Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/07/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I meant that there is a difference between who the image looks when viewed in my browser from the LUG gallery and how the uploaded image looks when viewed with Lightroom or Preview. In any case, I think I may have over cooked that image quite a bit. I?ll upload a revised version of it in the next day or so when I have a moment to work on it. ?Jim On Jul 13, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Howard Ritter <hlritter at bex.net> wrote: > As an amateur astronomer who has tried to get photos that faithfully > represent what's seen through the eyepiece, I'd say that the image you > posted is not bad at all for a single image taken with an 82-mm objective. > For comparison, here's a single image of the same Moon with a Canon DSLR > through an astronomical telescope of three times the aperture of the > Televid, yet it's inferior to yours: > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/laurie_astronomy/14665188023/ > > Do you mean that the visual appearance through the Televid was much > sharper? That's very typical and is due to the fact that an astronomical > object is always viewed through a turbulent, boiling atmosphere that the > human visual mechanism compensates for, both by integrating the image over > time and by being abe to see momentarily sharp details. The best images of > the Moon and planets invariably come using specialty software that > examines huge numbers, hundreds to thousands, of individual video frames > taken at prime focus (as you did, with no eyepiece or camera lens) with > either a cheap webcam or a somewhat more expensive several-Mpx "planetary > camera" (that still costs less than the leather case for the Televid!), > selects the best images (whose details in hundreds of points across the > image deviate the least from the mean positions of the details), derives > from them a consensus image using the mean position of each detail, and > applies mathematical routines to "deconvolute" the details to partially > compensate for residual smearing. > > Or do you mean that the image looks better on your monitor right out of > the camera than off the Gallery? When viewed large, your Gallery image > seems to have a peculiar graininess, almost pointillistic, and I wonder > whether it would look better if it were uploaded with less compression and > size reduction. > > If I have favorable conditions here tonight, I'll try to get a single > image with my 155-mm apo refractor and post it. > > ?howard > > > On Jul 13, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Jim Laurel <jplaurel at gmail.com> wrote: > >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/jplaure/landscape/Super+Moon.jpg.html >> >> Here?s a shot of last night?s super moon as seen from the Seattle area. >> Captured with an Olympus OMD E-M1 through a Leica APO Televid 82 using >> the Leica DSLR Photo Adapter. This is not digiscoping in the typical >> sense, where you take a photo through the scope?s eyepiece. The Leica SLR >> Photo Adapter replaces the eyepiece and provides a T-mount that you can >> use to adapt almost any lens mount. In this case, a T to m4/3 adapter. >> With the APO Televid 82, the adapter provides the equivalent of an 800mm >> lens. On a Micro 4/3 camera, it yields a 1600mm equivalent field of view. >> >> The image is actually a lot sharper than it appears on the LUG Gallery. I >> don?t know why it looks so soft there. >> >> Here is a link to the DLSR Photo Adapter on the Leica site. >> >> http://us.leica-camera.com/Sport-Optics/Technical-Equipment/Sport-Optics-Technical-Equipment/DSLR-Photo-Adapter >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information