[Leumas]

So just came across this and, as a K1 owner, am not impressed. I'll take my 36MP with Astrotracer thank you very much

Canon unveils the EOS Ra, a full-frame mirrorless astrophotography camera: Digital Photography Review

[The Squirrel Mafia]

I'm pretty sure that this is going to be a nice camera, but it definitely doesn't appeal to me. Seems like a very niche market for that.

[tokyoscape]

It is a no-brainer for everyone interesting in Astro to switch to Pentax. IMO

[Adam]

Interesting choice to go mirrorless for astro...this is one context where an OVF can be really nice.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[totsmuyco]

I haven't done any astrophotography but, aren't Pentax cameras capable of doing it?

[tvdtvdtvd]

As a consumer I'm indifferent, (as I am with most Canon products). As a photography enthusiast, I say the more the merrier.
The real worry will be when manufacturers stop making such niche equipment.

[C_Jones]

I haven't done any astrophotography but, aren't Pentax cameras capable of doing it?

Yes, very capable.

[Leumas]

I haven't done any astrophotography but, aren't Pentax cameras capable of doing it?

Built in Astro-tracer, plus a very good performing sensor.....Yeah they're basically the only ones catering to astro photography

[PDL]

Now I apologize for the following - believe me I do....

You do not need one of those old-fashioned, heavy lensed cameras to do astrophotography --- according to Ken Rockwell... Just scroll down to Oct 31st - You will see one of the (in my opinion) ugliest astrophotography images ever made. Ken Rockwell's Photography News
I am sure that the astrophotographers on this site just did a spit take over the "quality" of the phone image.

Aside, there was a astrophotography specific Agfa SLR made back in the day. Mirror lockup and no focus screen, the camera focused by looking at the aerial image, just like an eyepiece. I never got around to getting one and it was one of the first camera body lines I saw disappear in the 70's.

[Leumas]

Now I apologize for the following - believe me I do....

You do not need one of those old-fashioned, heavy lensed cameras to do astrophotography --- according to Ken Rockwell... Just scroll down to Oct 31st - You will see one of the (in my opinion) ugliest astrophotography images ever made. Ken Rockwell's Photography News
I am sure that the astrophotographers on this site just did a spit take over the "quality" of the phone image.

Aside, there was a astrophotography specific Agfa SLR made back in the day. Mirror lockup and no focus screen, the camera focused by looking at the aerial image, just like an eyepiece. I never got around to getting one and it was one of the first camera body lines I saw disappear in the 70's.

*spits coffee on screen*

That....is hideous. Sometimes I wonder if Ken Rockwell is just trolling us....but I don't think so

[leekil]

You could go for the 645D IR, if you work for a specialized institution.

PENTAX 645Z IR | RICOH IMAGING

[LensBeginner]

That camera has no IR cut filter; astrotracer is good but has its limits.
Using that camera with a motorized mount will probably yield better results than a "normal", all-purpose camera.
So, I really don't see anything to LoL about.

[cprobertson1]

*spits coffee on screen*

That....is hideous. Sometimes I wonder if Ken Rockwell is just trolling us....but I don't think so

Eurgh! What... what happened to it! Now I'm a novice when it comes to astrophotography. Sure, I do take an alright shot now and then (mostly by accident) - but... what on Earth happened to that image! It's like if JPEG compression turned out to be the Borg and started assimilating the nearby pixels!

---

That camera has no IR cut filter; astrotracer is good but has its limits.
Using that camera with a motorized mount will probably yield better results than a "normal", all-purpose camera.
So, I really don't see anything to LoL about.

I'm afraid it is merely a modified IR filter - I personally think it would have been better without any IR filtering at all? But that's just me. The filter in the Canon astrocamera lets through more H-a regions of the spectrum than a normal IR filter, but still attenuates the other IR regions in between those Ha bands.

EOS Ra has been modified to better capture celestial objects in the night sky, but aside from that remains unchanged from its more conventional counterpart. Specifically, Canon has modified the IR filter in front of the full-frame sensor, to allow the Ra to capture as much as four times the amount of hydrogen alpha rays (656nm wavelength) compared to the standard EOS R

So it's an Ha-sensitive EOS R, which doesn't neccesarily compare favourably to the Pentax equivalent in terms of astrophotography ability, and it costs quite a bit more. It's greatest boon appears to be the modified IR filter.

But that said, I like it! That's a useful feature for astrophotography... but at the same time, it feels like a bit of an odd choice; "underwhelming" would be a good way of putting it.

I reckon the largest market for that would be existing low-spec Canon users with a few lenses who have an interest in astrophotography and want to upgrade while still having a general camera. The next biggest market by my reckoning are novices wanting to buy their first astrophotography setup, and brand recognition (the Canon name) does the rest.

It doesn't strike me as a great product - not a bad product, of course - just it seems like a missed opportunity aimed at a bit of a small market - they could have done a lot more! Perhaps that small market slice is the exact reason that more wasn't done - they don't expect to appeal to a wide audience, so make a small modification to an existing line, and use it to bolster sales from that slice, even if it isn't great.

In marketing terms, that would seem to make sense - it's less risk than making an innovative astrocamera with a more dedicated feature-set: specifically, it's less of a loss if nobody buys it, as it may still sell to "normal" users who don't want it's astro-features.

Who knows! I might be wrong! :P

---

So, hands-up, folks! Who would buy this if they didn't already have some Pentax gear?[COLOR="Silver"]

[MossyRocks]

You will see one of the (in my opinion) ugliest astrophotography images ever made.

Couldn't agree more. I'm pretty sure in an area that dark I could do better with my K2000 and my S-M-C 28/3.5 Takumar. And by better I don't mean marginally but significantly. Now let me use my the K-3, O-GPS1, and SMC A 50/1.2 and we can really talk about how phone cameras are killing DSLRs at astro photography.

[boriscleto]

I do hope all of you visiting Ken Rockwell's site made sure to make a donation to support his growing family.