O-GPS1 - How is this works with moving + stationary object?

LFLee · 09-22-2011, 01:58 PM

Hi,

I purchased the GPS unit O-GPS1 (will ship in Oct) and this morning I thought how this thing will work with combination of stars and stationary object (tree, hills, etc)?
Will it blur the stationary object while it try to follow stars movement?

Have anyone use this to shot stars + stationary object?

If all object are stationary, will it induce shake during long exposure (like forgot to turn off SR when you place the camera on tripod w/ long exposure)?

Any samples will help!

Lee

Ubuntu_user · 09-22-2011, 03:10 PM

My [limited] understanding is that it will bur the stationary object. Why? Because in order "follow" or "track" the star[s], it moves the sensor. Thus stationary objects would be blurred.

**Lowell Goudge** · 09-22-2011, 03:39 PM

I will have to admit I have not looked at all at the functionaligty but why wouldnthe gps unit interfere with the image at all. The gos is there to record where the camera is with a resolution of +/- 1 meter and an accuracy of +/- 10-20 meters

It has no impact on the image, shake reduction or image tracking at all

thoughton · 09-22-2011, 04:45 PM

He means that aside from the GPS functionality, it includes the potentially much more interesting star tracking feature. wired.com

Quicksand · 09-22-2011, 04:46 PM

The Astrotracer function of the O-GPS1 does exactly that -- use the SR mechanism to move the sensor and eliminate star trails.

And yes, I remember seeing some early sample photos that showed nice pinpoint stars and smeared landscape. I don't know how it could work any other way!

**Lowell Goudge** · 09-22-2011, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by Quicksand

The Astrotracer function of the O-GPS1 does exactly that -- use the SR mechanism to move the sensor and eliminate star trails.

And yes, I remember seeing some early sample photos that showed nice pinpoint stars and smeared landscape. I don't know how it could work any other way!

OK I see where he is coming from now, using the SR to take the star trail out, providing the exxposure is short enough to remain within the movement of the sensor. in that case, yes it would cause any object that is stationary relitive to the camera (i.e. on earth) to blurr. More appropriately it would leve a trail

HawaiianOnline · 09-22-2011, 10:12 PM

A tracking mount would do exactly the same thing, eliminate star trails at the cost of blurring stationary objects. It does not matter if it is a dedicated tracking mount moving the entire camera, or if it's just the SR system moving the sensor.

Ubuntu_user · 09-23-2011, 07:48 AM

Just don't get anything stationary in the picture!

LFLee · 09-23-2011, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by Ubuntu_user

Just don't get anything stationary in the picture!

Hm.... in this case the composition will be a little boring, don't they?

I guess if the foreground (shadows of trees, etc) is totally dark, then it should be OK, or light the foreground with torchlight in short period of time?

In this case I might have to re-think my purchase....

Lee

**Lowell Goudge** · 09-23-2011, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by HawaiianOnline

A tracking mount would do exactly the same thing, eliminate star trails at the cost of blurring stationary objects. It does not matter if it is a dedicated tracking mount moving the entire camera, or if it's just the SR system moving the sensor.

I have not thought this through in detail, but to me, it seems that the camera would need long, lat, and position relitive to true north, and the camera angle in the sky to get this right.

Assuming it gets the first 3 from the gps and the last from the camera itself (from the accelerometers used for SR. why couldn't there be a menu to allow inputting this data without the GPS?

Gimbal · 09-26-2011, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Assuming it gets the first 3 from the gps and the last from the camera itself (from the accelerometers used for SR. why couldn't there be a menu to allow inputting this data without the GPS?

Because then you wouldn't have to buy the GPS unit, and the now unique GPS unit would just be another GPS. But yes I suggested this about a week before the O-GPS1 was announced. Or I actually suggested a variant where you first take a shot without tracking (nor GPS) and let the camera analyze the resulting star-trails and then you retake the shot and this time the camera would compensate the movement.

Since the astrotracer seems to work so-so as it is now (to many input variables and all of shaky quality) it would be cool if they added this option as a super-fine calibration where the camera analyzed the tracking error from the previous shot.

twitch · 09-26-2011, 03:40 PM

You could try exposure blending though, so one long exposure for the still objects when the sensor isn't being moved, one long exposure for the stars where it is, then blend the 2 in PP. Would work for some scenes at least, but not for all...

**interested_observer** · 09-30-2011, 12:42 PM

Here are some examples from a google image search using "o-gps1".

Its not absolutely perfect with stationary objects, but better than what you may expect...

09-22-2011, 01:58 PM	#1
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	O-GPS1 - How is this works with moving + stationary object? Hi, I purchased the GPS unit O-GPS1 (will ship in Oct) and this morning I thought how this thing will work with combination of stars and stationary object (tree, hills, etc)? Will it blur the stationary object while it try to follow stars movement? Have anyone use this to shot stars + stationary object? If all object are stationary, will it induce shake during long exposure (like forgot to turn off SR when you place the camera on tripod w/ long exposure)? Any samples will help! Lee

09-30-2011, 12:42 PM	#13
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	Here are some examples from a google image search using "o-gps1". ??????? - ??????+O-GPS1 - ????? GANREF Google Images ?StarConifer<???> : PENTAX GPS UNIT O-GPS1 2?? in ???? ???????? - ????? ‰¿Ši.com - wé‹ÊŒ§’•ƒ@¹’n@H@„—ç@@wO-GPS1xx ƒyƒ“ƒ^ƒbƒNƒX PENTAX K-5 ƒ{ƒfƒB ‚*‚Ü‚Ô‚ñ‚³‚ñ@‚ÌƒNƒ`ƒRƒ~ŒfŽ¦”Â[13438157] ‚Ì‰æ‘œ3 ‰¿Ši.com - wPENTAX GPS UNIT O-GPS1 ƒŒƒ\|[ƒgx ƒyƒ“ƒ^ƒbƒNƒX O-GPS1 ƒVƒtƒ@ƒ^ƒ“‚³‚ñ@‚ÌƒNƒ`ƒRƒ~ŒfŽ¦”Â[13300458] ‚Ì‰æ‘œ1 ?????:O-GPS1 Its not absolutely perfect with stationary objects, but better than what you may expect...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
O-gps1	janne	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	3	08-24-2011 03:47 AM
O-gps1	Mike Cash	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	12	07-13-2011 12:47 PM
O-gps1	OK5	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	3	06-05-2011 02:50 AM
Pentax M Lens works on Kx? DA L lens works on Vivitar 2X Macro Teleconverter?	Kenneth3aracing	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	05-06-2011 08:54 AM

09-22-2011, 03:10 PM	#2
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	My [limited] understanding is that it will bur the stationary object. Why? Because in order "follow" or "track" the star[s], it moves the sensor. Thus stationary objects would be blurred.

09-22-2011, 03:39 PM	#3
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	I will have to admit I have not looked at all at the functionaligty but why wouldnthe gps unit interfere with the image at all. The gos is there to record where the camera is with a resolution of +/- 1 meter and an accuracy of +/- 10-20 meters It has no impact on the image, shake reduction or image tracking at all

09-22-2011, 04:45 PM	#4
thoughton Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Saffron Walden, Essex Photos: Gallery Posts: 362	He means that aside from the GPS functionality, it includes the potentially much more interesting star tracking feature. wired.com

09-22-2011, 04:46 PM	#5
Quicksand Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area) Posts: 1,519	The Astrotracer function of the O-GPS1 does exactly that -- use the SR mechanism to move the sensor and eliminate star trails. And yes, I remember seeing some early sample photos that showed nice pinpoint stars and smeared landscape. I don't know how it could work any other way!

09-22-2011, 06:31 PM	#6
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Quicksand The Astrotracer function of the O-GPS1 does exactly that -- use the SR mechanism to move the sensor and eliminate star trails. And yes, I remember seeing some early sample photos that showed nice pinpoint stars and smeared landscape. I don't know how it could work any other way! OK I see where he is coming from now, using the SR to take the star trail out, providing the exxposure is short enough to remain within the movement of the sensor. in that case, yes it would cause any object that is stationary relitive to the camera (i.e. on earth) to blurr. More appropriately it would leve a trail

09-22-2011, 10:12 PM	#7
HawaiianOnline Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Hawaii Posts: 613	A tracking mount would do exactly the same thing, eliminate star trails at the cost of blurring stationary objects. It does not matter if it is a dedicated tracking mount moving the entire camera, or if it's just the SR system moving the sensor.

09-23-2011, 07:48 AM	#8
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	Just don't get anything stationary in the picture!

09-23-2011, 08:29 AM	#9
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ubuntu_user Just don't get anything stationary in the picture! Hm.... in this case the composition will be a little boring, don't they? I guess if the foreground (shadows of trees, etc) is totally dark, then it should be OK, or light the foreground with torchlight in short period of time? In this case I might have to re-think my purchase.... Lee

09-23-2011, 10:56 AM	#10
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by HawaiianOnline A tracking mount would do exactly the same thing, eliminate star trails at the cost of blurring stationary objects. It does not matter if it is a dedicated tracking mount moving the entire camera, or if it's just the SR system moving the sensor. I have not thought this through in detail, but to me, it seems that the camera would need long, lat, and position relitive to true north, and the camera angle in the sky to get this right. Assuming it gets the first 3 from the gps and the last from the camera itself (from the accelerometers used for SR. why couldn't there be a menu to allow inputting this data without the GPS?

09-26-2011, 08:00 AM	#11
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Assuming it gets the first 3 from the gps and the last from the camera itself (from the accelerometers used for SR. why couldn't there be a menu to allow inputting this data without the GPS? Because then you wouldn't have to buy the GPS unit, and the now unique GPS unit would just be another GPS. But yes I suggested this about a week before the O-GPS1 was announced. Or I actually suggested a variant where you first take a shot without tracking (nor GPS) and let the camera analyze the resulting star-trails and then you retake the shot and this time the camera would compensate the movement. Since the astrotracer seems to work so-so as it is now (to many input variables and all of shaky quality) it would be cool if they added this option as a super-fine calibration where the camera analyzed the tracking error from the previous shot.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-26-2011, 03:40 PM	#12
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	You could try exposure blending though, so one long exposure for the still objects when the sensor isn't being moved, one long exposure for the stars where it is, then blend the 2 in PP. Would work for some scenes at least, but not for all...