more maybe, and to balance the processing of the two frames - seems quite obvious one FOV has significantly more stars than the other ?
Thanks Roger!
Most of the subs are 8 minutes from a dark site, it's amazing what 3 minutes extra does.
I was intrigued by the difference in stars from both frames. I just looked at individual subs, both of 8 minutes exp and there's definitely more stars around the belt region.
Focus might be one factor and foreground nebulosity another for the Orion neb region.
I'll post the two subs later so you can see the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimmoW
congrats on a great image, esp with such a lens! Is this from a darksite or are you using an LP filter?
Thanks Simon!
Yep dark sky site, I'm lucky to live in a rural area.
Most of the subs are 8 minutes from a dark site, it's amazing what 3 minutes extra does.
Ohhh, right, I get it. I read it as "30 sec subs, 5 and 8 minutes" as in, 5 + 8 minutes comprising of 30 second subs! I get it now I don't feel so bad about my attempt with 5 mins 1600ISO under light polluted skies now
