Dear barondla and Roger,
Thanks for the warm welcome! I have shown the moon picture to a few photographer friends, many of them couldn't believe it wasn't stacked or manipulated in some other way. Of course, I played around a lot with sharpening / NR / contrast in post-processing before I found good settings without it looking artificial - but it's still just one image. Very happy with the final result.
Incidentally, "Q" is pronounced "kuu" in Finnish, which means "moon". Coincidence or not?
Originally posted by barondla I also use an Olympus OM 180 f2 at times.
Nice rare lens! I have yet to purchase a lens of that kind, both due to price and weight. Maybe somewhere down the line...
Originally posted by barondla Astronomical subjects don't work easily with ball, gimbal, or pan heads. An equatorial mount makes it far easier to keep objects centered. Motorized is even better.
Yes, I haven't done much astrophotography besides shooting the moon, this might be something I'll look into later, thanks!
Originally posted by barondla The one thing I could not do without is the adapted Pentax red dot scope. This makes subject location very quick. It isn't easy to center subjects using a 300mm lens on a Q, unless a red dot scope is available.
Yes, this does seem like something that would be helpful. I checked out the Pentax RD10, which seems like a good buy in the US, but with tax and shipping to Europe I might look into other brands. There's also the case of finding an adapter for the hot shoe. Do you think something like this would work?
Blitz | Blitz Starpointer-Schnellkupplung aus Metall für DSLR
It does seem a bit short and would only allow for mounting a red dot sight at one clamp point - but it should at least not wobble side to side...?
Originally posted by barondla There is a lot of info on using the Q with adapted lenses in "the reach of the Q" thread in this forum. Look it up if you haven't read it yet.
Seems like a long read
but I'll check it out!
Here are my thoughts about a tripod and a head - I have generally not been fond of tripods due to the added bulk, but as we know, the tripod is not really optional with the Q and tele lenses
And now that I've witnessed how far you can see with the Q and a tele lens, I might be willing to lug around a tripod more often! So, both of you mention proper ball heads with medium to sturdy tripods. I've however been fascinated by the gimbal head and the idea that you are able to balance the lens for the feel of weightlessness, and adjust the friction on both axes to your liking... Of course, with my current gear, the jello effect is in play - so I might anyway still be shooting mostly stationary targets with the Q. And, the gimbal would only work properly with longer lenses that have tripod collars. So yes, it's a specialized piece of gear...
I have been looking at this side-mount gimbal
LensMaster Gimbal RH-1, which is not very heavy, at least. Fairly priced, but not cheap. Somehow, I also think that my current travel tripod, with a weight rating of 6kgs, would be in need of upgrading to something sturdier as well, should I get the gimbal head
Possible investments coming up...
The no-brand remote I got for the Q was 5 bucks, at least, and works well
Thanks a lot guys for your thoughts!
Best regards,
Markus