Should Green18 go back to his old icon

Oh man..... Cheech might get me if I hijack her thread. I'll offer up one of them

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks. I had read about and then looked at a few Takahashi refractor telescopes, and the specs claimed them capable of covering a FF sensor, but others either haven't made this clear or I've missed/misinterpreted something. At this point in time I've absolutely no desire to again own a crop sensor camera of any brand, and is a big reason why I ask. I've nothing against them and am well aware of the pros, cons, etc, but they're just not an ideal fit for my shooting style. The same goes for again owning a DSLR. I spent most of my life shooting either a Nikon F, F2, or Leica M4, obviously in the film days, but today's mirrorless is just a better fit personally.

Being as this would be an new area for me, it would be nice to be able to allow my primary equipment to do double duty, hence the image circle question. I also do remember the "star eater" issue, but thanks for addressing it nonetheless.

Are longer exposures preferable to stacking, or does it depend on the situation?

 

I'm not to sure about Takahashi but I think their FSQ 130 line is full frame exposure capable, but I don't think their 120 line is.

I use both DX 24mp and FX 24mp. The DX allows more cropability though (approx.) 2 stops longer exposure. Though I haven't tested high density FF sensors (d800/850).

Just like with lenses a larger "aperture" allows more light in. For Telescopes the width of the optical scope tube - the wider of course allows more light to the sensor than a smaller diameter in the same amount of time.

I think the above first nebulae was with a single image 5 inch reflector, on a D7000 16mp DX sensor. The 2nd was 12inch multiple stacked images including multiple light colors. I was also testing full spectrum sensors where you block out areas of the spectrum, then stack them all. Stacking allows shorter exposure (less vibrations) to show a stacked more crisp detail image than one super long exposure - you can also control noise better and don't need a high end tracking system. Also limited spectrum images. But complexity skyrockets.

Problem is refractors due to the cost of the lenses (and additional weight) cost more than Reflectors. Though the better more accurate mirrors you get in a reflector and the prices skyrocket.

A good Refractor will have more detail than a lower cost Reflector.
My 600mm lens offers better cropability details of Saturn/Jupiter, then my 1900mm 5inch or 2,000mm 12inch reflector telescope. Although, do deep space and the lens suffers dramatically in my comparison tests unless you find a nice 8 inch refractor for light gathering color for some reason LOL.

but it all varies. My tests are limited to what I have and how actually clear the skies are to the telescope, not the eye. My 12" reflector scope has mounted a smaller refractor or a small 3 or 5 inch reflector when I put it on.

My main thing with cameras .. as I've gotten older is I use DSLR simply because I have them before mirrorless became more available. I nearly switched to SONY mirrorless but the star eater issue came out.

But remote shutter either mechanical, electronic or remotely is important as is a flippy type screen (saves my back and time). Many cameras can have the same sensor, with just the electronics and software being the varying factor. But when it's dark your shutter speeds and stability comes wildly into play. very minor vibrations (just you sneaking away) can show slight shifts in the images with pinpoint stars on them once you pixel peep with images greater than 1/6th of a second - thus stacking may help.

too much to type in a single post ...

 

Well, when I joined green18 had a different icon. I was never too sure about that bag thing he replaced it with....

 

I miss the P-38...wait, who's @green18 again?

 

He's the guy who landed the B-52 on the moon. Don't you read the Enquirer

 

Hey, any pictures of the transit of Mercury? It always gets me when people tell me they have seen Mercury in the night sky...

 

While out taking Milky Way shots this summer there was a rather loud and rude lady insisting she could clearly see Orion's Belt. Of course she refused to even consider that she may be wrong, but as they say... ignorance is bliss.

 

Thanks, Jim. I really do appreciate it and also apologize for not saying so sooner. I thought I had, but must've never finished or sent it.

As you can probably tell, being so new to this I'm really at a loss as to where to begin other than what amounts to mostly aimless searching. While I had heard of cloudynights and remember reading there when considering lens options for night landscapes, I completely forgot about it and also didn't realize yahoo groups still existed.

My home is surrounded by others with fairly significant light pollution, plus I've a number of large trees that impede a (sizable) clear view of the sky. This considered I'm probably going to have to keep an eye towards portability and only makes this that much more difficult. All the necessary homework will give me something else to do this winter though.

Thanks again!

 

Learning is so much fun !!!! Keeps us young and delays dementia !!

 

Cheech......green18 is looking at you quietly as you speak......