Comet Holmes and "Falling Star"

The first picture is a 15 second exposure using Digital camera (Panasonic DMC –FC50) with ISO setting to 1600, f 2.8 at 2 mega pixels, with a “wide” angle setting, probably equivalent to about 40mm for 35 mm camera at about 2 a.m. November 11, 2007.

When I went out to take the picture, I noticed a “falling star” and thought it would be neat to actually catch such an event, but dismissed the idea as unlikely.

The only reason I have this picture is that the Camera’s viewfinder does not have the resolution necessary to see stars, the screen is “blank”. In order to frame a picture, I first took a time-lapse photo, saw what the camera was looking at, and then adjusted the camera and tripod to frame the comet. Once the comet was centered I could use the zoom.

John
AKA SnowflakeUniverse

Attached Images

	cropped photo comet and meteor.JPG (65.5 KB, 67 views)
	cropped comet.JPG (49.2 KB, 57 views)

Very nice. Very lucky shot. Please repost the orginal picture with the exif header attached.
Thanks.

hha

what is the exif header?

I cropped the origional picture to reduce file size.

John

The EXIF header is numbers related to the camera and detailed shooting information imbedded into the jpeg file.

I have been shooting the comet with a Pana LZ6 at max zoom, which is f=36 mm f/4.5. The LZ6 only goes to iso400 and 15 seconds would not show much of the comet, even with a heavy dose of Photoshop. Getting useful performace at iso1600 would be nice.

Your writeup mentioned that you used a Pana FC50 camera,
35 mm focal length and 15 second exposure at iso1600. I have not found any information on a Pana FC50, but there is a FZ50, which goes from 6-60 mm. The noise level at iso1600 looks very reasonable.

I presume your shot was taken on a mount which tracks the stars.

hha

Hi hha1

I miss typed, it is the DMC FZ 50, made by Panasonic.

I did not use a clock drive. At wide angles, or non-telescopic views, over a 15 second interval of time, the "streaking" is minimal. If you notice the second picture where the telephoto is extended all the way, there is considerable streaking of the stars; evidence of a lack of clock drive.

The second photo was a 30 second exposure and the stated x magnification is 21.4 times. I suppose if I measured the streak length, checked the angle position on 2 am on the day I took the picture, I could come up with the true magnification of the photo. This camera has a 12 x optical zoom, but if the pixels used are dropped from the max of 10 million to 2 (which I used in the photo) an extended zoom is allowed. This not quite the same as choosing a digital zoom, which produces a “grainer”, picture.

(I took some pictures of the moon with the camera and at the “21.4 X “ rating, the moon does not “fit” in the picture, a small piece of the rim is missing. As I recall this is probably closer to a 15 magnification. It has been a while since I used my old telescope with a mounted camera).

I also boosted the contrast and color and minimized the noise for the photo. Compression was set to “low”.

I really like the camera. It even allows a limited asa setting of 3200! Unfortunately this asa setting can not be used with extended exposures but with an asa of 1600 and a 60 second exposure, and a wide angle setting, I will get a picture of hundreds and hundreds of stars when I can only see a couple of dozen or so. Actually, a 15 second exposures are better since the sky will still be black and the stars will still look like points. I’m having fun taking picture of constellations. It is as if I can “see” the stars as they would be without all the pollution.

The camera is new for me and I haven’t loaded the software to tap in to the details of the picture when the picture was taken, I’m using older camera software to look at the photos and the detailed file information is missing. I’ll work on it tomorrow. .

snowflake

Very nice capture of the comet and a meteor. What luck! Thanks for posting.

Tucson Tim and hha1

The photograph was extremely lucky.

Years ago I used to sit outside with my camera during meteor showers and try to take a picture of a "falling star" and despite using rolls and rolls of film, and hours upon hours of time, I never got a decent picture, too faint, or just a fragment at the edge of the film.

The picture is cropped to the edge of the shot, presumably the streak continues further.

If you look closely it is possible to see variations in the brightness of the falling meteor. There even appears to be a spot flash, which may be actually a star. If I used a longer exposure it would have helped differentiate the burst from just a very coincidental path in front of a star. It appears that towards the end of the path observed, there are some signs of the intensity of the starting to fluctuate towards a dimmer state.

It seems unusual that I saw 3 falling meteors with in a 30 min period. Perhaps this mini shower is associated with some ancient, forgotten comet. (Actually all comets are ancient, forgive the melodrama, but astronomy just taps into these kind of thoughts).

snowflake aka john kulick

I use the Panasonic LZ3. It has only 6x zoom. In order to get long exposures and have the focus at infinity, one has to use the "Stary Sky mode". This provides 15, 30 and 60 second exposures, unfortunately only at iso80. Attached is a picture of the comet taken from my backyard on 12 November 2007 at midnight, with the LZ3 clamped to the clockdrive of my telescope. The picture was taken at 5 Mpixel, this is maximum for the LZ3, saved in the best mode, with the LZ3 set to max zoom, 60 seconds and f/4.5. It was cropped and contrast enhanced in PhotoShop, then reduced in size to make it small enough for email. The sharp point of the stars shows that the LZ3 has a very good lens. If you look carefully you can see one or two stars throught the comet.

Without a clock drive you still can do good things with constellation pictures, but you the maximum exposure will be limited by the motion of the stars.

Enjoy.

hha

Attached Images

P17.LZ3.x6.f4.5.60sec.G2.0.P1010996_NW.crop.e.jpg (74.1 KB, 13 views)

Hi hha1

Amazing to see what just a camera reveals.

Either you live where there is less light pollution, or you are good with touching up the contrast. Your 60 second exposures still have a dark sky, whereas my photos end up with a light sky.

Out of curiosity, have you had any problems with the LZ3? I have had other digital cameras with a zoom lens that retreats and extends from the camera body, and 5 times over 4 years I have had to send the cameras in for repair. I keep two so when one breaks I have a back up while the camera is in repair. I am hoping the contained lens system of the LZ5 will be more robust. So far I am very pleased with the camera.

Also, you noted the LZ3 had max asa of 80 for time exposures, did you mean to say 800?

john

[QUOTE=snowflakeuniverse;1112511]Hi hha1

>Amazing to see what just a camera reveals.

>Either you live where there is less light pollution, or you are good with >touching up the contrast.

A bit of both. I live in the hills above Los Angeles. Visual magnitude in my backyard from NW to NE was +3.5, which is as good as it gets. I barely can see the comet, but with the 60 second exposure the faintest stars visible are about +9.5.

If you see fog in your picture you probably have set the iso too high.

>Your 60 second exposures still have a dark sky, whereas my photos end up >with a light sky.

Set gamma=2 or change levels to 2 to 50 in PhotoShop. Need to experiment.

>Out of curiosity, have you had any problems with the LZ3?

No problems this far. The 6-36 mm f/2.8-4.5 lens is very good. The 1/2.5" 5 Mp CCD is relatively better than some of the newer CCDs which squeeze 10 Mp into the same size CCD.

>I have had other digital cameras with a zoom lens that retreats and extends >from the camera body, and 5 times over 4 years I have had to send the >cameras in for repair. I keep two so when one breaks I have a back up while >the camera is in repair. I am hoping the contained lens system of the LZ5 will >be more robust. So far I am very pleased with the camera.

It sounds like you have an LZ5 (6 Mp with the Venus II engine, otherwise very similar to the LZ3) and an FZ50.

Never had a problem with any of them. My Olympus D490z (3z zoom, 2 Mp)
still works, produces good pictures, but is ever so slow.

>Also, you noted the LZ3 had max asa of 80 for time exposures, did you
> mean to say 800?

The LZ3 in Stary Sky mode uses iso80 only. In non-scene modes the iso is selectable from Auto, 80, 100, 200 and 400. I keep it at iso100.

hha.

Hi hha1

Thanks for the advice and helpful hints

John