[Ex Finn.]

Pentax K-5 does just dandy on Milky Way shots. Here's three samples, of course Photoshop also is a very valuable tool with such imagery.

Milky Way between Eureka, UT and Jericho Junction 6-5-2013 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Milky Way | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

All sizes | Milky Way _IGP9041iv | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Those are spectacular. Thanks for sharing.

[bigrex]

Those are really spectacular. Thanks for sharing.

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words, glad you enjoyed them. The dark location also makes the shots possible, makes all the difference in the world.

[Ex Finn.]

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words, glad you enjoyed them. The dark location also makes the shots possible, makes all the difference in the world.

Yup, last time I experienced a dark sky was in Arizona high desert, it was pretty impressive. Eastern seaboard where I am is not very good for astro-"anything".

Cheers.

[k5astro]

Pentax K-5 does just dandy on Milky Way shots. Here's three samples, of course Photoshop also is a very valuable tool with such imagery.

Milky Way between Eureka, UT and Jericho Junction 6-5-2013 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Milky Way | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

All sizes | Milky Way _IGP9041iv | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

O!M!G! That's probably the best image of the milky way that I've seen. I also watched the slideshow of your photo stream. Excellent landscapes. Some seemed like k5iis resolution but for some reason the exif info doesn't show the camera.

The exif data of the milky way photo doesn't give any information of importance. Can you give some details on that? Thanks.

[Tsuken]

Pentax K-5 does just dandy on Milky Way shots. Here's three samples, of course Photoshop also is a very valuable tool with such imagery.

Milky Way between Eureka, UT and Jericho Junction 6-5-2013 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Milky Way | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

All sizes | Milky Way _IGP9041iv | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Wonderful!! Really really well done.

[bigrex]

O!M!G! That's probably the best image of the milky way that I've seen. I also watched the slideshow of your photo stream. Excellent landscapes. Some seemed like k5iis resolution but for some reason the exif info doesn't show the camera.

The exif data of the milky way photo doesn't give any information of importance. Can you give some details on that? Thanks.

Thanks! I think that might have been during the period when I couldn't get any EXIF data to show up on a newer version of Flickr, I still have problems with correct info. showing up when I stitch and blend multiple photos together. Most of the Milky Way photos are a dozen or so stitched images. Sometimes Photoshop also has issues with stitching night time sky images.

Anyway, for instance, on this image: Exif | Milky Way between Eureka, UT and Jericho Junction 6-5-2013 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! The EXIF data should read something like f/2.4 10 sec. 35mm Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon iso 1600 (or 3200), can't remember which on this one. Formula for no star trails is around 600 divided by your camera lens mm, so 600/55mm=10 sec. *Remember on the cropped frame sensor a 35mm is equivalent to about a 55mm lens. On some of the photos I used a 20mm and 14mm lens, so the minimum shutter speed before star trails occur would be different. Some prefer 500/lens mm, since minor trails still exist with the 600 calculation.

If you are interested, here is a brief video

You Tube

You Tube

with more about what I did to edit the Milky Way photos once they were in Photoshop. I even have an inexpensive 6 hour online course, some of the videos cover night sky photography, but you can personal message me if you want more info. on that, probably not the best place to directly promote it in this thread.

On the resolution, I use a certain method for online sharpening that helps a lot with perceived online resolution. Basically, I downsize it to twice the online size, oversharpen it and then reduce the size again.

...Ok, EXIF data did show up on this image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rxbg/7835032894/meta/in/set-72157635001962706

[bigrex]

Wonderful!! Really really well done.

Thank you sir!

[Tsuken]

I'm amazed at what you've got out of 10 seconds at f/2.4. Dark sky makes all the difference; I have relatively dark sky for a semi-rural/semi-suburban location, but it's really not dark. I must go exploring further up the Mountains..,

[k5astro]

Thanks! I think that might have been during the period when I couldn't get any EXIF data to show up on a newer version of Flickr, I still have problems with correct info. showing up when I stitch and blend multiple photos together. Most of the Milky Way photos are a dozen or so stitched images. Sometimes Photoshop also has issues with stitching night time sky images.

Anyway, for instance, on this image: Exif | Milky Way between Eureka, UT and Jericho Junction 6-5-2013 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! The EXIF data should read something like f/2.4 10 sec. 35mm Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon iso 1600 (or 3200), can't remember which on this one. Formula for no star trails is around 600 divided by your camera lens mm, so 600/55mm=10 sec. *Remember on the cropped frame sensor a 35mm is equivalent to about a 55mm lens. On some of the photos I used a 20mm and 14mm lens, so the minimum shutter speed before star trails occur would be different. Some prefer 500/lens mm, since minor trails still exist with the 600 calculation.

If you are interested, here is a brief video How to Create a Milky Way Photo - Brief Overview with more about what I did to edit the Milky Way photos once they were in Photoshop. I even have an inexpensive 6 hour online course, some of the videos cover night sky photography, but you can personal message me if you want more info. on that, probably not the best place to directly promote it in this thread.

On the resolution, I use a certain method for online sharpening that helps a lot with perceived online resolution. Basically, I downsize it to twice the online size, oversharpen it and then reduce the size again.

...Ok, EXIF data did show up on this image: Exif | Milky Way _IGP9061x | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Thanks! I'll bookmark this for reference.

[Sage97]

I'm amazed at what you've got out of 10 seconds at f/2.4. Dark sky makes all the difference; I have relatively dark sky for a semi-rural/semi-suburban location, but it's really not dark. I must go exploring further up the Mountains..,

I agree. This was my best effort 30 mins or so away from the city. I too will have to venture further out into the darkness.

[Tsuken]

I agree. This was my best effort 30 mins or so away from the city. I too will have to venture further out into the darkness.

That's really nice nonetheless, but yeah. Need darker skies for *those* Milky Way pics. Happily I should have some near-pitch-black areas not too far away from me - so I must get on to trying them

[Sage97]

That's really nice nonetheless, but yeah. Need darker skies for *those* Milky Way pics. Happily I should have some near-pitch-black areas not too far away from me - so I must get on to trying them

Thank you and good luck. Would love to see what you can come up with.

[Tsuken]

Thank you and good luck. Would love to see what you can come up with.

Cheers. My best from the front garden are a couple of pages back. I've noticed some coma and stuff in them now, so here's hoping wifey gets me the astrotracer unit for Christmas, and I can stop down a bit.

[tonypysm]

Taken in Dongchuan Red Land, a famous seneric place in China.Pentax K5,Sigma 28mm/1.8,Skytracker 0.5X tracked.

[Stone G.]

......well rather in the all too bright, light polluted and cloudy evening sky.

November and begin December has been almost nothing but clouds for me, but yesterday was a quite suny day with a beautiful sunset in blue skies So, about an hour after sunset, I grabbed my K-5, FA 50mm f/1.4 and my O-GPS1 and went out on my balcony just to try a few shots in the northwesernly direction - straight towards my town centre. Due to the light pollution I cannot see a single star with the naked eye, but living at 56 degrees north, comet Lovejoy is still fairly high in the sky at taht time of the day so, why not give it a try now that ISON has disintegrated and evaporated out of sight for good?

So, I did my calibration and pointed my camera as much in the direction towards Lovejoy as my apartment building permits and - - - - saw that a massive cloud band had rolled in during the few minuts I was doing my calibration. Lovejoy would soon sink below the roof top and I was getting desperate as the cloud band slowly rolled by. Half an hour later, there were holes large enough to justify a few shots and I got some pictures like this one:


Astrotracer image: Pentax K-5 with smc Pentax FA-50mm @ f/1.4. 20 second exposure at ISO 100.

And isn't there someting fuzzy to the right just above the roof? Indeed there is:


Crop of above image. Click to see almost full size (90%) crop.

I managed to get 9 images without too many cloud patches. Still, drifting clouds and light pollution does make stacking and post-processing a rather hopless affair, but this is about as good as I could get it:


Crop of stack of 9 images inj Deep Sky stacker post-processed in PhotoImpact. Click to see 100 pct. crop.

Note the respectable brightness of the comet as compared to the surrounding stars and the very long tail (not too easily seen in this image). Indeed for those of you with a better sky, Comet Lovejoy should be a very rewarding target!