Amazing! Thank you! Very valuable insights. Did not know about astrophotographers using video to create an image.
I'll stay off the field monitors until I decide to get a tracking mount and play with the mask more.
I mentioned that the 4K video is tricky, a lot of folks doing planetary imaging use video feed captures and use software such as AutoStakkert, etc, to convert and stack the video into the incredible single images or short videos they show us. For them, a 4K feed like what your X-T4 has is a dream come true. They can focus with the settings they are working in, using telescope or camera lens. But they are not trying to combine it with a landscape background as you are in those aurora shots. They are also usually using a tracking mount.
The masks I mentioned can help for longer lenses if you are quick enough to get the shot, crank up the ISO and use sort shutter speeds, and quickly take the shot as fast as you can after moving the focus ring. You can relax after that while hitting the play back button to zoom into the shot to see how close you are. Speed is needed because once you get past 50mm or so, the star’s motion over the X-T4’s small pixel sites will make it seem like what should be a round star is instead sort of egg shaped which is a problem if you hesitated getting the shot.
For wider lenses, the old technique of finding the lens’ true long distance infinity focus point during the daytime, focus on something miles and miles (kilometers and kilometers) away off in the distance and mark the lens so that you can come back to that setting later at night can work well. In optics, three feet can be considered infinity when it comes to focusing, so trying for very long distances away instead of just a few hundred feet or meters works out better.
Welcome to our forum.
Short answer: no.
While a very few companies offered a kind of digital part to put on the analog camera instead of loading a film, Fuji never did.
Since there are a lot of challenges like shutter synchronization and handling the old glasses the results will most likely not satisfy the demands of today’s photographers. The developing costs also would be too high compared to actual digital cameras.