Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

General target advice - can my camera handle these?

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 bigopapa

bigopapa

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2021
  • Loc: Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 26 June 2022 - 03:54 AM

Hello!

I'm going to go to a darker sky (Bortle 5, I'm in Bortle 9) tomorrow, and I just can't decide what to shoot considering I don't get to do it often.

I have a Canon 450D with a 55-250mm lens on a Star Adventurer. I've narrowed it down to these targets, but since they're Ha I'm not sure if the camera would get these well:

1. Cygnus region (55mm would get both NA and Sadr region) - at 55mm I could shoot at F4, but I don't know whether my stock DSLR could get any nebulosity

2. Lagoon and Trifid - at 55mm I could also get surrounding milky way, so it's something even if I get almost none of the nebula

I'd love to hear your input, and whether you think it's possible to get either of these (or maybe even zoom in on one).

Thanks!

#2 Dren

Dren

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: 09 Jan 2020
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 26 June 2022 - 05:08 AM

I'd go for lagoon and trifid since (1) they are quite bright and (2) the surrounding milkyway is really cool. Here is an image someone took from B5 using 450d + 50mm at f4. 



#3 Notdarkenough

Notdarkenough

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,650
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2021
  • Loc: 5000' ft @ 41° N Utah

Posted 26 June 2022 - 05:58 AM

When I need a tie-breaker for target selection, I use Telescopius and SkySafari to help me sort some of the camera/target combinations 



#4 Hesiod

Hesiod

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,327
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2013

Posted 26 June 2022 - 06:01 AM

Both are very doable, and I shot them several times with unmodded cameras.

As an example here a picture I took last year from a Bortle 4 site.

Framing is at 200mm on a full frame sensor, so you could get the same field of view by setting your zoom at around 100-135mm.

I used fairly short subs to preserve the brightest areas (60"); do not remember the total integration time but should be a tad over 30'

 

gallery_215679_7885_10564553.jpg


  • Sheridan, Faris and Dren like this

#5 bigopapa

bigopapa

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2021
  • Loc: Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 28 June 2022 - 05:56 AM

Thanks for the responses!

 

Small update: didn't end up going, but there is a chance that tomorrow I could get a night at Bortle ~3 (I'm just really uncertain when it comes to driving out, might not be able to). In that case, should I sink the entire night on the Lagoon, or try to get around 2.5 hours on each? Will that be enough to show some detail in Cygnus?



#6 mayhem13

mayhem13

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,464
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2021
  • Loc: New Jersey

Posted 28 June 2022 - 06:21 AM

I’d go for the whole Star cloud and then a deeper view…….but I wouldn’t go any deeper than 200mm with a star adventurer unless you’re guiding……..in a Bortle 3 site, believe it or not you’re gonna need longer exposures to overcome sensor read noise with real photons……the light pollution in B7 takes care of that which you won’t have.

 

Hope you make it out and to see what you come up with…..I’m gonna get out to my B3 site day after…..tonight is partially cloudy on the other side.



#7 Hesiod

Hesiod

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,327
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2013

Posted 28 June 2022 - 08:59 AM

Thanks for the responses!

Small update: didn't end up going, but there is a chance that tomorrow I could get a night at Bortle ~3 (I'm just really uncertain when it comes to driving out, might not be able to). In that case, should I sink the entire night on the Lagoon, or try to get around 2.5 hours on each? Will that be enough to show some detail in Cygnus?


Mind that now you could have a very short time of true dark (e.g at 45° I have dark from ca midnight to maybe 4 am)

#8 bigopapa

bigopapa

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2021
  • Loc: Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 29 June 2022 - 06:39 AM

Okay, I'm getting the night!

 

So I'm thinking around 135mm focal length, and seems that I'll be spending most of the night on the lagoon and trifid.

 

Will 135mm be enough to reveal some detail on the nebula while getting some surrounding milky way? Or do I need to choose between longer focal length for the nebula or shorter for more milky way detail?



#9 Oort Cloud

Oort Cloud

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,740
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2020
  • Loc: New Jersey, USA

Posted 29 June 2022 - 08:40 AM

Dark site, unmodded DSLR, widefield. I'd be shooting a broadband target, not H-alpha targets. Andromeda would be the obvious choice, but it's not really available now. I'd shoot the Iris nebula. It's not a huge target, but is surrounded by some really cool dusty stuff, and all of it is broadband, so a good choice for an unmodded DSLR.

#10 Hesiod

Hesiod

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,327
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2013

Posted 29 June 2022 - 10:46 AM

Sure, both nebulae are pretty large and evevn at 135mm will reveal some features such as the shape, or the dark lanes giving the Trifid its name; the overall presentation should be close to the picture I posted earlier



#11 Dren

Dren

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: 09 Jan 2020
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 29 June 2022 - 11:24 AM

Will 135mm be enough to reveal some detail on the nebula while getting some surrounding milky way? Or do I need to choose between longer focal length for the nebula or shorter for more milky way detail?

"Detail" is a tricky word to use.  Longer focal length will get you smaller features of the nebula while shorter will get you more varied shape of the milkyway.  So with longer focal length, you'll see smaller details of the target.  But with milkyway shots, people are generally more interested in the overall shape.

 

Here is a shot using 135mm and 450D.

Lagoon.135

 

Here is a shot using 50mm and 450D.

Lagoon.50

 

Between 55mm and 135mm, I wouldn't be focused on how "detailed" your capture will be of the nebula, because at both lengths the nebula features will be fairly smooth.  Rather, I would focus on what type of framing you want.  

 

The above shots were captured with modded 450D, so your colors will likely be closer to what Hesiod posted.



#12 fewayne

fewayne

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,013
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2017
  • Loc: Madison, WI, USA

Posted 29 June 2022 - 12:10 PM

Lagoon/Trifid is easily doable with a non-modded camera. Here's mine, with a Pentax K-5iis at 336mm. That's an hour and a half of integration time, but note the Bortle class (yeah, talk about luxury!).


  • Hesiod likes this

#13 Oort Cloud

Oort Cloud

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,740
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2020
  • Loc: New Jersey, USA

Posted 29 June 2022 - 01:26 PM

Lagoon/Trifid is easily doable with a non-modded camera. Here's mine, with a Pentax K-5iis at 336mm. That's an hour and a half of integration time, but note the Bortle class (yeah, talk about luxury!).


I do like how the lack of H-alpha enhances the reflection nebulosity (blue), but let's face it - there is WAY more H-alpha there than what was captured.

#14 fewayne

fewayne

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,013
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2017
  • Loc: Madison, WI, USA

Posted 29 June 2022 - 04:19 PM

Oh, sure. But I'm pretty happy with the image as a picture.



#15 bigopapa

bigopapa

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2021
  • Loc: Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 01 July 2022 - 03:02 AM

Thanks so much for the help!

 

I ended up getting 3 hours of exposure on the Lagoon and Trifid (should have been more but ran into some problems). Framing was surprisingly easy, and so much was visible in a single exposure (well, in comparison to bortle 9).

 

This is the starless version, I kinda like it more than the one with stars, they came out pretty bad:

 

Lagoon and Trifid - Starless

 

I'm really happy with this shot, although it could be processed better (also, quality may be a little worse than on my PC, this is a screenshot to reduce the file size so I can upload)


Edited by bigopapa, 01 July 2022 - 03:02 AM.

  • Hesiod and Dren like this

#16 Dren

Dren

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: 09 Jan 2020
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 01 July 2022 - 08:15 AM

Very nice! Congrats! 




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics