Photographing stars, 4x5

[Crown-LF]

I'd like to try photographing the night sky on my 4x5 crown graphic, ideally not star trails.

I've found it hard to come across much (beginner) information on LF star/night sky photography, so just wondered if anyone here had any tips or information they'd like to share?

Just some general information on exposure times or camera settings that have worked for you - would be really helpful!
The only lens I have for the moment is a Kodak Ektar f/4.7 127mm.


Thank you

[ic-racer]

Photographing stars... not star trails.

Agree, it is not obvious. You have to look up "Clock Drive" and "Equatorial Mount."

[Crown-LF]

Agree, it is not obvious. You have to look up "Clock Drive" and "Equatorial Mount."

Ah...I didn't realise I'd need external equipment. I thought I would just need the camera and a tripod and release cable.

[konakoa]

I've been doing this very thing for years and years. It has its challenges for sure, but it's so very satisfying when you see a 4x5 negative you made yourself just full of stars. But it does require some work and care.

At the very minimum you're looking at ten to fifteen minute exposures so you need a way for the camera to track the stars. Yes, you will need some extra equipment for that. Your best bet is an equatorial mount to attach the camera to. Simply put the camera and lens on top of the mount. The telescope guys call this 'wide field' work. I put a couple of photos of two of mine below. There are a number of other considerations so if you're inclined send me a note and I can go into better detail and techniques to help and what to expect.

[Crown-LF]

I've been doing this very thing for years and years. It has its challenges for sure, but it's so very satisfying when you see a 4x5 negative you made yourself just full of stars. But it does require some work and care.

At the very minimum you're looking at ten to fifteen minute exposures so you need a way for the camera to track the stars. Yes, you will need some extra equipment for that. Your best bet is an equatorial mount to attach the camera to. Simply put the camera and lens on top of the mount. The telescope guys call this 'wide field' work. I put a couple of photos of two of mine below. There are a number of other considerations so if you're inclined send me a note and I can go into better detail and techniques to help and what to expect.

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it

[John Layton]

The problem with most stars is that they are either very busy...or are at least always trying to look and act busy (keeping up appearances, etc.)...and the idea of getting any of them to sit still in front of a 4x5 - much less for the lengths of time some have suggested above...is beyond me! :rolleyes:

[Tin Can]

Another example of adventuring with LF!

Perhaps an expert will show the Hinge Method?

[Drew Bedo]

Has any body mounted a TravelWide or WillTravel directly to a telescope already set up for star tracking? That would give 4x5 images with a real astrophotography telescope.

Either camera body would be light enough for direct coupling. Even if a suplimental bracket was needed, it wouldn't be much I would think.

I think the technique is called "Eyepiece Projection".

[Corran]

I currently have a SkyWatcher EQ6-R on order, arriving tomorrow hopefully but sky forecast looks cloudy until late next week.

Will be experimenting with full-size 4x5 cameras on the mount, as well as piggybacking on a Celestron C8 I will be remounting onto it as well.

Eyepiece projection will probably not happen for me. I don't think it's worthwhile - I know others disagree. First usage on 4x5 will probably be DSO with Linhof MT and 250mm Sonnar (heavy!).

[Phil_Young]

One of the laws of astronomy that you will not find in a textbook is that the arrival of new equipment will bring with it a week of cloudy skies.

[Huub]

One of the laws of astronomy that you will not find in a textbook is that the arrival of new equipment will bring with it a week of cloudy skies.

Ain't that a derivative of Murphies law?

[Fred L]

One of the laws of astronomy that you will not find in a textbook is that the arrival of new equipment will bring with it a week of cloudy skies.

hahaha yup. on an astro group I know, someone always posts a question on their forum asking who just got a scope cuz the clear sky charts are solid white lol

[William Whitaker]

Try YouTube. You will find more information there on this subject than you have time to watch.

[Lachlan 717]

This is going to be a rabbit hole if you choose to pursue it.

It is NOT as simple as putting the camera on an Equatorial mount and press the shutter release. You need a way to polar align the rig.

The longer the lens, the more accurate you’ll need to be.

Yes, these come with a PA scope; however, this will not be accurate enough. They work okay for ultra wide angle lenses on digital as you can smash up the gain on the sensor and take a heap of short (300 seconds or less) images that are then stacked in a dedicated programme to reduce signal noise.

But, that’s not what you do in LF Astro. You shoot single images. You shoot low sensitivity emulsions that suffer both reciprocity failure and colour shift. You loose light through filtration (which, unless you’re in very low Bortle skies, you will need).

So, you will need a Polar align system and a tracking system. Both will cost money and will require electric input (computer, iPad etc.)

This is NOT a pont’n’shoot pursuit....

[Nodda Duma]

OP, check out the Cloudy Nights forum for info on other gear that you’ll need to make it happen, aside from the camera itself.


You’re gonna love that EQ6, Corran

213807


I currently have a SkyWatcher EQ6-R on order, arriving tomorrow hopefully but sky forecast looks cloudy until late next week.

Will be experimenting with full-size 4x5 cameras on the mount, as well as piggybacking on a Celestron C8 I will be remounting onto it as well.

Eyepiece projection will probably not happen for me. I don't think it's worthwhile - I know others disagree. First usage on 4x5 will probably be DSO with Linhof MT and 250mm Sonnar (heavy!).

This is Provia 100F 4x5 shot through a Bausch & Lamb 24” f/6.3 aerial reconnaissance lens. The lens is mounted to a steel tube with a 4x5 back hacked onto it and mounted to a Losmandy dovetail for attaching to my telescope mount.

213808

[Corran]

This is Provia 100F 4x5 shot through a Bausch & Lamb 24” f/6.3 aerial reconnaissance lens. The lens is mounted to a steel tube with a 4x5 back hacked onto it and mounted to a Losmandy dovetail for attaching to my telescope mount.

Nice! I actually have the elements for that same lens, no barrel, that I've been meaning to try mounting up and putting in front of a camera somehow. Also a 20" f/5.6 B&L as well sitting here from some estate sale in barrel - a tele lens that might be easier to use. Lots to play with.

I tried registering at Cloudy Nights some time ago and got all kinds of weird errors and problems with their forum. Not sure what's up with that.

[konakoa]

This is going to be a rabbit hole if you choose to pursue it.

It is NOT as simple as putting the camera on an Equatorial mount and press the shutter release. You need a way to polar align the rig.

The longer the lens, the more accurate you’ll need to be.

Yes, these come with a PA scope; however, this will not be accurate enough. They work okay for ultra wide angle lenses on digital as you can smash up the gain on the sensor and take a heap of short (300 seconds or less) images that are then stacked in a dedicated programme to reduce signal noise.

But, that’s not what you do in LF Astro. You shoot single images. You shoot low sensitivity emulsions that suffer both reciprocity failure and colour shift. You loose light through filtration (which, unless you’re in very low Bortle skies, you will need).

So, you will need a Polar align system and a tracking system. Both will cost money and will require electric input (computer, iPad etc.)

This is NOT a pont’n’shoot pursuit....

Actually, the built in polar scopes can work just fine. I've been using a not much more than a equatorial mount, its polar scope, a modest little guide scope and a reticle eyepiece to utilize my 4x5 on the night sky for about fifteen years. I vastly prefer its simplicity and ease of use over the alternatives. You don't need a permanent pier, drift alignment, goto, laptops, pads, phones, autoguiders...

I'm posting a couple of negatives I made with little more than just that. These are on Tech Pan, and exposed recently. A nice little equatorial for tracking, polar alignment using nothing more than the built-in scope. Manual guiding. That was it. Rho Ophiuchi was done with a 300mm lens. About a twenty minute exposure. The close-up view shows how the tracking performed. The second is Orion. 180mm lens, similar exposure time, and a closeup. No alignment or tracking issues.

A bigger issue will be finding a mount that even has a polar scope anymore. I had to search hard to find a mount that still offered and used one. Most all new equatorial mounts rely on software fixes for alignment now.

[Lachlan 717]

20 minute subs with reticule alignment. Sorry; I don’t believe that is possible.

A 5 minute sub with tracking is tough enough with digital wide field, let alone 20 minutes unguided.

[Nodda Duma]

konakoa, if you can’t find a new mount with a polar scope, then you didn’t do an internet search. All the equatorial mounts on the market above “department store” level include them. Software doesn’t correct polar misalignment errors after the image is captured.

The harder part is finding them in stock... amateur astronomy has seen a huge increase in interest due to COVID driving people to find things to do at home.

Lachlan, 15+ years ago I was manually guiding 1-3 hour film shots by hand viewing through a reticled eyepiece. That was needed to correct tracking errors. This was at a very narrow FOV (1800mm focal length). When I piggybacked a camera for wide FOV shots, I didn’t need to make guiding corrections for that hour...the mount was smooth enough. For wide field shots you can get away with a barndoor tracker.

konakoa is talking about polar alignment when setting up, a different topic.


Btw, attached is a dry plate shot from a couple weeks ago, 1hr exposure, replicating a famous 1881 (iirc) dry plate photograph

[Fred L]

konakoa, if you can’t find a new mount with a polar scope, then you didn’t do an internet search. All the equatorial mounts on the market above “department store” level include them. Software doesn’t correct polar misalignment errors after the image is captured.

The harder part is finding them in stock... amateur astronomy has seen a huge increase in interest due to COVID driving people to find things to do at home.

Lachlan, 15+ years ago I was manually guiding 1-3 hour film shots by hand viewing through a reticled eyepiece. That was needed to correct tracking errors. This was at a very narrow FOV (1800mm focal length). When I piggybacked a camera for wide FOV shots, I didn’t need to make guiding corrections for that hour...the mount was smooth enough. For wide field shots you can get away with a barndoor tracker.

konakoa is talking about polar alignment when setting up, a different topic.


Btw, attached is a dry plate shot from a couple weeks ago, 1hr exposure, replicating a famous 1881 (iirc) dry plate photograph

Whoa, stunning photograph ! Wonder how bad colour shift would be if it was colour film (vs filters)

[Bill Burk]

The LEAH telescope at Chabot Observatory has Graflok back.

[j enea]

I work/volunteer at Lick observatory. They have several mounts for 4x5, 5x7 and mainly 8x10 for most of the scopes up on the hill. but the 36" was the main one along with the crosley, which became one of the major photo scopes in the world in from 1900-1930. they also have a full dark room attached to the 36" dome. years ago I spent several hours cleaning it up as it hadn't been used for many year for obvious reasons.

the 8x10 mount for the 36" is huge and stable. I have yet to find one of the 4x5 or 5x7 mounts as I think they were all moved. the vault I think has a collection of over 100,000 glass plates and later film negs. sadly, they are never printed, let alone looked at any more. I can remember even a few years ago in the gift shop they had 11x14 B&W prints on fiber paper they were selling for $20 each. they finally sold out and I begged them to let me print more or scan some so they could be printed digitally. No way. The shots they had of the moon was so amazingly filled with details that I wonder what emulsion they used. they have notes for every shot they took, but I dont have access to them. I believe the emuslsions were all hand made glass plates. Still, I keep my hopes up every year and ask. with the fire disaster last fall, I think they are planning on moving the vault down to the santa cruz campus, but thats up to the powers that be.

there are a lot of amateurs that bring their scopes up for the viewing parties. most of us "old times" still have their camera mounts so they could be mounted to the tubes. I don't know any who used 4x5. almost all used a pentax 67 set up and a few used nikon. just hoping we can re-open this year as last year was a total shut down.

john

[Nodda Duma]

Whoa, stunning photograph ! Wonder how bad colour shift would be if it was colour film (vs filters)

That didn’t use any filter. That was a hand-coated dry plate.

[Fred L]

That didn’t use any filter. That was a hand-coated dry plate.

haha, meant I wonder what a colour neg or chrome would look like. LF piggyback or afocal is pretty next level work.

[Fred L]

I work/volunteer at Lick observatory. They have several mounts for 4x5, 5x7 and mainly 8x10 for most of the scopes up on the hill. but the 36" was the main one along with the crosley, which became one of the major photo scopes in the world in from 1900-1930. they also have a full dark room attached to the 36" dome. years ago I spent several hours cleaning it up as it hadn't been used for many year for obvious reasons.

the 8x10 mount for the 36" is huge and stable. I have yet to find one of the 4x5 or 5x7 mounts as I think they were all moved. the vault I think has a collection of over 100,000 glass plates and later film negs. sadly, they are never printed, let alone looked at any more. I can remember even a few years ago in the gift shop they had 11x14 B&W prints on fiber paper they were selling for $20 each. they finally sold out and I begged them to let me print more or scan some so they could be printed digitally. No way. The shots they had of the moon was so amazingly filled with details that I wonder what emulsion they used. they have notes for every shot they took, but I dont have access to them. I believe the emuslsions were all hand made glass plates. Still, I keep my hopes up every year and ask. with the fire disaster last fall, I think they are planning on moving the vault down to the santa cruz campus, but thats up to the powers that be.

there are a lot of amateurs that bring their scopes up for the viewing parties. most of us "old times" still have their camera mounts so they could be mounted to the tubes. I don't know any who used 4x5. almost all used a pentax 67 set up and a few used nikon. just hoping we can re-open this year as last year was a total shut down.

john

used to spend time at the David Dunlap Observatory and saw some of 8x10 plates they had. Stunning. Not sure where those plates are now. Unfortunately the observatory is surrounded by sprawl so light pollution is pretty nasty, and a subdivision was built on the grounds that were sold off.

[reddesert]

The shots they had of the moon was so amazingly filled with details that I wonder what emulsion they used. they have notes for every shot they took, but I dont have access to them. I believe the emuslsions were all hand made glass plates. Still, I keep my hopes up every year and ask. with the fire disaster last fall, I think they are planning on moving the vault down to the santa cruz campus, but thats up to the powers that be.


For much of the 20th century Kodak made glass plates with various specialized emulsions that astronomers used - different emulsions had different color sensitivities. Some of the commonly used emulsions were called IIa-O, 103aO, IIIa-J - if you search for these you'll come up with papers in the astronomy literature on using them, hypersensitizing, etc. By the early 90s astronomer demand for plates had fallen a lot due to photoelectric detectors and CCDs, and Kodak stopped making these emulsions. The last few telescopes (Schmidt cameras) needing extremely large (like 14x14") photographic material switched to Technical Pan - I think the red sensitivity was also of interest. Most of those telescopes have now been retrofitted with electronic detectors.

I have an old handbook from Kodak with technical details of various scientific imaging products, but it's stuck in my office at the moment.

[prado333]

Interesting information
I would like to know how to shoot the moon with a 4x5 camera or a pentax 67 , and how to attach it to a telescope long enough to fill the frame.
I know nothing about astrophotography but i would like to have some prints of the moon in crescent and full moon. any advices are apreciated.

[Corran]

The moon fills the frame of my 36 x 24 mm camera with a 2000mm lens (telescope). So for 6x7 you need a 4500mm lens or so and on 4x5 an 8000mm lens.

Good luck, I hope you have deep pockets and a good tripod/observatory!

Seriously though, just shoot it with a small format camera and make prints as you would normally. The moon is not a challenging subject given a moderately good 300-400mm lens on APS-C digital, or 35mm film with same or a bit longer if you have it. My telescope actually makes worse images of the moon than a normal lens because I don't have a field corrector for it, yet - but are you going to spend $3000-$4000+ on this endeavor? I shot moderately good moon photos over a decade ago with a Nikon D90 and 70-300mm VR lens, which today would cost a few hundred bucks. If insisting on film I would still shoot 35mm and use a ~500mm lens, which should give decent results with a good tripod and careful technique. Unless you need a massive print that should work out okay.

Or you could download some NASA images and print those :).

[Alan Klein]

I've been doing this very thing for years and years. It has its challenges for sure, but it's so very satisfying when you see a 4x5 negative you made yourself just full of stars. But it does require some work and care.

At the very minimum you're looking at ten to fifteen minute exposures so you need a way for the camera to track the stars. Yes, you will need some extra equipment for that. Your best bet is an equatorial mount to attach the camera to. Simply put the camera and lens on top of the mount. The telescope guys call this 'wide field' work. I put a couple of photos of two of mine below. There are a number of other considerations so if you're inclined send me a note and I can go into better detail and techniques to help and what to expect.

What film do you use?

[Alan Klein]

Interesting article about how film plates recorded the bending of starlight around the sun during the solar eclipse of 1919 to prove Einstein's theory of relativity in 1919. War and intrigue followed the scientists as well as malfunctions in the photo and telescope equipment.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/science/eclipse-einstein-general-relativity.html

[konakoa]

What film do you use?

Hypersensitized Tech Pan. It's normal Kodak 4x5 Technical Pan film, only made more sensitive to light. It requires equipment and a process however that I'd be surprised if anyone here wanted to follow as it needs a few days to run and you'd have to make some of the gear to do it. Sealed air-tight, light tight chamber, vacuum pump, forming gas, heat and a thermostat...

The old version of Fuji Acros is really nice if you can find any. Works great right out of the box for astrophotography. Don't have to do anything special to it. This is all just for black and white negatives though.