Jump to content

Star/Astro shots - 50sii vs 100s?

Sal K

By Sal K
in Fuji GFX 50R / GFX 50S / GFX 50SII

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sal K Newbie

Sal K

Posted
Posted

Hello,

I am pondering a move to medium format.  One driver for me is to be able to get better star shots.  I am thinking the bigger sensor will help a fair amount.  The question I have is which is then more important once you have a bigger sensor (aka 100s and 50sii are same physical size) - the higher megapixels to catch more detail (100s) or larger photo receptor sites on the lower megapixel sensor (50sii).

My hunch is the 50sii.....but its more hunch than informed by experience with these bodies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jerryy Grand Master

jerryy

Posted
Posted

Between the two, the 50 will probably be a better choice for stars in the night sky, but, …, well that may not be your best approach according to folks that discuss those issues:

https://astrojolo.com/gears/pixel-scale-and-resolution/

https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-blogs/imaging-foundations-richard-wright/astrophotography-pick-your-pixels/

I think if you enjoy the hobby and want to use your camera for the images by all means give it a try.

But do keep in mind that you will need a g mount to telescope (t mount) adapter instead of the easier to find x mount to telescope adapter. Also, be aware that most popular telescopes use a two inch (M48) focuser — and associated other gear. This is ideal for APS-C sized sensors, but causes vignetting for full frame sensors and will not send an image outside the two inch circle to large frame sensors — you get an inner image with vignetting to black rectangle framing. This is not impossible to deal with, replace the focuser with one more appropriate but expensive especially after you make similar changes to any other gear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sal K Newbie

Sal K

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Oh I am a total hack.  My thought would be to first get the kit 35-70 with an eye on the 20-35 as a more appropriate use case (wider, very marginally faster).  I don't plan to start hooking up my telescope to anything given the massive number of permutations and combinations to consider (not to mention the size/weigth and the fact i can't travel with it).

I am willing to learn some new tricks on stacking.  I would be interested in maybe a very small 'tracker' but I don't plan to start hooking up actual telescopes to the body.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jerryy Grand Master

jerryy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Trackers such as Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer Pro and iOptron SkyGuider Pro are quite popular. As long as you can keep the total weight (camera, lens, etc.) under 11 pounds (about 5 kilograms) these should work. These are Alt-Az types of mounts, often used for star photos as opposed to the German Equatorial Mounts more typically used for deep sky objects. Note: Depending on where you purchase one of these, the tripod may or may not be included, also make certain the counter weight is included. Resellers often put together different packages designed to inflict as much wallet damage as possible.

For stacking, there are a lot of free and paid options out there, ASTAP, Siril, Deep Sky Stacker, APT, Pix Insight are all easy to find. Affinity Photo has an built-in astrophotography stacking module. I do not think GIMP or PhotoShop have that yet, but I do not know for certain.

Show us some photos when you can.

Edited by jerryy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...