Best astrophotography lens on a budget (vol 1: Asahi Super Takumar 200mm F4)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 ноя 2024
- This is a short review of the Asahi Takumar 200mm F4 lens. With a $10 M42 adapter you can make use of it with your modern dslr. It has fantastic characteristics that make it ideal for astrophotography and the best part is it can be found for under $60.
Yeah got this lens, and it's sharp corner to corner for astrophotography, has no astigmatism. This really reminds me of my 135mm Samyang lens, but in the 200mm focal length. Only problem is chromatic aberration, but it can be dealt with in post processing.
just found one with BEAUTIFUL glass at an antique shop for 35 bucks, so glad I picked it up
That’s awesome. I hope you enjoy it. Great price
Just purchased a Super Multi Coated version. Its like new in case and boxed here in UK £24.
Thanks I just watched this an ordered one of eBay. $43 with shipping and comes with leather case and metal hood! I really love astrophotography and as a new hobbiest I didn't realize how expensive lenses are. I hope to get great photos with this like yours. Thanks again can't wait for the second video.
Thank you and good luck. Takumars are fantastic options. The 135 and 400 aren’t bad either. I personally feel the job much easier with camera only below 500mm. Above 500mm I get the big guns out. Telescope. Clear skies.
Thank you for the information! Been looking for Budget alternatives! The prices on lenses today are insane for the updated AF Features as you stated.
Thanks for watching. Good luck and clear skies.
Recently bought another one, I have a nice collection from my Pentax camera days, I intend to use the lenses on two modified Canon 450D, one has the Ha filter pass, the other is monochrome (de-Bayered) & Peltier cooled 450D camera. I intend using both camera’s side by side imagining the same field and using two Pentax 200mm f/4 lenses. This was the cheapest way to go. I have always been impressed with Pentax lenses, both for optical and mechanical performance, focusing is so smooth on all their lenses. Waiting for darker nights ‘down under’. Southern Cross Observatory-Tasmania 42 South.🇦🇺🔭
That’s awesome. It’s impossible to let such quality glass become relics. I’m glad a large portion of modern day photographers are buying into high tech auto eye focus gear. It allows the rest of us to get quality equipment for a fraction of the price. That’s a pretty awesome setup you have. Clear skies.
The Takumar 135mm f/3.5 is also amazing for wide field Astro photography. With a ioptron sky tracker even better
Thanks for the advice. I’ll keep my eyes open for a copy.
I have that one. Thanks for the advice, I'll try for astrophotography.
I second this I've taken some insane images with the 135
Great lens! Taking mine to a dark site weekend after next. I do recommend using step down rings. Mine is stepped down to f/5.4.
Sound advice
Thank you. I’m on disability with 4 back surgeries. Everything I do is on an extreme budget. A few years ago I sold a very clean Sigma APO 400mm 5.6. For my Nikon Mount. Sure wish I had kept it.
...and literally a minute after watching this I found one on ebay and purchased it. Lol.
You will not be disappointed.
I just did the same thing. While watching it I was looking on eBay and bought one.
Will it fit on canon t6?
Yes. With an adapter
Thank you for the information. I really like your straight forward videos. And budget setups for AP.
I used my Asahi Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 200mm F4 lens to photograph Comet Hale Bopp with round stars all the way to the edge. I first bought it to use with my Praktica Nova. I still use it today with my Canon with a M42 adapter. It is a really good lens.
Indeed
thank you Garnett you have got me in to astrophotography i have a Nikon D7200 &a Nikon D3200 thank you for showing me how to do this . and Marrychristmas to you
Thanks for watching. I’m really happy you’re inspired. Merry Christmas to you also and clear skies.
Just bought this lens today on your recommendation, can’t wait to try it out. Looking forward to other vintage lens reviews of yours. Cheers from Australia 👍
Awesome. You won’t be disappointed. I hope to find a good copy of a Russian Tair 3. The Photo Sniper as it’s coined.
@@GarnettLeary Good Hunting 🤘 I’m on the lookout for a vintage alternative to the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm f2.8 (Canon) for Milky Way and nightscaping.
Thank you. That lens has quite the reputation and history. It’s absolutely the coolest thing I’ve seen in spy optics. The only complaint I’ve heard is that it’s heavy.
Thanks for the great review. Just order one myself. Another good lens for astrophotography is the Nikkor 28mm F2 ai. It has a wide field for auroras and renders the stars round and not footballs at the edge of the field.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Thank you for the information! I still have my Pentax Spotmatic and two Takumar lenses and have been wondering how to mate them up with my DSLR (a 6D). Just ordered the adapter. Thank you again.
You’re welcome. I’m glad you found the solution. They’re a brilliant series.
Just ordered one. I have no tracked so i'll be limited to about 3.2 second exposures. Lets see what happens if I point it at Carina!
Now to work out how step-down rings work!
Awesome. Good luck on your project. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks. I am going to attempt to image the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex. On Telescopius it seems like it will be framed nicely as 200mm
Beautiful and colorful target. It should frame nice. That’s an absolute favorite of mine in broadband. I actually like bloated stars in that image. I feel like it loses something when overcorrected and pin point. Gorgeous target. If I added anything narrowband it would be a slight exaggeration of the nearby dust lanes. That is a target to hang on the wall.
The nikkor -Q 200mm f4 is another beauty
Hi, after check many lenses, I go for your suggestion, in the 300mm version. Thanks
I hope you enjoy it
Let me jump in with a recommendation , tho i didnt test this vs Tair 3 old russian lens , so what is the deal with the Tair , why Tair . Well , it has no rear element , or its not all the way to the sensor .
That gives you an opportunity to isntall DIY Field flattener Focal Reducer Speed Booster resolution increaser or however you want to call it , its a magnifying glass . And it makes your sensor pixels bigger , apparently looking from the point of view of your lens . So what happens is that your sensor works better .
300mm Tair with a 0,6x focal reducer would give about similar FOV as Takumar 200mm without focal reducer .
But the Tair will have better optics
, it would be faster .
Theoretically .
I agree. I got ripped off on the one I purchased unfortunately. I’ll revisit it for sure because it’s awesome. I’d love to see a test but mostly I want to do it myself. That thing is well corrected. Heavy is it’s downside. Great insight thank you for sharing. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary I got one , should come in tomorrow didn't use it my self as well but there are examples on the net , and info . .ruclips.net/video/1VGMhtxko6k/видео.html
I cant even see any chromatic aberration , almost cant believe it . I hope its true , i have ED80 but would really llike something smaller 200-300 range . I guess will see
Awesome. Keep me updated. I’m very curious about what you discover. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary K, i have help from Astronomy forums fellas and will throw in the test Canon 55-250 zoom to represent modern lenses , and 80ED to represent modern telescopes , Tair as a vintage lens and if i find a Japanese vintage representative in form of Super Takumar . that would be a wonderful Video .
ill let you know .
Clear skys
Degree field of view quoted in the first few minutes! More math, please!
I bought this lens a while back and 'm really happy with it.
It is a bit on the heavy side, sometimes I struggle to keep it steady on my IOptron Star Tracker Pro if there is a wind.
Here are a few links to astro photos I took with it.
www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34225511550/in/dateposted-public/
www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34225511550/in/dateposted-public/
www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34225511550/in/dateposted-public/
I have also had good luck with my vintage Pentax 50mm f1.4 stopped down to f3.5
www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34225511550/in/dateposted-public/
as well as my vintage Nikon 105mm f2.5 stopped down to f4
www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34225511550/in/dateposted-public/
I have a bunch of vintage lenses that I have accumulated over the years and I'm slowly trying them out for Astro photography.
Great work on your channel by the way.
Thank you and I appreciate the links. Not much has changed in glass technology. It’s all that auto function, vibration control, cpu stuff that people favor over old lenses. I love finding top of the line lenses at junk stores. It’s amazing what is forgotten.
Thanks for the helpful video. I was gifted (by my car mechanic) the higher quality Adaptall 2 version of that lens and only need to get an adapter down to MFT.
I'm struggling with getting the stars in the Orion nebula so they're not washed out - using an old Milda 100mm f/2.8 lens I inherited. It has the M43 threads.
Thanks for sharing your experiences.
You’re welcome and thank you for watching. I love vintage lenses especially when a real bargain. Clear skies.
It was a very good review. Thank you. Jupiter 21m is better for astrography or this? What do you think about jupiter 21m for astrography?
Thank you. I haven’t tried it but I’ll look for a copy
LOVE this video! You don't need AF or IS for astro, so WHY pay for these features!
Exactly
Thanks for your video.
I have the following manual focus telephoto lenses:
135mm f/3.5 Takumar
200mm f/5.6 Takumar
300mm f/6.3 Takumar
135mm f/2 Zeiss
135mm f/3.5 Nikkor
400mm f/5.6 Nikkor
500mm f/4 Nikkor
I have never used any of them for astrophotography.
How do I test them to determine if they are suitable for astrophotography?
On a static tripod use the 500 rule and take some test photos. Look for chromatic aberrations and pay attention to how pinpoint you can make starlight. I’d use a UV filter if you have one.
I have the 200mm f5.6 but i use it for nature .. now i have a reason to get another takumar lens :D
Well I'm sold I'm definitely picking one up
I hope you find an amazing copy. It’s fantastic. Clear skies
The photo in this film at 5:58' is that something that is possible with a canon 400D with adapter ring and the takumar 200 lens.. i cant seem to get it right?? Nice photos but not like the one i seen from you at 5:58'' is the reach from my ISO with max 1600 to low? Kind regards Liz
That one was shot on an extremely cold night with the air very thin. I also had it on a tracking mount. It’s a single exposure at F8 but I forget the expo time. I often paired that lens with a CG-4 or Orion Atlas, using it like a mini telescope. I don’t think you could pull that much detail from even a full frame untracked. Perhaps a composite would work. 400D combo is perfectly capable of detailed shots. If you can’t track you can always rely on integration time.
@@GarnettLeary thank you very much. Gonna start of building a barn door tracker. Just to see where it leads me.. thank you so much for the info and bringing my dream a little closer!!
Thank you. Such nice words. This is what makes it worth my time. You made my day. I wish you lots of luck. Thanks again. Clear skies.
Many months later and I'm back to enjoy more. @ 5:49 (Just to the right of your camera sensor dust) it's as if I can clearly see that Fabulous but faint Flame nebula/ Seahorse head but you mentioned it is taken from polluted urban view! So could you please share with me your other EXIF data, especially the Exposure time and ISO? As you mentioned F was at 8 (& a single exposure, not stack) that incidentally is evident from that beautiful diffraction star burst pattern around the nearby Alnitak.
And what was the reason to leave the F at 8 and not wide open or less? Is it to decrease CA and city light pollution or for better sharpness or to get an overall darker black? cos this is against the general rules and natural will for this situation to me.
Again thanks a lot for your great upload and insight into this and I'm totally with your. The Simpler, the cheaper, the easier, THE BETTER. And you did it at best on all counts her.
Sorry I don’t have the info on that shot anymore. I do remember I mostly shot between 1600-3200 ISO from that location. I typically stop every lens down slightly. F8 is a bit extreme. I believe I was squinting lenses hoping to mitigate sky glow gradients. My 50mm F1.8 I shoot at F4. I stop my 50 F1.4 to F4 also. There’s always some degree of coma or astigmatism wide open even on the L series stuff. That 70-200 F2.8 L I had was gorgeous at F4 but practically unusable wide open for stars. People who disagree likely crop their images to death. Likely the only near perfect lens would be a Leica but that’s only practical for rich folks. The large clear aperture of the vintage lens in the video is responsible for the nebulosity. It’s quite the performer. When I say clear aperture I don’t mean the front objective lens. The relationship of elements out and thru the back iris. I’m glad I moved from there. It’s a strong bortle 8 there now. I don’t personally follow trends. I don’t readily believe what’s widely accepted either. Most people say to open the lenses wide open. Everything I’ve ever handled tells me otherwise. I used to do a lot of wide stuff involving stitching photos. Bad corners were murder. It’s best to test every opinion and logic. There’s a few people who make suggestions I don’t question. Damien Peach is one. If he gives you a planetary tip you better bank on it. Additionally no two lenses perform identically. I had two copies of the Rokinon 14mm F2.8 and one hit infinity at a completely different area of the focus throw. There’s endless variables in all aspects of this because there’s a seemingly endless set of things that affect it. I do believe anyone can grab a copy of this lens and appreciate it. Some just shine. The latest surprise was my Canon 100mm F2.8 macro. 1) I was told wouldn’t focus to infinity. That was wrong. It’s outstanding for stars. Sorry I don’t have more details to answer your question. You raise an importance of my saving it for future questions that may arise. I’ll definitely keep my exif on videos from now. I hope you have happy holidays and clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary Thanks a lot Garnett for the extensive and fast reply. Loved the reading as I have a lot in common with your belief. Yes I always have to remind myself to keep a track of EXIF, especially why astrophotographying and using manual lenses. I guess exposure time should have been really long, 30 sec or more likely north of 60sec as that nebulosity wont show up easy, especially with closer F stops. I believe you have had a tracking mount on that night. But the ISO for 1.6, 3.2K is really impressive and noise free. Your sensor must be great.
Btw I have two copies of that Samy/Rok 14mm F2.8 and another cine version of it with T3.1 and must admit they do make great nigh images. But the other secret I would like to share with you or may be 2. First Samyang 135mm F2... Marvelous and glass on that is better than Canon 135 F2 AF Canon L! If you believe and I can show you reviews to prove this. Even Wide open I get good result with it but you are very right to close the diaphragm a bit and get a lot in return.
That lens should be easily obtainable in low 400s and it worth multiple times of it's price for sure. You can have AMAZING widefield views of Orion with this baby, if you can track and stack about an hour worth of data and as moon is getting smaller these nights and Orion, higher, it is a perfect time for that. You actually inspired me to go hunting and I'm going to use my Takumar 135 F2.5 (The better copy with M42 mouth and right serial number) this time as I love it too for it's much lighter than Rokinon but more with CA.
Then the second secret and if you have a heavier than entry iOptron sky tracker. That is the older Canon FD L 300mm F2.8 and you can find it in good condition around $500. It is a gem and not only excellent for action and wildlife photography, some of my best "Comet" images with excellent tail deal are made with this lens and yes, you can use it Wide open, with full confidence, as my experiment tells me. No reserve on this but it is rather heavy with narrow field of view.
Anyways, thanks for the good and inspiring upload, then nice reply. Have a clear, cloud free, moon free, pollution free dark sky. Especially that we are can enjoy the last warmer night before the full fledge hit of the winter, especially that Leonid meteor shower leftovers are still visible! and better than that, Geminids meteor shower is on the way, scheduled for the MOONLESS nights of Dec 13-14 Peak Sunday night 2-4AM but fingers crossed, possible to pick up some activities even this week end... Enjoy my friend and stay warm.
looks something used to film the cold war. hey you got link for that adapter
Fotodiox Pro Lens Mount Adapter - M42 Type 2 Screw Mount Lens to Canon EOS (EF, EF-S) Mount SLR Camera Body www.amazon.com/dp/B003Y2Z6X2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_TsApAb9GR6KVN
Great video thanks, have you already tested the SMC version? Do you think it would be better? Can you please put a link what adapter do I need to attach it to my Canon? Thanks once again 😊
do you think the SMC or the non-coated lens is better. Also were you using a step down ring on all your pics you showed at f5.4?
The SMC coatings are going to be noticeably better in daylight for anti-ghosting but I don’t believe it matters much at night. There’s mixed opinions on that and I’m on the fence because I haven’t personally tested it although I’ve shot with both. No step down rings in example images. Clear skies.
Thank you very very much
Yep you got me hooked now onto astrophotography
I have this one 200 but I also have 135/2.5 6 groups 6 elements is it good for astro?
Thank you
135mm is itself a stunning focal length for widefield telephoto. Those two words don’t belong in the same sentence lol. You get my meaning. The Takumar 135 F4 is the one I tried. There seems to be several lines of Takumar. The SMC versions and standard are the two most common. I don’t know anything about the F2.5. It’s got me interested tho. Quite possibly the coolest lens I’ve found below 500mm is the Soviet Tair 3. It’s heavy as a brick but quite possibly only next in quality to a Zeiss 300mm. Eventually I’ll get around to all of them and next year likely concentrate more on slideshows. I feel like all I do is concentrate on testing stuff. Lol. Where are your images posted? I’d love to see them. I’d love to hear your thoughts on your 135 also. I wasn’t aware it came in such a fast aperture. Clear skies.
I just got a cheaper 135/2.5, the bayonet one. Haven't been able to use it yet, but it has a slightly larger physical aperture than the one in the video, when wide open (200/4 = 50 but 135/2.5 = 54) - so while there will probably be a lot more imperfections in the image, if you can get away with it, it should get a fair amount of light.
How many second single exposure did u take at f8.
P. S. - bought this lens after watching ur vdo, can't wait to get. Cheers.
It was around 30 or so. I have long deleted that but I’m sure that’s real close.
I purchased this lens and agree the quality seems quite good for daytime photography. I'm using a Neewer M42 to Canon EF adapter and the fit is good but for my astrophotography work I cannot get it quite in focus. I go all the way to the end of focus and the pinpoint on 10x never goes past perfect focus and stays somewhat soft. I suspect the problem is the distance from the back of the lens to the front of the sensor isn't correct and that I need some sort of shims between the lens and the M42 adapter so I'm looking to buy those if anyone knows where to get them.
I’ll keep it pinned hoping to get you an answer.
@@GarnettLeary - Thanks for the help Garnett. I spent time talking with B&H photo yesterday. Their thought was that possibly the Neewer M42 adapter I received was just a little thicker than it should be. Their opinion was that shims to move the lens further away from the sensor was probably the wrong answer. If true then I need to purchase an adapter from another company. At $10-$15 it would be a low cost solution. Do you remember which adapter you purchased?
I now see someone else further down in this comment list had the same problem and solved it with a different adapter. I've ordered a new one that says it supports infinity focus. If it works I will post back which one.
See my reply above.
You mention at f5. What about wide open at f4? Is it still completely flat with no coma or chromatic abberation?
I had to stop mine down. I haven’t owned a lens I didn’t have to. That’s being picky tho. Of course what is acceptable for social media and what is for print are two different things. At the focal length this lens can be used wide open for social media.
Just purchased one of these! Can't wait to get first light. Can I ask, which camera was you using in this video?
Full frame. Canon EOS 6D with the M42 to EOS adapter.
@@GarnettLeary Okay, thanks. And was there any problems with the mirror colliding with the lens?
I had one for over a year now and it doesn't disappoint. I saw a review on "Cloudy nights" and bought one on the strength of that.
Here is a sample: www.flickr.com/photos/mattschulze/34023778654/in/dateposted-public/
That’s awesome good job
Thanks
Well done!
Thank you. Clear skies.
Wonder how the 300mm SMC f4 Takumar would work for astrophotography
I have the 300mm SMC f/4. $130 plus shipping from Japan on ebay. I prefer the bigger glass. Good fill for M31, M42, NGC7000 etc. plus some more pixels on smaller objects. A solid lens with built in lens hood.
The 5 element is like a triplet plus the 2 element petzval field flattener found on modern APOs. The biggest (only) downside is the lack of ED glass so the Chromatic Aberration is there. If you are willing to spend the time, this can be removed in post processing. EG the green channel will be tack sharp, while the red and blue will be bloated. If you get the M42 adaptor, get the cheap ones that don’t obstruct the aperture stop pin, or you won’t be able to achieve infinity focus.
Great vid!... I purchased this lens after watching this video but on my Canon T6 I am unable to get it to focus on the Stars / infinity ... do you have any suggestions on what could be the issue? Thank you very much for your time
Thanks for watching and I’m sorry you’re having an issue. I wonder if the flange thickness on your adapter is too wide. It’s possible the lens is sitting too far from the image sensor. What is the brand and model of your adapter?
Honestly that is exactly what I was wondering... I have ordered a couple of more flanges of different brands each to try thank you very much for your time
@@GarnettLearyYou nailed it Sir!...It works great with the thinner adapter!...can't wait for clear skies! Thanks again!👍
Glad you got it solved. Hope you have lots of clear skies.
@@TC-bq5ri - I'm having exactly the same problem! Can you post info on which adapter you purchased to fix this problem?
Very helpful video. Thanks!
Thank’s for watching.
Thank you for your good review.
Thank you for watching
Awesome looking lens ☺ Thanks!
I’ll be publishing more with it and thanks.
I just order Pentacon 200 f4, i hope is good for astro...for some galaxy or nebulae.what you think?
I have no experience with it but the reviews seem good. Regardless a prime will have less aberration than a zoom in most all cases.
@@GarnettLeary thanks for reply
I wonder how this will work on moon photography?
It’s good but don’t expect tight framing.
I want one now lol
Thank: ) It was very useful
Thanks for watching. Clear skies.
Hy guys, Does anyone knoes adapter for sony alpha 6300 ? i have an Asahi tele kakumar 200 mm f 5.6 lens.
Go to Adoroma and type this in: Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter for M42 Type 1 (42mm x1 Screw Mount) Lens to Sony Alpha A-Mount (and Minolta AF) Mount SLR Camera Body. That’s what you need. $8 USD
does it use thoriated glass
Good question. I can only offer what I know as certain. My copy never yellowed which you may already know is indicative of the thorium isotope. The only real case of a radioactive lens I know of is a specific serial numbered 55. Theoria Apophasis has a real good test on his channel using a geiger counter. I’m certain my copy is safe but I can’t recommend to you that all productions of this lens are. I will definitely pin this for others. Great question again and clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary if the copy i get is going to be non thoriated (heck i dont think it's as risky since it's in small amounts) then I'm gonna have a blast with this lens. Right now the zoom lens i have is 210mm f6.3(55-210). This would be a good combo to my 16mm f1.4
@@GarnettLeary it costs 1.3k₹ on ebay that also has 4.9 rating. So it's not radioactive probably. And it's dirt cheap compared to what i paid for my sigma 16mm f1.4. hell yeah dude. I think lenses are way more comfortable than telescopes. If i get this lens, an adapter and a tracker. I should be able to take some pretty shots out of the city
I believe so. A lot of telescopes are gimmicks. I won’t name specific companies but here’s an example: 60/350mm. Why? Why buy a scope with such focal length and aperture when you can spend far less on an equivalent lens and depending on which... with direct communication to the camera via contacts? There is no reason but the market will drive towards ignorance regardless. A great example of price to value is my Canon EF 70-200 L. It will easily take in a seemingly endless amount of deep sky objects, has fluorite lens elements, and can also shoot a wedding. I can adjust the aperture, make money with it, and get automatic lens correction profiles. I can’t do that with a scope. There are folks who argue that scopes have spectral coatings. Lenses do as well. It’s the same concept as “anti-reflective” it’s just named something different. So when the bank is concerned it is far more realistic and cost effective to purchase a lens up to say 400mm. Beyond that you are getting real expensive in lenses and also the aperture advantage of the larger scope will surpass the quality of the lens performance. There are a few notable and semi-budget options that exceed that general rule such as the Sigma or Tamron 150-600s. They are phenomenal. It drives me crazy seeing all these 350mm and faster scopes being sold at the price point they are. You’re much better off with lenses for that wide a target unless, and only unless, you move to dedicated astro cameras in which case the scope adapts to much easier. This is fundamentally true across the board. Retailers don’t want you to realize that other peoples junk is in fact treasure. That 200mm Takumar is amazing.
@@GarnettLeary I dont think thats its thoriated however, I am sure it is the case for a few lenses such as the takumar 50mm f1.4, you can see if its radioactive by observing a brown tint on the lens
Where area the other volume? :D
Good question. Her name is Jazmin. She just turned 4 and I think I have time once again. Lol. Clear skies.
@@GarnettLeary Haha i understand you I have also a full volume named Lucie at home... any other lens your recommend though?
A really cool lens to research is the old Russian spy lens that looks like a pistol. Look up “Photo Sniper”. Tair 3. You want the “A” version. A friend has it and it’s amazing. Quality on par with a modest apochromatic scope. I mean to borrow it and review it.
Have you tried the f3.5?
I wasn’t aware there was one. I’m looking it up.
I'm really thinking of getting the 3.5 .. it seems like it will do a better job from the ratings.. i have a sky watch but it's such a pain to carry around..
I bought one of these in Mint condition (~$150 AUD) with case and lens cover for use with Canon 70D (APS-C) and have been VERY impressed with it at f5.4 using a filter step down ring from 58mm to 37mm. Example image here www.scottastrophe.space/Astronomy/2019-Refocusing-3/i-Df6QSct
How long of exposure do you do for astrophotography?
It depends on way too many factors but in short whatever keeps the histogram off the left side. My typical narrowband exposures are 2min to 3min at 7nm. I don’t shoot longer due to the amount of air traffic I have. If I was somewhere far from airports I’d drop my gain for longer exposures.
No entiendo porque el vídeo no es en español, así no hay manera de entender
nada, es un verdadera lástima que la
mayoría de videos sobre ópticas y cá-
maras estén en una lengua extranjera.
Fake