Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: E-510 for Astrophotography

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default E-510 for Astrophotography

    Have an adapter coming to attach my 510 body to the diagonal on my telescope. Has anyone used this camera for lunar, planetary or DSO photography? Any tips for camera settings welcomed.

    Larry

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by woodworker View Post
    Have an adapter coming to attach my 510 body to the diagonal on my telescope. Has anyone used this camera for lunar, planetary or DSO photography? Any tips for camera settings welcomed.
    Use Live View to gauge how vulnerable your telescope is to vibration, and how long it takes to die down, and set the mirror prefire interval accordingly. Use ISO100 for anything with an exposure over a couple seconds. Stack if you're going to shoot anything longer than a few minutes. Image Stabilization probably won't be useful on any tripod mounted scope.

    More generally, I've yet to find a focal reducer / field flattener for either refractor or catadioptric that was worthwhile. They've introduced more aberrations than any field curvature I've found across the fourthirds sensor.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    694
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    You might take a look at Cloudy Nights astronomy forums. There are some folks using Olympus equipment there. A fellow by the name of Clive Owen was using an E-500 with good success last time I visited. Good luck.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St. Peters, Missouri USA
    Posts
    1,111
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Larry, check out this Yahoo Oly Astro Group site,, much info there and see the 510 all over in discussions,,

    http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/O...rophotography/

    Alec who contributes a lot here on Astronomy questions is also a member and contributor there,,

    Derry

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    100
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    I'm interested also. I have an E-520 on order, and hope to dabble in AP with it. I've not done any AP as yet, but one of my reasons for getting a DSLR was so that I can try hooking it up to my 3 refractors. Sounds like fun :-)

    Sorry I can't give any advice. Good luck with it though, and would be interested to hear how you go!

    Oh, the CN suggestion is a good one. Heaps of knowledgeable people over there. IceInSpace is another good astronomy forum. I'll certainly be trawling the threads there soon myself.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Thanks guys, every little bit helps. The scope is an 11" cat pier mounted in an observatory. I do frequent Cloudy Nights; probably woud be the best place to post but was curious if anyone here was involved. I also have a Philips webcam and have downloaded Astro Capture for image capture and Registax for stacking. I thought it might be easier getting my feet wet with the 510 before advancing to the webcam.

    Larry

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Phoenix Arizona
    Posts
    1,566
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    3DPan and Olyinaz both post here regularly and have shown some amazing shots done with telescopes and Oly equipment. A seach for their posts should bring up some good info.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    112
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    The yahoo Oly DSLR astro group is a great resource. Alec posted a set of test images with various E volt cameras in his album there. The 510 does a good job, but I prefer the earlier E500 because its chip has better red response than others.
    I don't post pics here because with dial-up it's too difficult.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMinnerath View Post
    The 510 does a good job, but I prefer the earlier E500 because its chip has better red response than others.
    This is a good point. Likely not just a CCD vs MOS effect, but also a very strong IR cut filter on everything since the E-330. It doesn't just cut "true" IR, but also deep red. In particular, h-alpha is strongly attenuated, which makes deep space much more tiresome to photograph.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by heavy wind lover View Post
    Larry, check out this Yahoo Oly Astro Group site,, much info there and see the 510 all over in discussions,,

    http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/O...rophotography/


    Derry
    I ran across this site the other day and will be spending time perusing it.

    Larry

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    162
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by acme View Post
    More generally, I've yet to find a focal reducer / field flattener for either refractor or catadioptric that was worthwhile. They've introduced more aberrations than any field curvature I've found across the fourthirds sensor.
    I'll be sure to report your experiences to Roland Christen .

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by archer View Post
    I'll be sure to report your experiences to Roland Christen .
    I doubt Roland is using fourthirds sensors, or even sensors with AA filters stuck on them. If he were, and found curvature excessive, I'm sure he could throw sufficient funds into engineering an effective FR/FF, but expect to sign a very large cheque years in advance if you want one for yourself...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    112
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Actually there are good ones and there are not so good ones. And the best will cost you some coin.
    Most critical thing with most I've seen or used is correct position in the light train so they can do their job. Depending on equipment, it can take some digging to find just the right spacers to get everything set up.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMinnerath View Post
    Most critical thing with most I've seen or used is correct position in the light train so they can do their job. Depending on equipment, it can take some digging to find just the right spacers to get everything set up.
    Without doubt the spacing is critical, but I did follow the specs to within a couple mm, as well as a little closer and significantly further out. The Celestron SCT one added coma, and the WO one (different scopes, obviously, and probably two of the most common FR/FFs out there) added coma plus CA. In neither case was field curvature obviously a problem across the fourthirds sensor to begin with, but I was hoping to use more of the image circle. The result was faster, but certainly inferior to the unaugmented scope.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,141
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    I have noticed that I prefer the results out of my E1 over the 330 or E3. Have mine mounted on a Celestron C8+, which is, in essence, an 1800mm F10 lens.

    For planets and the moon, I'm finding that I prefer my old Nikkor 400 with 2x teleconverter to the C8. Less distortion.

    Hate to say it, but people using webcams and averaging the noise out over multiple exposures have turned in some pretty astounding results, especially with planets.
    E3, E1, E330, EP1, EM5
    ZD: 7-14, 8FE, PL25 1.4, 14-54, 35-100, 50-200, 70-300 50 Macro, EX-25
    MZD: 12-50, 45 1.8, 14-150
    Nikkor: 105 1.8, 400 3.5, TC301 teleconverter
    FL-50, STF-22

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
    Hate to say it, but people using webcams and averaging the noise out over multiple exposures have turned in some pretty astounding results, especially with planets.
    Without doubt the humble toucam revolutionized backyard planet shooting. These days I mostly keep telescopes for bright objects and save the SLRs for wide field stuff.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    162
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by acme View Post
    I doubt Roland is using fourthirds sensors, or even sensors with AA filters stuck on them. If he were, and found curvature excessive, I'm sure he could throw sufficient funds into engineering an effective FR/FF, but expect to sign a very large cheque years in advance if you want one for yourself...
    Roland charges anywhere from $500-$700 for flatteners suitable for a 6x7, in stock. However, he matches them to specific scopes, and THAT will set you back the price of a good used car and a couple years, although with current economic conditions that wait might fall .

    Flatteners have to be matched to the optical system to work well, otherwise they can (and do, as you've learned) introduce significant aberrations.

    Now, for the $1.0e6 question: what scope were you using the WO flattener on, and also, which of the three versions?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,379
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by archer View Post
    Roland charges anywhere from $500-$700 for flatteners suitable for a 6x7, in stock. However, he matches them to specific scopes, and THAT will set you back the price of a good used car and a couple years, although with current economic conditions that wait might fall .
    I think I see where your confusion is; you seem to be taking my comment on field flatteners and their use on fourthirds, and expanding it to field flatteners in general. As I understand field curvature, it's usually of parabolic (or roughly thus) form. As the format grows wider, so does its sensitivity to curvature, as it samples the edges of the field. Fourthirds, a relatively small format given the field projected by most backyard scopes, at a minimum, does not gain in quality when combined with a field flattener / focal reducer in my experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by archer View Post
    Flatteners have to be matched to the optical system to work well, otherwise they can (and do, as you've learned) introduce significant aberrations.

    Now, for the $1.0e6 question: what scope were you using the WO flattener on, and also, which of the three versions?
    Celestron .63x converter on a Celestron 200mm f/10 SCT, and WO WE-FLAT-2 .8x on a WO ZS 80mm FD. Both have been tried on other scopes as well, but if they don't make gains there I don't know where they would.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    184
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default Re: E-510 for Astrophotography

    Quote Originally Posted by acme View Post
    I think I see where your confusion is; you seem to be taking my comment on field flatteners and their use on fourthirds, and expanding it to field flatteners in general. As I understand field curvature, it's usually of parabolic (or roughly thus) form. As the format grows wider, so does its sensitivity to curvature, as it samples the edges of the field. Fourthirds, a relatively small format given the field projected by most backyard scopes, at a minimum, does not gain in quality when combined with a field flattener / focal reducer in my experience.



    Celestron .63x converter on a Celestron 200mm f/10 SCT, and WO WE-FLAT-2 .8x on a WO ZS 80mm FD. Both have been tried on other scopes as well, but if they don't make gains there I don't know where they would.
    I just sold my FFIII WO flattener/reducer which some people have had better results from than the Flat 2. I didn't get a chance to use it before having to sell off some equipment so cannot comment from personal use.

    I tried using my E420 to do some 30 secoond subs at ISO1600 but found it very noisy; haven't had a chance to experiment since that night.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •