OMDS moving on with the Olympus sprit again: The thinkers and engineers, that came from Olympus, are at it again at OMDS. All our astrophotography UHHers may want to think about OM...

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

The thinkers and engineers, that came from Olympus, are at it again at OMDS. All our astrophotography UHHers may want to think about OM cameras and lenses.

"OM System has been granted a patent for an astronomy tracking function that combines a camera’s in-body image stabilization (IBIS) system alongside optical image stabilization (OIS). Based on the … View the article. https://flip.it/N-d_Zx "

JD750 Loc: SoCal

wdross wrote:

The thinkers and engineers, that came from Olympus, are at it again at OMDS. All our astrophotography UHHers may want to think about OM cameras and lenses.

"OM System has been granted a patent for an astronomy tracking function that combines a camera’s in-body image stabilization (IBIS) system alongside optical image stabilization (OIS). Based on the … View the article. https://flip.it/N-d_Zx "

OM is a modern company and they are using the technology creatively to develop new products. Viva la competition!

So the obvious problem with M43 and astrophotography is signal to noise ratio (SNR). For two sensors from the same generation, the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a lower SNR.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

JD750 wrote:

OM is a modern company and they are using the technology creatively to develop new products. Viva la competition!

So the obvious problem with M43 and astrophotography is signal to noise ratio (SNR). For two sensors from the same generation, the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a lower SNR.

But it is also good enough that many people will enjoy it if it is easy enough.

jcboy3

wdross wrote:

The thinkers and engineers, that came from Olympus, are at it again at OMDS. All our astrophotography UHHers may want to think about OM cameras and lenses.

"OM System has been granted a patent for an astronomy tracking function that combines a camera’s in-body image stabilization (IBIS) system alongside optical image stabilization (OIS). Based on the … View the article. https://flip.it/N-d_Zx "

The problem; they don't have any lenses suitable for use with this function. It requires a fast, wide lens that has OIS. But if they did develop a 10mm OIS f1.4 lens, it would be interesting. I wonder how long the exposures could be. It would also be interesting of they could apply it along with the High Resolution mode (even for shorter exposures).

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

JD750 wrote:

So the obvious problem with M43 and astrophotography is signal to noise ratio (SNR). For two sensors from the same generation, the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a lower SNR.

This last sentence is backwards somehow. Probably switching pixel size with pixel count. Signal good, noise bad.

It should read:
…the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a better SNR,
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR,
…the sensor with the smaller pixel size will normally have a better SNR or
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

JD750 wrote:

OM is a modern company and they are using the technology creatively to develop new products. Viva la competition!

So the obvious problem with M43 and astrophotography is signal to noise ratio (SNR). For two sensors from the same generation, the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a lower SNR.

Article talks about noise. With the much longer exposures, it appears that noise becomes less of a problem. The picture (I realize from Pentax's tracking system) demonstrates the issue of eliminating the star tracks and lessening the noise.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

jcboy3 wrote:

The problem; they don't have any lenses suitable for use with this function. It requires a fast, wide lens that has OIS. But if they did develop a 10mm OIS f1.4 lens, it would be interesting. I wonder how long the exposures could be. It would also be interesting of they could apply it along with the High Resolution mode (even for shorter exposures).

That is the reason they are trying to develop it. No star tracks and long exposures. An f4 lens will be more than enough. They are looking at the 12-100 f4 Pro IS lens as possibly the best candidate for this software. Possibly even an f-stop greater than f4 can be used. It will be interesting to see what they come up with.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

wdross wrote:

That is the reason they are trying to develop it. No star tracks and long exposures. An f4 lens will be more than enough. They are looking at the 12-100 f4 Pro IS lens as possibly the best candidate for this software. Possibly even an f-stop greater than f4 can be used. It will be interesting to see what they come up with.

The Olympus 12-100mm f4 is great for astro photography. Here is one such example. Made from a stack of 6 sec images at ISO 3200 and taken at 100mm FL. I was using a cheap tracker.

And the SNR is good enough for enjoyment.

Comet Neowise in July 2020
Comet Neowise in July 2020...

(Download)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

jcboy3 wrote:

The problem; they don't have any lenses suitable for use with this function. It requires a fast, wide lens that has OIS. But if they did develop a 10mm OIS f1.4 lens, it would be interesting. I wonder how long the exposures could be. It would also be interesting of they could apply it along with the High Resolution mode (even for shorter exposures).

With over 7 stops of in-body stabilization, why would they need OIS in a wide angle lens? Slap the Leica 9mm on there.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Jack 13088 wrote:

This last sentence is backwards somehow. Probably switching pixel size with pixel count. Signal good, noise bad.

It should read:
…the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a better SNR,
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR,
…the sensor with the smaller pixel size will normally have a better SNR or
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR.

OMG you are correct. I should have said lower noise or higher ratio.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

JimH123 wrote:

But it is also good enough that many people will enjoy it if it is easy enough.

I'm sure that is true! I didn't mean to sound negative it was just an observation. I'm sure with processing and modern sensors, it can be as good or better than other larger sensors of prior generations.

User ID

Jack 13088 wrote:

This last sentence is backwards somehow. Probably switching pixel size with pixel count. Signal good, noise bad.

It should read:
…the sensor with the larger pixel size will normally have a better SNR,
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR,
…the sensor with the smaller pixel size will normally have a better SNR or
…the sensor with the larger pixel count will normally have a lower SNR.

Please reread the third one of your four "corrected" versions. It has exactly the same error that you criticized ....

Seems your proof reading skill is better than your editing skill.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

Using either of the hi-res modes eliminates a lotof noise also. If they combine the tracker with that, noise shouldn't be an issue.

StanMac Loc: Tennessee

wdross wrote:

The thinkers and engineers, that came from Olympus, are at it again at OMDS. All our astrophotography UHHers may want to think about OM cameras and lenses.

"OM System has been granted a patent for an astronomy tracking function that combines a camera’s in-body image stabilization (IBIS) system alongside optical image stabilization (OIS). Based on the … View the article. https://flip.it/N-d_Zx "

My Pentax K1 has its Astrotracer function which does the same thing already. Buy a Pentax!

Stan

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

User ID wrote:

Please reread the third one of your four "corrected" versions. It has exactly the same error that you criticized ....

Seems your proof reading skill is better than your editing skill.

No doubt. I just don’t get along with these touch screens. In fact much bad language was expended trying to get it right (almost). Should have the first one. Thanks!