Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Greetings from Portugal!


ACRosalino

Recommended Posts

The nuance that’s missing there is when the denoising algorithm is triggered. On the Sonys, it depends on setting and exposure time.
Link to comment

For Nikon bodies it kicks in at 1/4 to 1 sec. and longer, mentioned earlier in the thread.

Yes, as I understand from the DPreview astro forum the most serious version of the algorithm in the later Sonys are kicking in in bulb mode but not in timed exposures up to 30 sec; a lot of Sony users try to not use bulb mode. There are links regarding the different versions earlier in that thread,

http://www.markshelley.co.uk/Astronomy/SonyA7S/sonystareater.html

http://www.markshelley.co.uk/Astronomy/SonyA7S/sonystareater_v2.html

Link to comment
Yes, that’s where I was getting my info from, via lonely speck. I can’t take a picture of the stars in bulb mode anyhow because they streak. I would need one of those fancy tracker platform gizmos.
Link to comment

I guess its my fault for not posting images with my Olympus E3 when I got into UV in 2008. I had a E3 and got a full spectrum converted E510. I found the E3 had 1 stop less sensitivity than the full spectrum conversion camera. But the E510 maxes at ISO1600, the E3 has 3200 ISO. I also had the Baader venus filter. So I did use the E3. My early trouble came down to lenses. Not much was know. I only stumbled into this site near the end of 2016. Then got some good uv performance cheap lenses. That really made the change. But that did lead to buying a very expensive lens in the end.

 

If your photograph macro or close up mainly I would say Olympus has the advantage. You the extra light for wider depth of field. Looking at photons to photos nothing is 2 stops better than the Em1 mk2. And it doesn't even have the top of the line sensor. My Em1 works quite well.

 

But does depend on what your photographing. If you need f4 or faster on a 135 camera, than its a good format. If your using f4 or slower on m43rds camera, than its the best format.

Link to comment

Well, nothing like a good and civilized CanoNikonOthers debate, right? :D

 

I think it is safe to conclude that Canon is also an adequate platform for UV reflective imaging (as confirmed by existing users, here), so I guess I will stick to the plan.

But I am likely going mirrorless: compared to DSLR cameras, the much reduced flange focal distance (18mm x 44mm) seems a great plus, just like its lesser weight and lower cost. Additionally, when imaging the "invisible", I do not expect much need for an optical viewfinder, preferring to use EFV and/or Live Display, instead.

 

On the full frame sensor debate x APS-C x m4/3: from my astro-imaging experience, a larger CCD/CMOS sensor requires much better corrected optic$$, larger filter wheel$$/filter$$, bigger equatorial mount$$ - costs will rise quickly and exponentially. So I wonder which lenses (if any), developed in the old film era, are actually capable of producing sharp, well corrected images across large full frame camera sensors, nowadays populated with 20, 30 or 40 millions of very, very tiny pixels?

Maybe the very specialized camera lenses, like the UV-Nikkor are up to the job? Too bad they are not normally used for astro-imaging, those point source stars never lie :-)

 

Thinking out loud and trying to be reasonable, I feel that my glass ambitions for UV/IR photography are at best a couple of EL-Nikkors (today I just grabbed a nice "metal" 105mm, hope I can find the "metal" 80mm, too!) and a couple of other old-vintage lenses, like the Steinheil Cassar-S 50mm I already have... I think the mirrorless APS-C format will be just fine for me.

 

Regards,

António Rosalino

Link to comment

Maybe the very specialized camera lenses, like the UV-Nikkor are up to the job?

 

The old UV-Nikkor 105/4.5 and its current model the Rayfact 105/4.5 are indeed very very sharp lenses which resolve well. Also the Coastal Optics 60/4.0 -- although I don't know how the hot spot (which seems to be seen only at high magnification) would play out in Astro.

 

But your plan to start out with some EL-Nikkors and a Steinheil Cassar is an excellent one. No need for a $5000 lens when starting out in reflected UV photography!! You don't even know yet whether you will like it. B)

 

 

I think it is safe to conclude that Canon is also an adequate platform for UV reflective imaging (as confirmed by existing users, here), so I guess I will stick to the plan.

 

Yes. And converting a camera you already have but no longer use much is a good way to get started in UV photography. After you have made a few hundred UV photos with it and your ELs, then you can know whether you are hitting any limits imposed by the gear.

 

As for going mirrorless for its short FFD benefit, the primary need will be for adapters to convert from the lens mount to the camera mount. For Sony (mirrorless) bodies, those adapters are widely available. For the new Canon and Nikon mirrorless bodies, we don't yet have many choices although new adapters are beginning to appear. I don't think it will be too long before we see a wide choice across the more expensive Novoflex line, the moderately priced Fotodiox adapters, and the relatively inexpensive Ebay Chinese-made clones.

 

 

Note: Sony, Canon EOS-R and Nikon mirrorless cameras are full frame. Oly and Lumix are m4/3. Not sure who has an APS-C mirrorless?

ADDED: Woops!! I failed to note that Sony A cameras are full frame but Sony NEX are APS-C.

Added: Woops again. Added EOS-R to the Canon. The Canon EOS-M is APS-C.

 

I just thought of this as something for you to investigate:

When selecting a camera for "full spectrum" conversion, you will want to look at the LCD specs. Because, if you are shooting through a dark UV-pass filter, then you will be focusing in Live View on the LCD. It is very much easier to focus in UV on a really good, high resolution LCD (and with the aid of a UV torch to provide extra UV light for the focusing effort).

 

My Nikons (all of them) have better LCDs than my Sony A7 or Pentax K-5. The Lumix LCD, while not too high in resolution, is very good for UV focusing. Now that is only one Sony and two other cams, so obviously my LCD experience on non-Nikons is limited. But the point is to get the best LCD you can.

 

Side Note: The My Sony A7's focus peaking sometimes works in UV but sometimes it does not work in UV. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Andrea, the Sony NEX-7 was APS-C, not full frame.

 

Also, the optics only need to be super if you get a high resolution full frame sensor. My Sony A7S is all of 12 megapixels and is pretty tolerant. :)

Link to comment
Thanks Andy! I'll add a comment about that. I was thinkiing only about the Sony A line for some reason. Probably because I have an A7 but don't have a NEX.
Link to comment

 

Note: Sony, Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras are full frame. Oly and Lumix are m4/3. Not sure who has an APS-C mirrorless?

ADDED: Woops!! I failed to note that Sony A cameras are full frame but Sony NEX are APC-S.

 

 

The mirrorless Canon EOS M-series are APS-C.

Link to comment

Mirrorless cameras with Sensor sizes are:

 

I am skipping the Q mount by Pentax and Nikon 1 line as I think both are no longer being made.

 

Four thirds sensor roughly 13x17.4mm is in Olympus, Panasonic and YiMi micro four thirds cameras. There are other video focused mirrorless m43rds by Z camera, black magic, JVC and now Sharp.

 

Aps-c small size 14.9x22.3mm (1.6x crop) is in Canon M mount mirrorless. Like M50 and M100 cameras.

 

Aps-c slightly larger, 15.6 x 23.5 mm (1.5x crop), made mostly by Sony is in Sony E mount like A6000 series and in Fuji cameras like Xt3, with X mount. There was the one off Pentax k-01, just to add Pentax to the list in k mount.

 

A fun odd ball mirrorless with 1.5x crop 15.6x23.5mm (SDQ) and 1.3x crop 17.9x26.6mm (SDQH) is Sigma Quattro cameras in SA mount. To convert to full spectrum just remove dust filter. But only allow for monochrome UV reflectance.

 

Then you get the tinny 135 format cameras. Sorry full frame for me would be 8x10 inch. These are Sony E mount, Nikon (z mount), Canon (R mount) and soon to be released Panasonic and Sigma L mount. The Leica also exist, but Cost is a different ball park. I do like how Canon has copied Leica in going with M and R mounts, now that the EF mount is off patent and every Chinese company seems to be making lenses.

 

Then there is the all most medium format but not quite Fuji GFX 33x44mm camera and similar Hasselblad mirrorless. However, I don't think anyone has tried or converted these to UV yet.

Link to comment

Has anyone tried the EL-Nikkors on a full frame (24x36mm) sensor? How do they perform, in terms of vignetting and sharpness at the corners of the image?

I am planning for mirrorless/APS-C, but if those lenses are up to the job on FF and if I stumble on a good FF camera deal... :-)

 

Regards,

Antonio Rosalino

Link to comment

Being enlarger lenses I would imagine they would do quite well on FF or even MF.

 

I have a Sony A5000 mirrorless but I want to convert a flash like the 199 you purchased.

My mirrorless has no way of triggering the flash so bear that in mind.

Link to comment

Well, when I receive the EL 105 I can try to test that with my full frame 5D... provided I get the required adapters.

I suppose I will need an m39-EF adapter, with helicoid focuser?

Or maybe I should use an m39-m42 on the lens, then use instead a m42-EF adapter with helicoid focuser?

Seems like m42 is a more common lens interface...

 

Andrea mentioned 3 different 'classes' of adapters... what has been your experience with the cheap eBay adapters, versus the more expensive Fotidiox and Novoflex?

Since the eBay ones can take a month or more to arrive, I will need to order them soon enough, if I go the cheap route :-)

Link to comment

Has anyone tried the EL-Nikkors on a full frame (24x36mm) sensor? How do they perform, in terms of vignetting and sharpness at the corners of the image?

I am planning for mirrorless/APS-C, but if those lenses are up to the job on FF and if I stumble on a good FF camera deal... :-)

 

Regards,

Antonio Rosalino

 

The EL-Nikkor 80/5.6 was designed for an original area (film) within Ø100mm

The EL-Nikkor 105/5.6 was designed for an original area (film) within Ø130mm

 

Even if you stumbled on an UV-converted MF-camera it would be well covered without vignetting. :)

Link to comment
Some of the cheap eBay adapter offerings are excellent, some are awful or not set at the correct flange distance. Exterior finish sometimes is a little rough. One simply has to try a couple of them and hope for the best. Roxsen/Fotasy adapter have in general been fine, by the way and they are not among the more expensive alternatives.
Link to comment

I cant comment on the more expensive adapters as I dont have one for the UV. I bought an ebay Fotasy M42/NEX adapter which is ok but I'm sure there are better as this is not fantastic. You can feel a bit of play in the helicoid. I do have a Vello EF to NEX booster adapter with optics and its definitely much better but then so is the price.

 

I dont think it makes much difference seeing as there are no optics involved and they are relatively inexpensive - I think I paid $30 for mine.

 

and it was recommended to me to go M39 to M42 adapter ring - M42 Helicoid to NEX (as you said, I dont think there is an M39 to NEX adapter)

Link to comment

Are you using the Fotasy Slim 1mm M42/NEX adapter?

 

If not I recommend you consider one in combination with the longest 35-90mm helicoid.

The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take considerable additional length of simple M42 extension tube and still focus INF. Such a combo will focus from INF well into >1:1 macro magnification. To me the longer helicoids seem to have less play when used in the shorter end of the extension range.

 

Also when using the M39 to M42 thread ring be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck......

Link to comment

Are you using the Fotasy Slim 1mm M42/NEX adapter?

 

If not I recommend you consider one in combination with the longest 35-90mm helicoid.

The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take considerable additional length of simple M42 extension tube and still focus INF. Such a combo will focus from INF well into >1:1 macro magnification. To me the longer helicoids seem to have less play when used in the shorter end of the extension range.

 

Also when using the M39 to M42 thread ring be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck......

 

I'm using the std 1 inch model along with the 35-90mm helicoid and it seems to be ok.

Good point about the M39/M42 adapter ring, thanks :)

Link to comment

I'm using the std 1 inch model along with the 35-90mm helicoid and it seems to be ok.

 

Will the 80mm EL-Nikkor focus to INF on that? By my calculations it should be about 10.46mm to long for the 80mm. Hey, if you are OK with that then all is well!

 

Also I misspoke above where I said "The 80mm and 90mm EL-Nikkors will still take...." I meant to say "The 80mm and 105mm EL-Nikkors will still take...." I had FFD on the brain and the 105mm EL-Nikkor has a FFD of 90mm.

Link to comment

...be sure to orient the notches facing away from the lens in case rough threads get stuck

 

Why do I *never* remember to do this? :lol:

 

I also have observed, perhaps strangely?, that when the M39/M42 thread changer notches face the mount end of lens, that it almost always seems to help keep the aperture marks topmost for enlarger lenses. Trying to adjust aperture in the field when those marks are facing downward is not fun.

 

I could remedy my misadventures with the M39/M42 changers by buying a big lot of them and assigning them permanently to the various lenses which require them. I started doing this, but got sidetracked and never completed the task.

 

P.S. I was so "girl dumb" when I started this UV photography adventure 12 years ago, that I had no idea what those notches were for!!! Fortunately, I am teachable and soon learned. :D :D :rolleyes: Now I actually own 3 or 4 of those nifty little notch wrench thingies. An invaluable tool for anyone wanting to dismantle lenses. Or unscrew stuck M39/M42 changers.

 


 

I dont think there is an M39 to NEX adapter

 

I have a Fotodiox PRO Leica M39 to NEX adapter. Is that the same M39? Will go look up.

But I think it is perhaps easier to find M42-to-anything adapters.

Link to comment

Ulf: The mirrorless Canon EOS M-series are APS-C.

 

Thank you! I was away too long and must have forgotten how to Fact Check. I added a correction that EOS-R is FF and EOS-M is APS-C.

Link to comment

In answer to my own question.

 

The Fotodiox PRO Leica M39 to NEX adapter which I have is for an M39 x 26tpi lens.

 

And Wikipedia states that most EL-Nikkors "feature 39mm Leica thread mounts".

 

There are some M39 x 1 lenses also. I think Canon had some, for example. (Not sure about that.)

My Kyoei 135/3.5 Super-Acall is an M39x1. So is my UV-Planar which is an enlarger lens type.

 

The M39/M42 changer seems to work on either M39 x 26tpi or M39 x 1. That's interesting.

Link to comment

Well I am rambling on today, but I have another little bit of information about that Fotodiox M39 x 26tpi to NEX adapter.

 

I tried the UV-Planar M39 x 1 with the M39 x 26tpi adapter, and the lens could be partially screwed into the adapter. (Do.NOT.Force.)

 

Whether or not that would prove useful depends of course on a particular lens's flange focal distance (FFD). I doubt that any M39 x 1 lens is going to have the typical Leica M39 x 26tpi FFD of 28.8 mm. :D

Link to comment

Meanwhile, I have managed to grab a few relatively cheap lenses, for experimenting with UV imaging and I have ordered already a few adapters, to convert them all to M42 mount and to 52mm filter threads...now, a few additional questions come to mind:

 

* what is the best way to use just one Baader-U 2" filter on the various lenses? Is there an "easy filter swap" solution, for a reasonable price?

Such solution should also allow to easily shoot Visual-->UV-->IR frames, using various other filters, without disturbing the camera pointing and focusing...

 

* how can I use a lens shade/hood on these lenses? I am not sure how to fit one, when using 2"/M48 astronomy UV filter, mounted on some kind of adapter, so that it can fit on a 52mm filter ring on the lenses - but I am sure someone here has found a working solution, also for this?

 

Thanks in advance for your comments/advice on those 2 beginner's questions :-)

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...