Tell me about this new D810 for deep space photography

WestEndFoto

I imagine that the price will come down in due course. All of Nikon's camera sell at a significant discount at retail compared to their MSRP, at least in Canada.

As I said earlier, I think that this was a very cheap product for Nikon to launch. Probably about a million dollars to give astro photographers what they want. There is also likely a bigger market for this than we would appreciate. There is a very significant market for telescopes for amateurs filled by great companies like Meade and Celestron. Lots of those customers spend as much or more on their telescopes as we do on photography - I know - I was one of those when I was a kid. Many, if not most, want to take pictures through their telescopes.

Birders on the other hand, is a much more expensive market to service, requiring the creation of essentially a new camera from scratch.

nukuEX2

I think its bit much to pay nearly $4000 to get a camera that only takes one type of photographs. I wonder if there will be a firmware update in the future that will allow user to turn off the IR filter for the normal daylight photos and then turn on the filter at night for the astronomical shooting. :-/

scoobysmak

I think its bit much to pay nearly $4000 to get a camera that only takes one type of photographs. I wonder if there will be a firmware update in the future that will allow user to turn off the IR filter for the normal daylight photos and then turn on the filter at night for the astronomical shooting. :-/

I could be wrong but don't think it works like that. Consider your sensor "film" for a minute. The camera just takes the information from the sensor and processes it into a photo. The IR filter is a physical device put in front of the sensor so it will not pickup the IR wave length. Unless Nikon allows you to change the filter before the sensor or the sensor itself (wishful thinking) I do not see the firmware being able to block out certain wave lengths because it won't know what to delete or not.

Example:
A normal D800/810 blocks these IR waves so you can take normal pictures. The D810a does not block the IR wave form and allows it to hit the sensor, in normal photos it might show a red cast. Once you hit the sensor the camera will process everything, it will not know a red cast in IR from a red shirt on a person. If you could place and remove the IR filter then you would be able to take normal and astro pics with no problems between the two.

I would love to try astro photography but like others mentioned maybe only 2-5% of my pictures would be of this type/nature. This is very biased but after looking at the main blog and then seeing some pics in the PAD I wasn't exactly impressed with the D810a. There were a few I liked but overall not something I would pay extra for. I am sure some of this is cropping, most of the astro pics in the PAD are wide angle shots and you can see the earth in the picture. Most of the shots from the D810a in the blog might have been "long range" distant galaxy type shots and had an extreme crop to get the picture.

proudgeek

Based on the images I've seen, this doesn't look like it's designed for the kind of astrophotography you and I dabble in (star trails, Milky Way shots, etc.) This seems like it's better suited for deep space photography using a high-powered telescope as a lens, as well as a device that allows the camera to move in concert with the earth's rotation; hence the 15 minute exposure setting. Incredible images though.

I would also agree with Coastal's comments about the D400. This camera makes the D400 look like a mass market camera. More than ever, I think Nikon's not releasing one simply because they don't want to.

WestEndFoto

I think its bit much to pay nearly $4000 to get a camera that only takes one type of photographs. I wonder if there will be a firmware update in the future that will allow user to turn off the IR filter for the normal daylight photos and then turn on the filter at night for the astronomical shooting. :-/

I could be wrong but don't think it works like that. Consider your sensor "film" for a minute. The camera just takes the information from the sensor and processes it into a photo. The IR filter is a physical device put in front of the sensor so it will not pickup the IR wave length. Unless Nikon allows you to change the filter before the sensor or the sensor itself (wishful thinking) I do not see the firmware being able to block out certain wave lengths because it won't know what to delete or not.

Example:
A normal D800/810 blocks these IR waves so you can take normal pictures. The D810a does not block the IR wave form and allows it to hit the sensor, in normal photos it might show a red cast. Once you hit the sensor the camera will process everything, it will not know a red cast in IR from a red shirt on a person. If you could place and remove the IR filter then you would be able to take normal and astro pics with no problems between the two.

I would love to try astro photography but like others mentioned maybe only 2-5% of my pictures would be of this type/nature. This is very biased but after looking at the main blog and then seeing some pics in the PAD I wasn't exactly impressed with the D810a. There were a few I liked but overall not something I would pay extra for. I am sure some of this is cropping, most of the astro pics in the PAD are wide angle shots and you can see the earth in the picture. Most of the shots from the D810a in the blog might have been "long range" distant galaxy type shots and had an extreme crop to get the picture.

This is not how a camera like this will be used. It will be attached to a telescope and I doubt much cropping will be required. Also, deep sky galaxy shots are long exposures, sometimes a hundred hours over multiple nights (not usually, but can be).

As far as cropping is concerned, consider the largest large galaxy to Earth, Andromeda. It is actually twice the diameter of the full moon. This is a picture:



This is an 18 hour exposure. The issue is not size, but dimness. This is the CLOSEST large galaxy to our Earth's Milky Way (it will collide with ours in 2 billion years). And it still needs an 18 hour exposure.

This is the market that the D810A was designed for, not milky way shots with mountains at the bottom of the sky, though it will be good for those too.

There is a market for this camera. Amateur astronomers are a very market and spend lots of money on telescopes (and cameras).

sevencrossing

Needless to say an 18 hour exposure needs a really good lens mount
In my limited experience, they are equatorial mounts, weigh several tons and are bolted to an equally heavy concrete base

Ironheart

Yeahbut, why spend spend $3800 when you can buy a D810 for $3000 and pay someone $400 to convert it to astro or IR? Or better yet get a D800 refurb for $1500-$2000 and convert that. Same sensor, which is really all that matters for astro. It will be interesting to see if this is a wise choice by Nikon, or failed publicity stunt.

Ironheart

Nobody does 18 hour exposures anymore, too much noise. You take 100s of photos and stack them. You still need the equitorial mount, but it can be done in a backyard on a standard telescope tripod. The weather (clouds) are more of a concern. Here's the info from the galaxy photo above:

The image consists of 2 minute combined with 5 and 10 minute exposures for the luminance, 5 and 10 minute exposures for the RGB, 15 minute exposures with QHY9C one shot color CCD and finally 20 minute exposures using H-Alpha filter with QHY9M monochrome CCD Camera.

Total Exposure Time 18.7 hours.

Clear Skies
Terry

Image Information
Location: DownUnder Observatory, Fremont MI
Date of Shoot August 13, 21, 22 and 23 2012
Exposures:
QHY9M mono CCD
Luminance
RGB 6 x 5 min, 9 x 10 min
26 x 2 min
23 x 5 min
18 x 10 min
H-Alpha 11 x 20 min
QHY9C one shot color CCD
13 x 15 min
all sub exposures un binned.

WestEndFoto

Yes, they are always stacked. Astrophotographers have been doing multiple exposures for a hundred years.

heartyfisher

Nikon may have a winner here.. I visit a astro / night scape photography forum .. and quite a number of people have been excited about this camera.. many are contemplating a switch to nikon !

autofocus

How many places can you shoot in 18 hours of darkness. Can't be many that most photographers have access to.

Beso

How many places can you shoot in 18 hours of darkness. Can't be many that most photographers have access to.

If you look at the information associated with the Andromeda shot, you will see that it was done over several days with multiple steps designed to enable the best possible reproduction. Not many of us are going to go to that length. Whenever I have looked into deep space astrophotography I come away with an understanding that to get decent images one will have to use a telescope along with a properly designed camera; and the end results will never compare to what is coming out of the Goddard Space Flight Center postings of the Hubble generated images. There are several reasons for this but primarily they are associated with atmospheric interference and pollution plus the amazing technology that NASA and the ESU employ that are financially unobtainable and probably unavailable to the average citizen. It's fun to dream but the reality is the challenges are enormous.

Maadscientist

I am an astro imager and planetary imager. If I can give my 2 cents, I think Nikon has misunderstood the astro imaging market.. Cooling is essential for long exposure astro imaging. Most Astro Imaging camera manufacturers use 2 stage peltier cooling to get the camera at least 20 degrees or more below ambient. One of the best is http://www.flicamera.com/. A lot of imagers use mono cameras with filter wheels with LRGB filters. The objects are dim, so imaging in a luminence channel increases the S/N faster than the Bayer array one shot color. Now large bright objects can benefit from color cameras, and I personally use an Opticstar 616c XL http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Imagers-Opticstar.asp?p=0_10_0_50_250. This camera has no ir filter, I attach one when I use a telescope with lenses. Nikon has gotten half of the equation right. Emission nebula, (the pretty picture ones, give off their color at HA wavelengths, 656.3. Replacing the filter is great. However, Canon did it, twice. Problem? 5 minute exposures build up the thermal noise that cannot be managed. For beginners, they will get a decent set of images. The chip is HUGE. But eventually, serious astro imagers migrate to a cooled camera, you just have to ice that chip down for long exposures. Another problem, camera control software, especially for focusing. Backyard EOS is the winner for Canon, they are trying for Nikon, but the control software is proprietary and model specific. Nowto the Astro market. I have a $10,000 setup for mount and scope. Lots of imagers drop serious coin in this hobby, but even more are the cheapest SOB's out there. They will tell you till the cows come home they will buy a product, but when it comes out they will inevitably shy away. On the bright side, I applaud Nikon for trying. On the usage during the day, unless Nikon will make the IR filter they removed available as a screw on, you will have to take the RAW and adjust it. Hope this helps...

Ironheart

@Maadscientist (is there any other kind?) I wasn't the middle of composing a similar message about serious folks are using dedicated astro cams and Nikon should remove the Bayer filter if they are really serious. (I would love a monochrome sensor from Nikon, now there's a niche for ya!) What Nikon really has is a fancy star trail camera. A fancy star trail camera that I might just buy :-)

proudgeek

Wow. Just wow. It's like I'm playing checkers and Madscientist is playing 5 games of chess simultaneously.

Maadscientist

A mono chip would be well received. The guy who did the Andomeda pic is Terry Hancock. I know him, and he used a cooled QHY camera with an old Kodak FX chip, the 11002 https://www.astrofactors.com/cameras/product/21-qhy11-11-megapixel-full-35mm-size-mono-ccd-camera-using-kodak-kai-11002-ccd.html
The QE on that chip is weak, and the noise is wretched unless it is iced down.
Back to the Astro version, if one can set a custom white balance that works, the camera will be worth it for dual usage. Milky Way shots will have way more red, and if one starts tracking with a mount or something like a polarie or astro track, the big starter targets are red, H Alpha stuff. But again, it would depend if you can get the custom white balance to work for your needs during the day. In RAW, you can adjust it the way you want. I don't really see an issue for dual usage, but a professional might find the RAW adjustments still leave a slight red hangover.
Also as a heads up, take a dark of the same exposure as your light(s) and subtract it later. It will REALLY help, especially with bad/hot/cold pixels.Make sure you take it either right before or right after your light(s), or in the middle if you do a few.

proudgeek

So if I can create a custom WB (though something like an Expodisk) would that allow me to use this camera for day-to-day photography?

Ironheart

The Expo disk won't help, because the sensor is the thing that is overly sensitive to reds for general purpose photography. Here's an excerpt from my emails with Nikon support:

Would a filter that blocks IR wavelengths in front of the lens allow you to take a normal photograph? Thank you.

We do not recommend this camera for shooting regular photographs.

Which is just sticking to the party line they already have on their web site and press release. Ah, well we'll just have to wait to get our hands on one to find out.

NSXTypeR

A bit of a side note, but what about the Sigma DSLRs? Didn't they have a removable IR filter within the camera? Or was that just for IR photography and not the right wavelength for astrophotography?

Maadscientist

So if I can create a custom WB (though something like an Expodisk) would that allow me to use this camera for day-to-day photography?

You can, but the color will still be off a tad. Here is the quote from Jerry Lodigruss:

Accurate Daytime Color and Modified DSLR Cameras

It should be noted that with DSLR cameras where the long-wavelength filter has been removed or replaced, not all colors will be accurately reproduced in daytime images. This is because the digital sensor in the camera has different sensitivity than the human visual perception system. That is what the manufacturer's original filter is for, correcting the spectral sensitivity of the sensor to better match our vision.

Some objects will reflect or absorb more long red wavelength light, and even though we may not be able to see this with our eyes, a modified camera will record it. So, even with these white balancing methods, there may be some colors in daytime images that are not recorded correctly by modified cameras. For critical color recording of daytime images with a modified camera, it is necessary to use a filter over the camera lens that matches the manufacturer's original long-wavelength filter that was removed from the camera.

WestEndFoto

Maadscientist, thank you for bringing your perspective to this forum. You have added a lot. How did you come across the forum?

Maadscientist

Well, I own a couple of Nikon's, the D3200 and the D3100 which I gave to my wife. I use it for Lunar Photography, as I have many scopes in my arsenal. An APS-C size chip is considered pretty large in Astro Imaging, as many telescopes cannot get the field flat enough and abberation free for that size. My cooled Opticstar uses a Nikon chip that was in the D70? from a while back. I am interested in an FX size chip for Lunar Photography and a bit of landscape. The 750 seems ideal, but the reflection issue is troubling and at this time I can only afford the grey market version. Might be better off to get a used 810, I dunno. Anyway I was researching the 750 and came across this forum. I was pleasantly surprised to see the 810 Astro version being released, and just browsed to the forums where the original poster asked the question.

I thought I would share some of my knowledge. Astro Imaging is a field all unto itself, and probably requires about a $5,000 initial investment to get off the ground and some good results. Sky glow is a killer, and if you live in urban areas you will be restricted to planetary imaging. That being said, planetary can be the most rewarding, as the planets are constantly changing and getting moon transits and atmospheric changes are relative to the date you get it. Miss it, and you can't go back in time! Also, there is the science. Large telescopes are booked ahead for years, so planetary scientists rely on the amateur community to regularly submit there images. I have a ton of Astro stuff, but have been trying to consolidate on Astrobin. Here is my page: http://www.astrobin.com/users/Maadscientist/

Maadscientist

I was a little ticked that the RAW images in the D3200 are compressed, and I would have to upgrade to the D5300 to get the non compressed 12 bit. The 5300 also allows 14 bit raw. I then thought heck, why not go to FX and the 750 looks good.

Maadscientist

Oh, I forgot, you can do solar imaging as well. Here is a shot from the partial eclipse in 2014 with the D3200
Well I can't eem to figure out how to upload it.

spraynpray

Image number 111669 on your site is cool Maadscientist - care to talk us through how you got it?

See the sticky thread on posting on pad near the top for image posting info.