[Docrwm]

Really impressive! I think i will definitely be going for it once ive tested with what gear i have first.

The O-GPS1 is on my short list too. Keep us informed on what you learn as you go through this process.

[captainbert]

The O-GPS1 is on my short list too. Keep us informed on what you learn as you go through this process.

I certainly will indeed!

[pixelsaurus]

If you want to go the DIY route, you could always make a barn door tracker
Astronomy Boy: Barn Door Tracker

[captainbert]

If you want to go the DIY route, you could always make a barn door tracker
Astronomy Boy: Barn Door Tracker

Thank you, alas i have absolutely no DIY skills whatsoever!

[VTerlakyPhoto]

I have to agree with others, first get out and try your equipment (and techniques) before investing in new gear. I would die to have either your Sigma 10-20 or DA 15... but alas, I only have an old FA35-80 and FA100-300, but there is still a lot of good shots to be had with those! Just as an example, here is my online astrophoto gallery. All images taken with my K-r and the 35-80, except the moon close-ups were taken through the telescope, and the last moonset (9th picture) and the orion nebula were shot with the 100-300.

A few months back I also wrote a short introductory article on astrophotogaphy for another website, you can find that here. It discusses the basics (e.g. equipment, settings etc..) to how to shoot in specific scenarios (e.g. star trails in light-polluted skies, star scenes without trails etc...), and it may have some useful tips for you. Lastly - go out there, try new things and enjoy!

[captainbert]

I have to agree with others, first get out and try your equipment (and techniques) before investing in new gear. I would die to have either your Sigma 10-20 or DA 15... but alas, I only have an old FA35-80 and FA100-300, but there is still a lot of good shots to be had with those! Just as an example, here is my online astrophoto gallery. All images taken with my K-r and the 35-80, except the moon close-ups were taken through the telescope, and the last moonset (9th picture) and the orion nebula were shot with the 100-300.

A few months back I also wrote a short introductory article on astrophotogaphy for another website, you can find that here. It discusses the basics (e.g. equipment, settings etc..) to how to shoot in specific scenarios (e.g. star trails in light-polluted skies, star scenes without trails etc...), and it may have some useful tips for you. Lastly - go out there, try new things and enjoy!

Yeah thanks for that. It does kind of almost feel like cheating in a way to start off with a device which would make it the whole process a lot easier without doing it the way everyone else does first. I will definitely be going for the Astrotracer as it does seem amazing but i'll leave it for a couple of months (funds permitting at that stage)once ive explored shooting with what ive got first. I had a look through all your images and was certainly impressed indeed! I particularly loved numbers 18 and 19 and that is exactly the type of scenes i am after with trees in the foreground. Very beautiful and thanks for your sound advice too!

[Docrwm]

I have to agree with others, first get out and try your equipment (and techniques) before investing in new gear. I would die to have either your Sigma 10-20 or DA 15... but alas, I only have an old FA35-80 and FA100-300, but there is still a lot of good shots to be had with those! Just as an example, here is my online astrophoto gallery. All images taken with my K-r and the 35-80, except the moon close-ups were taken through the telescope, and the last moonset (9th picture) and the orion nebula were shot with the 100-300.

A few months back I also wrote a short introductory article on astrophotogaphy for another website, you can find that here. It discusses the basics (e.g. equipment, settings etc..) to how to shoot in specific scenarios (e.g. star trails in light-polluted skies, star scenes without trails etc...), and it may have some useful tips for you. Lastly - go out there, try new things and enjoy!

Thanks for the links. When I went to your article on the other site the sidebar ad was for a Pentax O-GPS1

[VTerlakyPhoto]

Another thing I should've said in my earlier post: you mentioned that you want to have foreground objects in the scene and also use the astrotracer. I would suggest against that, and this is why. You said that you essentially want star scapes (frozen stars), not star trails, and for that at first glance the astrotracer is a great tool. However, the astrotracer works by actually moving the sensor inside the camera to track the stars - and that means that anything anchored to the ground will turn out blurry. So you will end up with perfect pinpoint stars, but with a foreground that looks like your camera moved. Another reason you won't need the astrotracer is because you're going to use an ultra-wide angle lens. It doesn't matter if you're using your 10-20, 15, or even a new 14 mm Samyang, they are all very very wide angles. With those you can shoot up to about 30 without any really noticeable star trails, and up to about 45 seconds with still acceptable star blur. So you really don't need the astrotracer at all!

If you haven't gone out yet, I predict that with your K-5 you'll get very nice shots at ISO 1600 and with either your Sigma at f4 or the DA at f5, and a 25-30 second exposure. Depending on the light pollution in your area (you should get to an as dark place as possible of course) you will have to adjust those settings, but you'll be very close. With that you'll find that as long as you focused well the stars are essentially pinpricks or tiny (few pixel long) streaks, which you'll only see as streaks at full 100% magnification.

[VTerlakyPhoto]

Thanks for the links. When I went to your article on the other site the sidebar ad was for a Pentax O-GPS1

That's funny! I run Firefox with AdBlocker, I didn't even know there was an ad there

[captainbert]

Another thing I should've said in my earlier post: you mentioned that you want to have foreground objects in the scene and also use the astrotracer. I would suggest against that, and this is why. You said that you essentially want star scapes (frozen stars), not star trails, and for that at first glance the astrotracer is a great tool. However, the astrotracer works by actually moving the sensor inside the camera to track the stars - and that means that anything anchored to the ground will turn out blurry. So you will end up with perfect pinpoint stars, but with a foreground that looks like your camera moved. Another reason you won't need the astrotracer is because you're going to use an ultra-wide angle lens. It doesn't matter if you're using your 10-20, 15, or even a new 14 mm Samyang, they are all very very wide angles. With those you can shoot up to about 30 without any really noticeable star trails, and up to about 45 seconds with still acceptable star blur. So you really don't need the astrotracer at all!

If you haven't gone out yet, I predict that with your K-5 you'll get very nice shots at ISO 1600 and with either your Sigma at f4 or the DA at f5, and a 25-30 second exposure. Depending on the light pollution in your area (you should get to an as dark place as possible of course) you will have to adjust those settings, but you'll be very close. With that you'll find that as long as you focused well the stars are essentially pinpricks or tiny (few pixel long) streaks, which you'll only see as streaks at full 100% magnification.

That's very good to know. I had kind of presumed such problems regarding blurred foreground and star scapes would be a problem but i presumed there was a post production of combining both shots but maybe that is not possible or realistic. All in all it seems i should be good to go once the next clear night comes about. Thanks for that!

[Docrwm]

Another thing I should've said in my earlier post: you mentioned that you want to have foreground objects in the scene and also use the astrotracer. I would suggest against that, and this is why. You said that you essentially want star scapes (frozen stars), not star trails, and for that at first glance the astrotracer is a great tool. However, the astrotracer works by actually moving the sensor inside the camera to track the stars - and that means that anything anchored to the ground will turn out blurry. So you will end up with perfect pinpoint stars, but with a foreground that looks like your camera moved. Another reason you won't need the astrotracer is because you're going to use an ultra-wide angle lens. It doesn't matter if you're using your 10-20, 15, or even a new 14 mm Samyang, they are all very very wide angles. With those you can shoot up to about 30 without any really noticeable star trails, and up to about 45 seconds with still acceptable star blur. So you really don't need the astrotracer at all!

If you haven't gone out yet, I predict that with your K-5 you'll get very nice shots at ISO 1600 and with either your Sigma at f4 or the DA at f5, and a 25-30 second exposure. Depending on the light pollution in your area (you should get to an as dark place as possible of course) you will have to adjust those settings, but you'll be very close. With that you'll find that as long as you focused well the stars are essentially pinpricks or tiny (few pixel long) streaks, which you'll only see as streaks at full 100% magnification.

I was planning on trying this the next time we go to the observatory at the local science museum for the kids. They're north of the city and have some small mountains between the actual observatory and the city. It's not the same as being in the Cariboo Mountains of British Columbia, but its the best I can do on a regular basis.

[mikeSF]

i've been dabbling in landscape astrophotography using the O-GPS1 and haven't really driven out to a place with dark skies; so far contending with massive light pollution.

I do shoot one with the tracer on and then a second shot with it off at the same exposure and then blend the two with a layer mask. This is easy and fairly effective.

I use both lenses you mentioned, the Sigma 10-20 and the DA15. I usually stop down a few clicks, but you should be able to get decent results at wide open apertures.

[mikeSF]

this last one takes advantage of the rectilinear lens distortion at 10mm (Sigma 10-20) which causes the clouds to appear to be fanning outward instead of traveling all in the same direction, resulting in an effect that resembles rays emanating from behind this shed.

Heavenly Shed

[Docrwm]

i've been dabbling in landscape astrophotography using the O-GPS1 and haven't really driven out to a place with dark skies; so far contending with massive light pollution.

I do shoot one with the tracer on and then a second shot with it off at the same exposure and then blend the two with a layer mask. This is easy and fairly effective.

I use both lenses you mentioned, the Sigma 10-20 and the DA15. I usually stop down a few clicks, but you should be able to get decent results at wide open apertures.

Mike, I'm impressed - as usual - with your photos. Would you mind explaining the process and settings involved in first shot (Cell tower + sky)?

[mikeSF]

Mike, I'm impressed - as usual - with your photos. Would you mind explaining the process and settings involved in first shot (Cell tower + sky)?

sure Doc,
this was the night of the meteor shower (Aug 13th). I went east toward the mountains to find a darkish sky. Unfortunately, upon arriving at this row of towers around 10pm, the glow from Sacramento was really lighting up the sky and there was a heavy bank of clouds rolling in. Ended up waiting til 3am before it started to break up. There were many meteors, but i didnt manage to catch much.
This is the Sigma 10-20 at 10mm and wide open, ISO 2500. It is a 2.5 minute exposure. I shot one with the O-GPS on and then clicked it off and shot another without any tracking then did a layer mask in Photoshop. This was was trickier to do than most because the star trails were very evident in the gridwork of the tower and my masking was a little sloppy. Rather than keep the black sky that was recorded, I boosted the exposure to reveal a few more stars and lighten the sky. This tower is bathed in red light from the blinking red light atop the adjacent tower.