What an incredible presentation with beautiful photos! I'm definitely going to give this a try. Thank you so much for sharing :) Tony Hallas is a genius!
Awesome,... I loved your presentation on the Lazy approach to DSLR Astrophotography,... I now feel a lot more comfortable in the way I personally approach Astrophotography, giving that I just as Lazy, Thanks, Tony.
Great video. Question: If one wanted to dither 2-3 star diameters and was using a DSLR with camera lens on a tracker like a Vixen Polarie, couldn't one just turn off the power for a short bit and then turn it on to resume tracking on a slightly different field? Any formula on how long to leave it off based upon the focal length of your lens? TIA.
Very informative video. Thanks for sharing. I've been wanting to learn some more effective editing techniques, but astrophotography in general is a lot to take in if you're new to the subject.
a question: im considering buying the new Pentax K1. It offers not only a atrotracking function but a new tecnology called Pixelshift resolution. every pixel on the sensor is capable of recording all 3 colors. so the camera makes 1 image per color and moves the pixel of one step, up, down and so on. now my question: is this the inbođy solution of color mottle?
Any good basic tutorial on how to dither? Is that something you do while shooting exposures...between exposures you move the camera a little between each exposure?
I realize this is an old video, but I will try: I wonder how do you practically move the FOV a few star diameters for dithering. What tripod / head would you use for that? Thank you! (Brilliant pictures and process, btw!)
Hello, the Rokinon 35 mm is definitively a great lens but I was wondering if the 14 mm F 2.8 version deliver the same image quality and if it is suitable for astrophotography. Thank you!
Is it possible to load the photos out of ACR into something like DSS instead of Register, and expect the same kind of output, except maybe set it for a FITS, instead?
Wow just for curiosity i checked the MTF values of the nikon 14-24... I couldn't belive em. It's actually sharper than some prime lenses for most of it's range, that is just ridiculous.
+BubuSnow93 a bit late message :P Yeah, and it's true, and it's as sharp as the extremly good rokinon 14mm 2.8 also it as slight bit less vignetting But to me, the rokinon 14mm 2.8 is still better as a price to performance ratio ($$$) in my opinion it's better to have the rokinon 14mm 2.8 and the 24mm 1.4 that you can use at F1.4 of F2.0 for time lapse (need to be the fastest lens)
VERY good discuss! thx for the new idea! oh yeah my life is soo better with the 6D!!! full frame = WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (exactly as our equipment, canon 6D, canon 70-200 f2.8, 200mm 2.8 and 14mm, 24mm 35mm rokinon lens) I say to astro forum member for like 5-6 years that I NEVER do darks, bias, lol! Exact!!! dithering is key of noiseless images! no painful dark, bias taking process (also when not done properly, it add noise and dust to images!!!) also... to color mottleling, an added idea of how to deal with: It's better to shot with less ISO but longer exposure image and same in hot days too (I think the primary ''noise'' is from the automatic bias in conjoncture with the differential amplifier on each pixels, longer exposure make this noise to be more ''far'' in background from signal.. the differential amplifier idea is that this device is on and ''attract/affect'' other surrounding pixels with a bit of electronic noise, like the amp glow we found on some cameras... lower iso make it better, less amplification) Also a dslr take an automatic bias before each exposure, this is why Cmos is better those days, because in low years 2000 those sensors has not equal pixels, so the dif-amp and automatic bias make the images pixels even corner to corner from start... but there are a background limit hidden in each images, so the more far you are from it in signal, the better it will be (I'm not 100% sure, but I study this for years and this have some sense...) also, the bad about longer images, it need good tracking/guiding, and less airplane light About the median/mean, it's not better to use a software that do kappa sigma clip?
Hi, I was wondering are his pictures taken with a tracker or not? I see when Tony opens his pictures in Adobe, it says f4.5, 180.00 s 1600 ISO and there is no star trail at all and for 180 sec exposure this is impossible. :/
I emailed him and here's what he said. He got back to me within 10 minutes! "Yes you need to track, otherwise your stars will all be little lines. For such a short focal length you don't need a high end mount. A small German equatorial mount will be fine. It helps for it to have a polar scope of some sort for accurate polar alignment. That is quite important if you want to shoot several minutes without guiding. If you are traveling by air to some exotic location a Vixen Polaire works well. You will need a red dot finder on your camera so you can dither between exposures."
Can you guys please help, I cant decide between getting Sony a7s or canon 6d for astrophotography, Do we need more sensitivity? or more resolution? Which is going to give me better results?
Would be an excellent tutorial except for one glaring omission ... an omission that is actually the crux of the whole process. That omission? Just exactly how is the dithering done? ie How does one move the DSLR 2 or 3 star diameters between shots? Since that step is missing, the tutorial is practically useless!
Dithering is a function of the capture program you choose to use. TheSkyX Pro, for instance, has a dithering function that is quite easy to use. The purpose of Tony’s talk was not to tout any particular image capture app but what is necessary and valuable, no matter what program you use.
Some great info but the it's a real shame the images ended up so over processed. The stacking and basic lens corrections and raw adjustments are necessary but the obnoxious vibrance and saturation make the images look tacky and sci-fi. Sci-fi is just that, it's fiction and these unfortunately no longer look real due to the heavy handed processing. A real shame since the images captured had enough wow-factor information within them that they didn't need be processed into a Thomas Kincaid replica to capture your attention.
Fantastic video, love Tony Hallas and his approach - keep it simple. Thanks so much for posting!
What an incredible presentation with beautiful photos! I'm definitely going to give this a try. Thank you so much for sharing :) Tony Hallas is a genius!
Awesome,... I loved your presentation on the Lazy approach to DSLR Astrophotography,... I now feel a lot more comfortable in the way I personally approach Astrophotography, giving that I just as Lazy, Thanks, Tony.
Great presentation Tony! Nice pacing and lots of money saving tips. Thank You!
Great video. Question: If one wanted to dither 2-3 star diameters and was using a DSLR with camera lens on a tracker like a Vixen Polarie, couldn't one just turn off the power for a short bit and then turn it on to resume tracking on a slightly different field? Any formula on how long to leave it off based upon the focal length of your lens? TIA.
One of the best presentation AND "how to do session" in regard to a very complicate tool for beginners
That was a great overview Tony. I got a lot out of it.
that was an awesome talk. just about to get a dslr and i would not have had a clue if i had not seen that
Thanks Tony! Clear, concise, information.
Awesome presentation! I am definately gonna try the dithering, looks amazing!
This video contains an amazing amount of useful information. Thank you for sharing this with us. Scott
Very informative video. Thanks for sharing. I've been wanting to learn some more effective editing techniques, but astrophotography in general is a lot to take in if you're new to the subject.
I learned so much from this video. Very inspiring stuff.
Nice presentation. Just to nitpick: I believe you got the last star of Cassiopeia wrong. It would be off screen on that view.
Fantastic vid!! TY!! :D
@ 18:02 you were gonna say " beer " LOL I would be too!
Thanks for the color mottle explanation!
a question: im considering buying the new Pentax K1. It offers not only a atrotracking function but a new tecnology called Pixelshift resolution. every pixel on the sensor is capable of recording all 3 colors. so the camera makes 1 image per color and moves the pixel of one step, up, down and so on. now my question: is this the inbođy solution of color mottle?
Excelent Tony, Clean and neat presentation!, thanks a lot for sharing....Gustavo
Any good basic tutorial on how to dither? Is that something you do while shooting exposures...between exposures you move the camera a little between each exposure?
Thanks. I haven't bought a mount yet. Are there some that have a guider and some that don't?
I realize this is an old video, but I will try: I wonder how do you practically move the FOV a few star diameters for dithering. What tripod / head would you use for that? Thank you! (Brilliant pictures and process, btw!)
Thanks Excellent explanation
Is the SLR camera modified
This would probably be a question best answered by Tony Hallas. His official website is www.astrophoto.com/
Thank you so much Tony! #LEGEND!
Hello, the Rokinon 35 mm is definitively a great lens but I was wondering if the 14 mm F 2.8 version deliver the same image quality and if it is suitable for astrophotography. Thank you!
Atacama desert in Perú?? very well Mr Hallas...very well...
tony is the best astrophotographer
Glad I found this before I through my DSLR against a brick wall. Dithering isn't far enough probably.
Is it possible to load the photos out of ACR into something like DSS instead of Register, and expect the same kind of output, except maybe set it for a FITS, instead?
Wow just for curiosity i checked the MTF values of the nikon 14-24... I couldn't belive em. It's actually sharper than some prime lenses for most of it's range, that is just ridiculous.
+BubuSnow93 a bit late message :P
Yeah, and it's true, and it's as sharp as the extremly good rokinon 14mm 2.8 also it as slight bit less vignetting
But to me, the rokinon 14mm 2.8 is still better as a price to performance ratio ($$$) in my opinion it's better to have the rokinon 14mm 2.8 and the 24mm 1.4 that you can use at F1.4 of F2.0 for time lapse (need to be the fastest lens)
very helpful , thanks!
VERY good discuss! thx for the new idea! oh yeah my life is soo better with the 6D!!! full frame = WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(exactly as our equipment, canon 6D, canon 70-200 f2.8, 200mm 2.8 and 14mm, 24mm 35mm rokinon lens)
I say to astro forum member for like 5-6 years that I NEVER do darks, bias, lol! Exact!!! dithering is key of noiseless images! no painful dark, bias taking process (also when not done properly, it add noise and dust to images!!!)
also... to color mottleling, an added idea of how to deal with:
It's better to shot with less ISO but longer exposure image and same in hot days too
(I think the primary ''noise'' is from the automatic bias in conjoncture with the differential amplifier on each pixels, longer exposure make this noise to be more ''far'' in background from signal.. the differential amplifier idea is that this device is on and ''attract/affect'' other surrounding pixels with a bit of electronic noise, like the amp glow we found on some cameras... lower iso make it better, less amplification) Also a dslr take an automatic bias before each exposure, this is why Cmos is better those days, because in low years 2000 those sensors has not equal pixels, so the dif-amp and automatic bias make the images pixels even corner to corner from start... but there are a background limit hidden in each images, so the more far you are from it in signal, the better it will be
(I'm not 100% sure, but I study this for years and this have some sense...)
also, the bad about longer images, it need good tracking/guiding, and less airplane light
About the median/mean, it's not better to use a software that do kappa sigma clip?
+LeCarl99 sorry if it's not that clear, I drink too much caffeine and I'm not primary enlish, lol! :P
rowafaucas? the first image example of dithering what nebula is that? what lens\telescope was it taken with? how long etc...
Yes! Id love to see how that is spelled
Thank you very much, i would have never been able to guess that :)
Ophiuchus
hi guys i just like to let you know i have registar however i cant open the tiff files for some reason any advise?
Thank you.
Tony is using an older version of RegiStar. The latest version is WAY different and MORE complicated than what he is describing here.
Amazing...
tHANK YOU.
Hi, I was wondering are his pictures taken with a tracker or not?
I see when Tony opens his pictures in Adobe, it says f4.5, 180.00 s 1600 ISO and there is no star trail at all and for 180 sec exposure this is impossible. :/
I emailed him and here's what he said. He got back to me within 10 minutes! "Yes you need to track, otherwise your stars will all be little lines. For such a short focal length you don't need a high end mount. A small German equatorial mount will be fine. It helps for it to have a polar scope of some sort for accurate polar alignment. That is quite important if you want to shoot several minutes without guiding. If you are traveling by air to some exotic location a Vixen Polaire works well. You will need a red dot finder on your camera so you can dither between exposures."
Can you guys please help, I cant decide between getting Sony a7s or canon 6d for astrophotography, Do we need more sensitivity? or more resolution? Which is going to give me better results?
Would be an excellent tutorial except for one glaring omission ... an omission that is actually the crux of the whole process. That omission? Just exactly how is the dithering done? ie How does one move the DSLR 2 or 3 star diameters between shots? Since that step is missing, the tutorial is practically useless!
Dithering is a function of the capture program you choose to use. TheSkyX Pro, for instance, has a dithering function that is quite easy to use. The purpose of Tony’s talk was not to tout any particular image capture app but what is necessary and valuable, no matter what program you use.
Some great info but the it's a real shame the images ended up so over processed. The stacking and basic lens corrections and raw adjustments are necessary but the obnoxious vibrance and saturation make the images look tacky and sci-fi. Sci-fi is just that, it's fiction and these unfortunately no longer look real due to the heavy handed processing. A real shame since the images captured had enough wow-factor information within them that they didn't need be processed into a Thomas Kincaid replica to capture your attention.
Poor nebulae look like a crayon threw up on them :(
before or after the whole software process?