Calling all Astrophotographers, all skill levels. Post your work.

originally posted by: recrisp

Is there ANY way that you can take a shot of the moon and have it to where it could be downloadable? The reason I ask is, I might be interested in getting one, but I'd really like to see it up close and personal, I am a real pixel peeper. If you can't or don't want to, I do understand, it's just that it has impressed me, that's all.

Oh yeah.... I'm out every night. The pictures I took last night didn't come out well due to the weather, I had to wait for an opening in the clouds to see the Moon, and a mist was falling on the lens. I didn't stay out long with the camera, it was getting wet.

From last night, edited.... Pink Moon, April 11.
With fog and wet lens.... here is the original >>--> ibb.co...



Even took a video!: )
Nikon P900 - Pink Moon - April 11 - Full Zoom


Close up zoom from earlier this month, no edits:

ibb.co...
ibb.co...
ibb.co...

The camera is awesome... If they come out with a new model I would jump on it!

Nikon to announce replacements for the Coolpix AW130 and P900 cameras (125x zoom!) It will feature a monster 125x zoom or 24-3000mm >>--> nikonrumors.com...

originally posted by: imitator

originally posted by: recrisp

Is there ANY way that you can take a shot of the moon and have it to where it could be downloadable? The reason I ask is, I might be interested in getting one, but I'd really like to see it up close and personal, I am a real pixel peeper. If you can't or don't want to, I do understand, it's just that it has impressed me, that's all.

Oh yeah.... I'm out every night. The pictures I took last night didn't come out well due to the weather, I had to wait for an opening in the clouds to see the Moon, and a mist was falling on the lens. I didn't stay out long with the camera, it was getting wet.

From last night, edited.... Pink Moon, April 11.
With fog and wet lens.... here is the original


Even took a video!: )

Close up zoom from earlier this month, no edits:



The camera is awesome... If they come out with a new model I would jump on it!

Nikon to announce replacements for the Coolpix AW130 and P900 cameras (125x zoom!) It will feature a monster 125x zoom or 24-3000mm >>--> nikonrumors.com...

That's pretty awesome actually! heheh
I took your image and did a little tweaking to it and it looked VERY good, it was a little rough at 100%, but it is really nice. You may have settings in your camera that you can remove and make things better. There should be an option to override what the camera does and you can sharpen it as you see fit, not what your camera tells you to, or it should.
Anyway, if that is right out of the camera that is about as good as it gets when it comes to that stuff.

Your video is really something too, it seems like it took an hour for it to cross the screen!

The sounds of the frogs was really something, it helped make the video, I assume you have a pond in your yard.
The stuff you may be referring to is more than likely 'dew', it's a big problem with astro-photography, I sure could be wrong though and since I wasn't there, well. heheh They make a 'dew heater' that helps prevent it from messing up your 'stuff'. I don't know anything about it than that.

That's a good camera though, I like it, whether or not my wife lets me have one is still up in the air.
I would LOVE to see you shoot Jupiter or Saturn when it's available though, that ought to do that easy.

Thanks for the shots and video, I really appreciate that.

a reply to: recrisp

Hi I agree the P900 is a nice little camera well actually it's not that small and it's great for Moon shots wildlife etc but it's very limited for the type of shots on here, there are also few myths that have to be explained the camera is quoted as having an 83 times zoom that's not 100% correct it has an 83 times zoom range going from a 35mm (full frame equivalent ) of 24-2000mm. Now 24mm is wide angle and approximately 0.5 x magnification on a 35mm or full frame digital sensor.
So max magnification is just over 40x I wont bother with digital zoom as that impacts quality.

The crop factor also effects the actual aperture value explained here.



Smaller senors also create more noise due to the tiny pixels see this chart below.



The P900 sensor 3rd from left.

The camera gets good reviews the lens is good quality but for example test images here from image resource

P900 Detail 200 iso
Nikon 3200 Detail 200 iso

P900 Detail 800 iso
Nikon 3200 Detail 800 iso

Nikon 3200 APS-C Sensor larger so will cope better with lower light levels and higher iso's what you tend to need for night shots.

Here are images from my Sony A37 SLT a 16mp APS-C camera taken with a 70-300mm lens

Moon HEAVY crop



A daylight example of a jet this was over 25,000 ft and a few miles down range from my house same lens which only cost me £90.

Before the crop


After


Also if you are interested in making prints the review said this.

P900
A very good 13 x 19 inch print at ISO 100; a nice 8 x 10 at ISO 800; a good 4 x 6 at ISO 3200.

The Nikon 3200

SO 100 shots look terrific printed as large as 24 x 36 inches, with good detail and color. Wall display prints are possible to 30 x 40 inches.

ISO 200 shots look great at 20 x 30 inches.

ISO 400 images also stand up to printing at 20 x 30 inches.

ISO 800 prints start to show a little more noise in the shadows and a little softer detail at 20 x 30, so while we'd call them usable, we prefer them printed at 16 x 20 inches.

ISO 1,600 prints are pretty good at 13 x 19 inches. A bit of noise is creeping into a few areas, but still good for the ISO.

ISO 3,200 shots are a bit rough printed at 13 x 19, but pass muster at 11 x 14 inches, with just a bit of noise in flatter areas.

So at iso 3200 a 4x6 print from the P900 but a 11X14 inch from the 3200.

So the P900 is a good camera but I will stick to a DSLR.

a reply to: wmd_2008

So the P900 is a good camera but I will stick to a DSLR.

I 100% agree with that. heheh

I liked Tony's video, that is one I haven't seen, I trust him, and it was nice to not see Chelsea without a glass of wine in her hand. heheh
What you have shown is a really good example of what most don't know about camera sensors, (me too!) trying to explain that to a non-enthusiast is a hard thing to do. Tony's video is a lot to ingest, my eyes tried to roll back into my head a couple of times, but it's good information, seeing all of that side-by-side is great, I wish I had that information when I first got my digital camera. I have seen a lot of online arguments about the differences.

That's a good list of print sizes too, I had no idea about those, I spent (almost) 30 years in printing but still didn't know that, but I didn't print, I worked in another area, pre-press. I have printed from my Nikon 990 that I had, well, still have, and printed a couple of images to around 2'x3' or so, they came out really good, I was shocked actually, Of course I did quite a bit of Photoshop on them, but still. I printed several around 16"x20", I was only doing it to see how it'd do, and it did real good. I had access to an Epson 40" printer and we'd use scraps to print our own stuff, pretty cool. I have not ever printed any image from any of my better cameras though, I'm just not a printer type of guy really. Most people I know that shoot have all kinds of pictures hanging on their walls, but not me.
There is no doubt in my mind that IF I did print out anything it would be a great print, now my skills may show, but... heheh
All I know is that I see a LOT of people that are pretty good wildlife photographers that have images that are not that great looking at them enlarged, as in a Flickr image, but they are happy, and I am overly critical on mine, so I am sure I am on theirs. Viewed online they are fine, well, except the ones that don't bother with noise.

I know the P900 is not so bad at taking shots of Jupiter/Saturn and the moon, but as far as deep space objects I am sure that is just too much to ask. The reach is there but the quality, not so much, and that goes for anything that it would shoot.
Again, I really am too much of a pixel peeper, I don't like that about myself either, I have just enough OCD to ruin things sometimes. Literally I do not use an image if it doesn't look good at 100%, I mean, I 'might', but it's rare. Really I don't use many of my images anyway, I just put 'em on Flickr. heheh

I just think that the P900 is a good camera for certain things, and it's probably perfect for a lot of people, it could not be my only camera, I know that. That camera is perfect for a private eye though, I know one, I am going to tell him about it... heheh I know one thing for sure, looking at the moon picture that was shown here looked REALLY good, it's what we used to call, "chewed up" when viewed at 100%, but viewed online at a normal size it has a lot of impact. Lots of good tonal goodness.

Have you ever taken a shot of the ISS? I ask that 'cause I have, it's amazing how much you can see from something that's way up there. I have seen some shots that were so detailed it's hard to fathom. Mine are not anything special, I have never had the perfect conditions or I wasn't on a tripod, etc. If you haven't, it's pretty cool to try.
One thing I bought and have yet to try out on the ISS is my Bahtinov Focusing Mask, I always have a time trying to focus on infinity, so a few tests show this will do me some good. I didn't buy it for this reason but I want to try it.

a reply to: wmd_2008

I have tested altitude shots with flight tracking software, the P900 looks like your blown up photo at cruising altitudes of around 39,000ft but with some noise.

That is a great shot at 25,000ft with a 70-300 mm zoom, with the P900 you'll be looking in at American Airlines windows. At cruising altitudes your looking at a dot with a 70-300 mm zoom.

a reply to: imitator

True it's just a 300mm lens the advantage is I can change them to suit the situation and they always have a bigger senor behind them (look at print dimensions so could be cropped further) oh and remember the replacement camera may have a claimed 125x zoom but again that is RANGE the max optical zoom will be 60x, again because it starts of at a wide angle.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Right, the 125x just means equivalent to 3000mm. However, small sensors are catching up with DSLR's with ultra low noise and speed, especially with smart phones. It's amazing that a phone can compete with a DSLR in image quality.

Now don't get me wrong haha, DSLR's are still superior to bridge cameras and smart phones, obviously a DSLR will give you better images, lenses and equipment. But.... the P900 can go from megazoom to supermacro in a instant, without all that luggage, and that's why I bought the P900.

It'll take me a while to buy the lenses needed for my DSLR, like a Canon EF 300mm f/2.8.... that one will take me at least a year or more to save up haha.

a reply to: imitator

Dont belive the hype seriously the quality of the image depends on the optics and the size of the pjxels on the sensor thats why a full frame DSLR produces better quality inages than an APS-C DSLR when light levels reduce bigger pixels are better, any new sensor tech would obviously work better on a larger sensor.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Well hey I'm just a beginner.... I've only owned a DSLR for over a month now haha, I have lots to learn.... and this P900 is like something out of Star Wars!

From what I've been reading, some modern APS-C type cameras are far better than older full frame APS-H size cameras, with a low iso you'd never be able to tell which one has the bigger sensor. Only in low light conditions we would see the difference, and that also depends on the optics... so bigger is not always better! "That's what she said!"

Just look at Event Horizon Telescope, instead of one big radio telescope to search for that supermassive black hole, it's using ten radio telescope observatories across the planet.

Then look at the smart phones, they are starting to use an array of small camera sensors, Sony has a triple-sensor camera on a smart phone, shooting 4K resolution videos! Each sensor dedicated to a specific task, one for sharpness and another for lighting etc... My prediction for the future, large FF camera's will be old school. haha

Come on man, let's root for the little guy! I always bet on the underdog!

Well hello everyone. A little while ago moderator Eriktheawful started a thread on night time photography, having dabbled in a little night time photography myself reading his threads helped me out a bit more. Since posting a few posts on that thread ive been quite busy but still have been managing getting the camera out of a night and getting some shots. Anyway .. ive just came back from scotland after 3 days trekkin and was given a clear night while i was out in the middle of the highlands. Trying to battle -5 degrees weather and the temptation of hot tea back in the tent i only managed to get a few (good) shots after i finally got the camera set up (i know very amateurish but we gotta start somewhere)

ive got a few days off before i have to go back to work so i will be spending some time of going through my photos and sharing them with everyone but i thought id upload one for everyone to see. I dont think the quality is all there and nor does the photo do any justice of how clear and how many stars that you could actually see


Edit: the bightest object in the picture is jupiter

Nice shooting ThePeaceMaker......

April 19
I caught this "potentially earth hazardous" asteroid last night...

Asteroid 2014 JO25




www.skyandtelescope.com...

Here we go two pics that i managed to catch a meteor in. Took these while i was out trekking in scottish highlands

My best Moon so far:

www.astrobin.com... x=&nc=user&pixel_size_min=&q=egidio88&pixel_size_max=&camera_type=5&camera_type=4&camera_type=3&camera_type=2&camera_type=1&camera_type=0&camera_type= any&aperture_max=&aperture_min=&moon_phase_min=&telescope_type=22&telescope_type=21&telescope_type=20&telescope_type=19&telescope_type=18&telescope_ty pe=17&telescope_type=16&telescope_type=15&telescope_type=14&telescope_type=13&telescope_type=12&telescope_type=11&telescope_type=10&telescope_type=9&t elescope_type=8&telescope_type=7&telescope_type=6&telescope_type=5&telescope_type=4&telescope_type=3&telescope_type=2&telescope_type=1&telescope_type= 0&telescope_type=any&moon_phase_max=

I never encountered a better condition yet...I guess that night was special.

Just came in from outside after a beautiful view of Jupiter with 4 of the moons visible... I could see the bands clearly tonight...

How I wish I had a camera attached to the telescope...

BT

I have been catching lots of meteor scatter on the FM radio band.....

www.youtube.com...

Just awesome!!! I'm getting me a P900 now after seeing some of the pics posted here.

It was a little rough hanging out for an hour at 20 below zero, but it was a great test for my winter gear. I made ome awesome photo a few years ago (unfortunately I can't load it). I am fond of night sky, always hang out on dedicated astronomy wesbites like solarstory.net... . Hope to make more photos in the future.

Finally I found some time and decent weather conditions to get out and shoot some astro shizzle.
Installed the gear, pointed the camera at Saturn and the rising Milky Way and enjoyed the views.
This is one of the shots from that night.

detail:
Tracked with Skywatcher SA
Total exposure 33min(23 stack)
50mm f1.8 @ f/4
iso1600

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Very nice shot, I'm totally jealous...

I'd be lucky to see clear skies with the tropical like weather we are having. It's a jungle here... In clear weather I'd have to deal with snakes and bugs, all kinds of creepy night crawlers. I can't wait for winter to come back!

Maybe I'll mount my camera on the roof haha...