I got a Nikon D7500 (not modified, not going to) and the 18-55 stock lens isn't enough. Is there any good lens I could use for DSOs? Budget is $100, no higher.
What f-mount lens should I use for M42, M45, M31, etc
Used 50mm AFS f/1.8G.
andrea tasselli:
Used 50mm AFS f/1.8G.
Thank you, but wouldn't a telephoto lens be better?
Well Written Respectful
Not for 100 USD…
Hi Pete,
a good way to select a lens is to use a Planetarium software like SkyChart (Cartes du ciel( or Stellarium to simulate the field of view. It is possible to input your equipment data (sensor data and focal length of the lens or telescope). Both programs then show a frame which simulates the field of view of your setup. If you select a target, you see exactly how it fits in the frame.
Personally I prefer Stellarium, because it was easier to set up the needed data. It has some widely used sensors and lenses already in its database. It also has a more realistic view than cartes du ciel. Both programs have their pros and cons. I think, there are other solutions out there that might do the same. You even can use NINAs framing assistant for this. There even might be some online tools that can do framing like this.
However, without knowledge how to do it, it is a bit of a research. But it is not black magic either and once you got it running, you're the king of the framing. It shows exactly what is worth to photograph and what's not. You don't waste your time on guessing and trying.
Hope this helps..
CS
Christian
a good way to select a lens is to use a Planetarium software like SkyChart (Cartes du ciel( or Stellarium to simulate the field of view. It is possible to input your equipment data (sensor data and focal length of the lens or telescope). Both programs then show a frame which simulates the field of view of your setup. If you select a target, you see exactly how it fits in the frame.
Personally I prefer Stellarium, because it was easier to set up the needed data. It has some widely used sensors and lenses already in its database. It also has a more realistic view than cartes du ciel. Both programs have their pros and cons. I think, there are other solutions out there that might do the same. You even can use NINAs framing assistant for this. There even might be some online tools that can do framing like this.
However, without knowledge how to do it, it is a bit of a research. But it is not black magic either and once you got it running, you're the king of the framing. It shows exactly what is worth to photograph and what's not. You don't waste your time on guessing and trying.
Hope this helps..
CS
Christian
Helpful Engaging Supportive
Here's my 50 1.8 AF-D, stopped down a bit.
andrea tasselli:
Not for 100 USD...
*** Would something like this do? https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/tamron-af-70-300-4-56-ld-macro-nikon-fit/sku-2437453 ***
I would advice against it zooms in general. Better to save up for a decent prime like the 180ED which isn't all that expensive all things considered. If you can find one I can vouch for the 135mm F/2.8 AI, it's not perfect but I got some decent results with it at least and it is cheap enough to perhaps fit the bill.
If you have a paid membership here on AB you can use the equipment section to search for various lenses to find examples.
If you have a paid membership here on AB you can use the equipment section to search for various lenses to find examples.
Concise
Pete:
*** Would something like this do? https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/tamron-af-70-300-4-56-ld-macro-nikon-fit/sku-2437453 ***
Very unlikely. Some of the old primes AIs are worth looking into. I suggest you try find either a 85mm f/2 or a 105mm f/2.5. Stopped down to f/4 the 85mm gives pretty decent results and the 105mm can be used even fully open.
See some test shots here: Lens Tests - AstroBin
Pete:
I got a Nikon D7500 (not modified, not going to) and the 18-55 stock lens isn't enough. Is there any good lens I could use for DSOs? Budget is $100, no higher.
*** @Pete hi Pete, I bought a used vintage Nikon 300mm f/4.5 on eBay. You can get it for under$100USD plus freight. It is an amazing lense. Aluminium body, manual focus. I prefer manual focus as infinity is true focus, no messing around.
I also am not going to modify my D7500. There's no need, it captures ha very well. The sensor is so good I don't use calibration frames!
The image of the Cat's Paw is only about 25 minutes of acquisition. My polar alignment was tricky being in the Southern hemisphere so only could have 10 second exposures. I have resolved this.
I think the Nikon 300mm vintage lens is one of the best lenses ever, sharp as a knife.
I hope this helps, let me know how you get on.
Do you use a tracker? If you are interested I can share with you what I use to find any visible DSO in a minute!
Helpful Engaging Supportive
Here's a cropped Nikon 300F4.5ED manual on a D7500, riding a StarAdventurer
It isn't a great lens by any means but stopped down might actually work.
Thanks for your reply! It might not be the best lens but for a hundred dollars it does a good job 😄
Well Written Respectful
By the way, nice picture Andrea, how much acquisition time?
This is using an AF-Micro Nikkor IF-ED with a QHY268M. I think I used the lens wide open and the image processing sorted any coma in the corners of the image. That has an APS-C sensor so it should be the same field of view as a Nikon AF-C camera and a 200mm lens. The Nikkor 200mm f/4 Ai and Ai-S lenses are good value for money. How long a lens you can use depends on what your camera is mounted on. This was on an equatorial mount and so I could take 5 minute exposures. Longer lenses of on a star tracker would be a challenge. I've used a 300mm f/4 Nikon lens with good results and that is in the same lineage as the 300mm f/4.5 which would be a good lens too.
Helpful
Pete:
I got a Nikon D7500 (not modified, not going to) and the 18-55 stock lens isn't enough. Is there any good lens I could use for DSOs? Budget is $100, no higher.
"Good" is what gets me here. For terrestrial, it doesn't take all that much to create a good enough lens, and in some cases some aberrations (notably spherical) can actually be desirable.
Astrophotography is a different beast, though, and "good" is an entirely different measure. Unless you are ok cropping a fair amount, you need pretty darn good optical performance all the way into the corners for a lens to be "good enough" for AP. As such, a $100 budget is pretty limiting. Maybe you could compensate with AI processing, but if you really want a good lens, it might be worth saving some more money and getting a lens that is better suited to the hobby.
Well Written Helpful Insightful
Burger Oosthuizen:
By the way, nice picture Andrea, how much acquisition time?
*The ones above aren't mine.
andrea tasselli:
Not for 100 USD...
I did some research, would this work well? https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-nikkor-50mm-f-1-8/sku-2615801
Hi Pete, it will work on your camera, but only really good for me milky way wide angle photos, no go for DSOs, you need at least 200mm.
Pete:
I did some research, would this work well? https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-nikkor-50mm-f-1-8/sku-2615801
Stopped down to f/3.3 yes. But mainly for vistas/panoramas.
You can capture wide views of Orion, witches head horse head and flame, but they will be small, also Rho Ophiuchus.
Rho Ophiuchus complex can be imaged with success with something like a 80-100 mm focal length.
Rho Ophiuchus complex can be imaged with success with something like a 80-100 mm focal length.
@andrea tasselli
Hi Andrea, I bought mine about 4 months ago on eBay, it came from Japan, it's vintage ( probably about 25 years old, excellent glass, used but in mint condition) I paid about $100USD.
I have just checked and there are quite a few still available.
Hi Andrea, I bought mine about 4 months ago on eBay, it came from Japan, it's vintage ( probably about 25 years old, excellent glass, used but in mint condition) I paid about $100USD.
I have just checked and there are quite a few still available.
Helpful
Burger Oosthuizen:
Hi Pete, it will work on your camera, but only really good for me milky way wide angle photos, no go for DSOs, you need at least 200mm.
andrea tasselli:Pete:
I did some research, would this work well? https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-nikkor-50mm-f-1-8/sku-2615801
Stopped down to f/3.3 yes. But mainly for vistas/panoramas.
Burger Oosthuizen:
You can capture wide views of Orion, witches head horse head and flame, but they will be small, also Rho Ophiuchus.
Rho Ophiuchus complex can be imaged with success with something like a 80-100 mm focal length.
Wouldn’t this mean to get a 70-300? I’m new to astrophotography and I’m basically a broke teenager so aperture doesn’t matter the most
Try to find a 105mm f/2.5 AIs used, I paid less than the equivalent of 100 USD at that time. Ebay is the place to go.
Jon Rista:Pete:
I got a Nikon D7500 (not modified, not going to) and the 18-55 stock lens isn't enough. Is there any good lens I could use for DSOs? Budget is $100, no higher.
"Good" is what gets me here. For terrestrial, it doesn't take all that much to create a good enough lens, and in some cases some aberrations (notably spherical) can actually be desirable.
Astrophotography is a different beast, though, and "good" is an entirely different measure. Unless you are ok cropping a fair amount, you need pretty darn good optical performance all the way into the corners for a lens to be "good enough" for AP. As such, a $100 budget is pretty limiting. Maybe you could compensate with AI processing, but if you really want a good lens, it might be worth saving some more money and getting a lens that is better suited to the hobby.
You are correct. I guess it's a case of expectations verses reality.
If your goal is to publish or try for "likes"
Photo competitions etc, then you have to spend the money. But for an amateur like me on a budget who wants to explore the night sky, I am happy to compare myself with myself and try to do the best that I can with my budget in dollars and time.
Concise