[Mikesul]

Perhaps they need to have precise data on the lens in order to do the calculations.

[MossyRocks]

Perhaps they need to have precise data on the lens in order to do the calculations.

I know for the GPS based one that is what was required but with the GPS-less it shouldn't be an issue unless it is using that to calculate the maximum astrotracer length.

[Paul the Sunman]

One circumstance where the GPS-less astrotracer probably won't work is for a total solar eclipse. Even if it can lock onto stars during totality (unlikely), you don't want to waste 30 seconds of that precious full eclipse while it acquires and calculates. By the way, a long exposure is required to capture to streamers in the extended corona.

Vicuña, Chile, July 2019


1/30 sec doesn't give you much of the streamers

[kwb]

You aren't helping me stave off the urge to buy that camera. I was hoping to get one eventually used when my K-3 or K-3ii gives up the ghost but that plan may likely change.

Hey @MossyRocks it's not my fault, it's Ricoh! How dare they make a true innovation to make casual astrophotography a totally hands- and pain-free experience to lure you into paying serious chunk of money?

They first released GSP-based Astrotracer, that was good enough to get you and me mildly addicted. To get good results, we were even WILLING to contort ourselves in a funny way to rotate our cameras around all three axes for calibration. They knew this, and now they're selling this magic so we don't have to do funny calibration dance any more.

Evil genius, but I welcome that!

[MossyRocks]

Hey @MossyRocks it's not my fault, it's Ricoh! How dare they make a true innovation to make casual astrophotography a totally hands- and pain-free experience to lure you into paying serious chunk of money?They first released GSP-based Astrotracer, that was good enough to get you and me mildly addicted. To get good results, we were even WILLING to contort ourselves in a funny way to rotate our cameras around all three axes for calibration. They knew this, and now they're selling this magic so we don't have to do funny calibration dance any more.Evil genius, but I welcome that!

For me it is more than casual and the GPS based one can give some great results even in fairly light polluted locations. I do appreciate that they are continuing to support this unique feature that does set them apart from others and even the previous iterations provide some excellent results. I mean I managed these from my local "dark" site using a K-3, O-GPS1, giant wooden tripod, and my 400mm from the 80s (granted that 400 is one of the best lenses ever made by Pentax but it is still a design from the 80s).

M42 - The Great Orion Nebula and Running Man:


M45 - The Pleiades (also known as The Seven Sisters, or for those in Japan Subaru):


M31 - The Andromeda Galaxy:


My big problem is there are so many things in the night sky to shoot and I just can't manage to get to all of them. With a K-3iii now on the way I can run 4 bodies at night now with 2 doing astrotracer (at 400mm and 300mm) with 2 bodies riding on the little equatorial with some short lenses like dual 50s various shorter lenses.

[kwb]

Hi MossyRocks, thanks for sharing great photos, I recognize that Andromeda one!

For me it is more than casual and the GPS based one can give some great results even in fairly light polluted locations.

When I wrote that Astrotracer Type 3 is "a true innovation to make casual astrophotography a totally hands- and pain-free experience", I simply meant that. That's what amazes me the most, that's the differentiating factor for me as I haven't seen anything like this before. It's on top of the game in this regard. I don't mean that it's only good for casual purposes.

(OTOH, for serious purposes, nothing I saw are hands-free, Astrotracer is no exception.)

[MossyRocks]

When I wrote that Astrotracer Type 3 is "a true innovation to make casual astrophotography a totally hands- and pain-free experience", I simply meant that. That's what amazes me the most, that's the differentiating factor for me as I haven't seen anything like this before. It's on top of the game in this regard. I don't mean that it's only good for casual purposes.(OTOH, for serious purposes, nothing I saw are hands-free, Astrotracer is no exception.)

I fully understand what you meant. And yes I am aware of it's limitations. However from what I have seen from your shots and others also indicates that I likely will be able to substantially increase my shot length and still get the single shot results I want. Halving the number of shots but lowering the ISO means with a better performant camera means I will end up with better end results, less time freezing my rear off, and shorter integration times. Well I will probably spend as much time out as I can so that just means even better results.


The original astrotracer was a really great piece of engineering and for me and others are well loved and used feature. Making it better only gives those of us who use it reason to upgrade and stick with Pentax which is probably why Ricoh is supporting it. I believe Olympus (maybe it was someone else) was planning on implementing something similar to the original astrotracer now that a patent has likely expired so this may be Ricoh pushing their face in it.

As far as hands free I get that nothing is. Some things are mostly set and forget like an equatorial but there is the whole set part and one still needs to babysit things and check focus from time to time, replace batteries. With astrotracer you get to be the one to keep things mostly framed up and reposition so a lot less on the set part but more babysitting.

[Kunzite]

Perhaps they should add a Type 4 Astrotracer, one that would get the location info from the smartphone - and the direction would be input manually. To be used when Type 3 doesn't work (and you don't have a GPS unit).

I've only briefly tried the Astrotracer, and not in the best conditions; just to see how it worked. Not so well, I'm afraid, perhaps because of the "chicken dance" calibration?

[gwiazdor]

The idea of Astrotracer Type3 is genius.

Perhaps they should add a Type 4 Astrotracer, one that would get the location info from the smartphone - and the direction would be input manually

Sounds interesting, but I'm afraid there will be issue with precision data. On the other hand the worst that coud happen is blurry picture, so hy not?

[MossyRocks]

Perhaps they should add a Type 4 Astrotracer, one that would get the location info from the smartphone - and the direction would be input manually. To be used when Type 3 doesn't work (and you don't have a GPS unit).

but I'm afraid there will be issue with precision data.

I'm not sure that woudl really work. The position data isn't super critical so being off some isn't a big deal, however the compass reading is much more critical and for that having a smartphone provide it or even hand held compass will likely throw things off unless you point the compass perfectly in the same direction as the lens is facing. I think that type 3 astrotracer would likely be even more reliable since it would appear that all it needs is to "see" some stars in the sky and if your camera can't see stars in the sky why are you attempting to use astrotracer anyway. All in all while a proposed type 4 initially sounds interesting I don't think it would be useful or very functional although pulling GPS and good enough compass data for tagging shots from a phone app would be useful.

Not so well, I'm afraid, perhaps because of the "chicken dance" calibration?

Calibration can be a pain, but also finding a spot where things to interfear with the compass is key. Things like your vehicle, tripod, tripod head, fence posts, buried or overhead power lines, being near a transformer, being near an electric motor, etc all will throw it off, even the ground can if you are in an area with high iron concentrations (the Iron Range of northern MN for example). The fact that type 3 eliminates the GPS, level sensors, and the compass, which was the biggest issue for getting good tracking, means it should become much more reliable.

[slartibartfast01]

I'm not sure that woudl really work. The position data isn't super critical so being off some isn't a big deal, however the compass reading is much more critical and for that having a smartphone provide it or even hand held compass will likely throw things off unless you point the compass perfectly in the same direction as the lens is facing. I think that type 3 astrotracer would likely be even more reliable since it would appear that all it needs is to "see" some stars in the sky and if your camera can't see stars in the sky why are you attempting to use astrotracer anyway. All in all while a proposed type 4 initially sounds interesting I don't think it would be useful or very functional although pulling GPS and good enough compass data for tagging shots from a phone app would be useful.




Calibration can be a pain, but also finding a spot where things to interfear with the compass is key. Things like your vehicle, tripod, tripod head, fence posts, buried or overhead power lines, being near a transformer, being near an electric motor, etc all will throw it off, even the ground can if you are in an area with high iron concentrations (the Iron Range of northern MN for example). The fact that type 3 eliminates the GPS, level sensors, and the compass, which was the biggest issue for getting good tracking, means it should become much more reliable.

Do you think it might be possible to have an automatic calibration routine for the 0-Gps1 using a similar technique to the GPS-less Astrotracer?

[MossyRocks]

Do you think it might be possible to have an automatic calibration routine for the 0-Gps1 using a similar technique to the GPS-less Astrotracer?

Possibly but I'm not sure what benefit that would bring as the camera can figure every thing out it needs from using the GPS-less astrotracer so why bother with the added effort of correcting things from the GPS/compass? The only thing I could think of is as a way to calibrate the compass, and level sensors so that if they are off it can be corrected but having a procedure for that seems like it would be more involved (take a minimum of 3 shots) and require a bunch more math for very little benefit.

[slartibartfast01]

Possibly but I'm not sure what benefit that would bring as the camera can figure every thing out it needs from using the GPS-less astrotracer so why bother with the added effort of correcting things from the GPS/compass? The only thing I could think of is as a way to calibrate the compass, and level sensors so that if they are off it can be corrected but having a procedure for that seems like it would be more involved (take a minimum of 3 shots) and require a bunch more math for very little benefit.

For the circumstances when the GPS-less astrotracer doesn't work. I believe shots including anything other than the sky don't work so well.

[gwiazdor]

I'm not sure that woudl really work. The position data isn't super critical so being off some isn't a big deal, however the compass reading is much more critical (...)

That's what I meant, Compass data from smartphone is very low precision (from what I've seen).

[redpit]

For me it is more than casual and the GPS based one can give some great results even in fairly light polluted locations. I do appreciate that they are continuing to support this unique feature that does set them apart from others and even the previous iterations provide some excellent results. I mean I managed these from my local "dark" site using a K-3, O-GPS1, giant wooden tripod, and my 400mm from the 80s (granted that 400 is one of the best lenses ever made by Pentax but it is still a design from the 80s).

M42 - The Great Orion Nebula and Running Man:


M45 - The Pleiades (also known as The Seven Sisters, or for those in Japan Subaru):


M31 - The Andromeda Galaxy:


My big problem is there are so many things in the night sky to shoot and I just can't manage to get to all of them. With a K-3iii now on the way I can run 4 bodies at night now with 2 doing astrotracer (at 400mm and 300mm) with 2 bodies riding on the little equatorial with some short lenses like dual 50s various shorter lenses.

These images are from another planet! Congratulations, I wish I could take some like these, but I'd had to spend much time researching and preparing and I'm not in the mood at this period (not to mention the lack of 400/2.8, but with my Tamron 300/2.8 I could try to produce something similar). So I enjoy viewing these superb shots from top class astrophotographers like you @MossyRocks