Jump to content

The Crescent Nebula in Cygnus


Ben
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi,

many forums and the "pros" once were certain that the star eater issue makes the Sony A7 Series unusable for astrophotography but I always had good results with my Sony A7rII. So I recently went ahead and had it astromodified. The thick IR-Block Filterglas was replaced with a thin Baader substitute that lets IR Light down to the h-alpha line and the sII line through to the sensor with high transmission. The results can be seen in detail on my google drive link here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SrdJ7tJbEUwN5KcbXsfpKaesq8KltzmY/view?usp=sharing

I could write a lot of things that make the A7rII not the perfect camera for astro but suffice to say, it is still bloody capable. Cheers and CS,

Ben - Instagram - AstroBin

Technical stuff:

Acquisition:

  • Imaging telescope or lens : Meade SN-8
  • Imaging camera : Sony a7rII astro modified
  • Focal reducer : TeleVue ParaCorr PLU1106
  • Filter : STC Cyclops Optics STC Astro Duo-Narrowband Filter
  • Dates : May 28, 2020
  • Frames : STC Cyclops Optics STC Astro Duo-Narrowband Filter :  39x300" ISO640
  • Integration : 3.2 hours
  • Darks : ~50
  • Flats : ~50
  • Avg. Moon age : 5.67 days
  • Avg. Moon phase : 32.16%
  • Bortle Dark-Sky Scale : 8.00

Processing was done with Adobe Lightroom Classic CC, Aries Productions Astro Pixel Processor APP and Adobe Photoship CC 2018. Stacked with sigma kappa clipping 3/1. Light pollution could not be removed automatically in A.P.P. and had to be done manually in Lightroom with local adjustments and a lot of fiddling. Both images have reduced star sizes with a minimum filter applied to masked stars. The masked stars color’s were also tweaked in order to bring them close to the feel of a normal broadband rgb distribution with colors between either aqua and blue or yellow and orange. I did however not manage to create a mask that includes the faintest and smallest of stars. If you look closely you see how the star colors are a little off, the smaller the stars get

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by Ben
forgot hashtag
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hi Pieter, Not yet. I've thought about that, to use a tripod. But I've no time to try that yet. I'll try it this weekend and let you know.  Thanks!
    • Did you try manually focussing at 135mm, camera on tripod / solid ground, delayed release? If you can get sharp pictures that way, at least you know the optics are fine.
    • I don't know how those cameras would fare as aviation cameras - either of them are far beyond my scope of purchase - but people have been taking pictures of planes and other man-made flying objects well, as long as they have been around.  Unless the aircraft is flying straight at you or flying perpendicularly away from you, the AF lagging behind the shutter should not be an issue and in almost all cases you would be shooting at infinity so internal lens movements to acquire focus should be at a minimum.  If you are expecting to crop a lot, I guess a camera with higher resolution would be better for you but that also depends on what you are going to do with the image.  If you are going to be printing large mural sized prints, higher resolution image would be better but if you are going to print at or below 11x17 or not print at all, even a cropped image from my A7II will be good enough on any consumer grade monitors on the market.  I have seen images printed from the first generation Olympus OM-D E-M5 (16MP) at 11x17 and they were excellent.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...