# Great Conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 7, 2020)

In just a few weeks, Jupiter and Saturn will appear very close to each other in early evening. Who is going to photograph this? I'd assume a telescope is best but I don't have one. How about my 100-400L plus a TC or two? Do I need a motorized mount?

Is it even practical?


Before the end of 2020, great conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn | Astronomy Essentials | EarthSky


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 7, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> In just a few weeks, Jupiter and Saturn will appear very close to each other in early evening. Who is going to photograph this? I'd assume a telescope is best but I don't have one. How about my 100-400L plus a TC or two? Do I need a motorized mount?
> 
> Is it even practical?
> 
> ...


I’ll probably give it a go after getting some fun time in with comet Neowise. I think you will have pretty limited time to get your shot so far north, down here in Florida I’ll get a bit more time but a lot more light pollution. I’ll use my 300 f2.8 with and without TC’s.


----------



## fentiger (Dec 7, 2020)

here in the uk it will be conjuncted by clouds


----------



## tron (Dec 7, 2020)

I guess it depends if someone wants to include landscape too. If not, my "record" is managing to balance for a couple of times (a few seconds each) a 5DIV with 300 2.8II with 2XIII to an Astrotrac. It allowed me to shoot the moon eclipse with an ISO ten times less than without any mount. I had my hands in standby to catch the combo though  I loved the result and felt sorry for not using it a few minutes earlier than I did, instead of trying to shoot the eclipse with my 500mmII on a tripod (and high ISO)!


----------



## LDS (Dec 7, 2020)

Planets can be quite bright (depending on their actual distance from Earth, and atmosphere cleanness and darkness) and they can be shot without a motorized mount if the lens is bright enough. I took some photos of Jupiter last July (when it was close) at 1/90 - 1/125s f/11, 400 ISO, with a 400/5.6 mm to get a readable object (making the Galilean satellite visible required a longer exposure, 1/15s f/5.6 1600 ISO, but the planet is overexposed). I did a lot f bracketing. It was a polluted environment.

With a 400mm anyway the planet disc is tiny, less than 30 pixel across with a 5DIII (a better sensor will yield something more). A 2x converter may help greatly. You can try with two TCs too, and see if the image is still good enough. Usually, with telescopes, high magnifications are used for planets, well above what a telephoto con reach.

Focusing must be very careful - it's better if the camera/lens are left to reach the ambient temperature. A very stable mount is essential, no vibrations. Raised mirror (or no mirror, of course). The open shutter and black card trick is a bit difficult with short exposures. An electronic shutter might help, but never had a chance to try one.

That's to take planets images. To take an image of the conjunction with a nice landscape as a backdrop is a different matter, but in this kind of images planets are just bright dots.

I did it more to see what the system could yield than to get something nice/useful, anyway. But I'll try to get images ot the event anyway.


----------



## Valvebounce (Dec 9, 2020)

Hi Mt Spokane. 
Thanks for the reminder, I read about this earlier and intended to create a calendar event to remind me to have a go at it, then dinner arrived! ‍
Reminder now set!

Thanks to all for hints and tips, they should help speed up the process.

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 10, 2020)

SwissFrank said:


> The two will be a lunar width apart.
> 
> Even with the 600/4 and 2x TC, the moon is only about 2/3 of the height of the photo, so your 400mm x 2 would have them about half a full-frame sensor's height apart. I think that's about the shot you'd want.



That does not jive with what i'm reading. The moon width is about 31 arc minutes, the separation will be 6.1 arc minutes. The diameter of Jupiter plus Neptune is about 36.8 arc seconds or 0.6 arc minutes. That means the combination will be about 6.7 arc minutes in diameter which is about 0.22 the diameter of the moon.

My 100- 400mmL f/5.6 would need a 3X plus a 2X TC or 2400mm equivalent to fill the frame height to 90% and I'd have a effective aperture of about f/32 which means a fairly long exposure at a reasonable ISO but doable.

Obviously, you are going to need far more than 2400 mm to fill a FF sensor to even half the sensor height with the Jupiter/Neptune conjunction. One half the sensor width would take even more. I did not bother to calculate it because the effective aperture of such a lens would be very tiny and a very long exposure. A camera lens that long is also nonexistent except for telescopes. 

One suggestion is to take a video and stack the frames. My R5 will take 4K or 8K video and I might be able to stack frames. That would give a lot more pixels. Its overcast tonight or I could play with a video and see what I get. 1/5 the size of the moon gets pretty small but is huge compared with the size of a planet alone.

My PowerShot Zoom arrives tomorrow. That might be something to easily get a idea as to what's possible with a real camera and I would not need to drag out all my heavy duty stuff. I don't hold much hope for it to be useful in the dark, I think that trial would easily confirm that. It might see the moon though.

Here is a R5 photo of the moon at 2400mm. Its about 90% of the frame height. 

Moon at 2400mm on R5 | Canon Rumors


----------



## SteveC (Dec 10, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> That does not jive with what i'm reading. The moon width is about 31 arc minutes, the separation will be 6.1 arc minutes. The diameter of Jupiter plus Neptune is about 36.8 arc seconds or 0.6 arc minutes. That means the combination will be about 6.7 arc minutes in diameter which is about 0.22 the diameter of the moon.
> 
> My 100- 400mmL f/5.6 would need a 3X plus a 2X TC or 2400mm equivalent to fill the frame height to 90% and I'd have a effective aperture of about f/32 which means a fairly long exposure at a reasonable ISO but doable.
> 
> ...




Did you actually look up Neptune's arc width instead of Saturns? I ask because you said Neptune multiple times so it may have been intentional. It's Saturn that's going to be in conjunction with Jupiter, not Neptune.

You are, no matter what correct about the overall size of the phenomenon. I even saw a graphic somewhere showing the two planets in a (simulated) telescope view, with far more magnification than you'll get on a 400mm lens.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 10, 2020)

I have an old telescope and somewhere an adapter that worked with my film camera. It might work with my 6D2. I haven’t used the telescope since I moved here 11 years ago. There is too much light pollution to see much. But planets are a different story. Still I think it will be far enough west that I’m not going to have a clear view from my yard, and the old clock drive needs plugging in. So too many variables and too much trouble to try something for the conjunction itself. A good picture will show both planets, Saturns rings, and some of the bigger moons. I’ll let others take those shots.

My plan is to take a pictures around the 15th, weather permitting. Some time about then the two planets will form a triangle with the crescent moon. I’ll shoot that with my 100-400mm lens. I don’t have a TC. I will bracket exposures and probably stack. The moon is so much brighter than Saturn that I doubt one setting will work for both. The planets will be not much more than dots. I shot Mars with that lens, and it was a small red circle, obviously a planet and not a star. Maybe Jupiter will be similar. If I get something I think is interesting, I’ll post it here. In the meantime, I like seeing them get closer together each night that is clear.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 10, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Did you actually look up Neptune's arc width instead of Saturns? I ask because you said Neptune multiple times so it may have been intentional. It's Saturn that's going to be in conjunction with Jupiter, not Neptune.
> 
> You are, no matter what correct about the overall size of the phenomenon. I even saw a graphic somewhere showing the two planets in a (simulated) telescope view, with far more magnification than you'll get on a 400mm lens.


I mistyped the planet, the arc sec is correct for Neptune. Its extremely tiny in the sky, not visible without magnification.

That gap between the two is nowhere near the size of the moon.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 10, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I mistyped the planet, the arc sec is correct for Neptune. Its extremely tiny in the sky, not visible without magnification.
> 
> That gap between the two is nowhere near the size of the moon.



Yes, this is going to be quite a sight, naked eye, telescope, camera, you name it. Being able to see Jupiter and Saturn without having to move back and forth is an _extremely_ rare treat.

I've recently tried photographing planets through my 100-400 with both the 2x and 1.4x teleconverters but got nothing but a white blur. When I tried Mars, it was a pale orange blur. I actually had much better luck a couple of years ago with my M6-II and a Tamron 18-400--the planets were at least recognizable, Jupiter having a hint of striping and Saturn's rings obvious and both had color.


----------



## zim (Dec 10, 2020)

Hey calling @AlanF .... Time to break out the big gun with those tele converters !


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 10, 2020)

zim said:


> Hey calling @AlanF .... Time to break out the big gun with those tele converters !


I think he said overcast in Merry Olde England. It looks like lots of rain currently over a big North South portion of the country and the rest is likely overcast. We are overcast here as well, It is hopeful that the 19th might be clear, otherwise a little snow and lots of clouds.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I've recently tried photographing planets through my 100-400 with both the 2x and 1.4x teleconverters but got nothing but a white blur. When I tried Mars, it was a pale orange blur. I actually had much better luck a couple of years ago with my M6-II and a Tamron 18-400--the planets were at least recognizable, Jupiter having a hint of striping and Saturn's rings obvious and both had color.


I shot these at 400mm with no teleconverter. Mars is a 100% crop, shot handheld at f/6.3 for 1/400 second. The moon and Jupiter were shot at f/8 for 1/320 second. IS was on.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 11, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I shot these at 400mm with no teleconverter. Mars is a 100% crop, shot handheld at f/6.3 for 1/400 second. The moon and Jupiter were shot at f/8 for 1/320 second. IS was on.
> View attachment 194453
> 
> 
> View attachment 194454


What was the ISO setting?

Anyhow, I may have identified two possible causes for my issue. I was using a 1/100th to 1/200th shutter speed and may have been suffering because of that (people have reported blurriness at those speeds with an R5). Going faster may help that, or switching to electronic shutter. The other issue could be that even though I was on a tripod I had IS on. I can still experiment tonight on Mars (Jupiter and Saturn have set by now).


----------



## stevelee (Dec 11, 2020)

Moon and Jupiter shot was at ISO 3200. I couldn't find the Raw file for the Mars picture, so I don't know the ISO right off. Probably the same.

Here is a picture I shot in 2016 at 75 mm with my T3i. This is a composite, since the moon was overexposed in one shot, so I used the moon from a different exposure in the bracketing. This shows Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, and the moon. The moon is at ISO 200 and the planets at ISO 3200. It is reduced for posting here, but you can still make out the planets. If I can get this on a Rebel with a notoriously bad lens (75–300mm), you shouldn't have too much trouble doing better.


----------



## Joules (Dec 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Anyhow, I may have identified two possible causes for my issue. I was using a 1/100th to 1/200th shutter speed and may have been suffering because of that (people have reported blurriness at those speeds with an R5).





stevelee said:


> If I can get this on a Rebel with a notoriously bad lens (75–300mm), you shouldn't have too much trouble doing better.


There is more than gear and settings to shooting the moon and planets. Another common and very impactful source of blur are disturbances in the atmosphere. Especially if the object you are shooting isn't right above you, you're looking through a lot of air that can wobble and distort the image in the process. It what maker's stars twinkle. If you observe the moon through LiveView it will be easy to judge how the 'seeing' is in a given night. 

Ideally, you get lucky and just image on a very still night and wait until the moon / planet has risen sufficiently far above the horizon. Another strategy to combat this has already been described.

Take lots of pictures and let software Analyse them to combine and stack the sharpest sections of them all into one image with less noise and less impact from the atmosphere. The technique is called lucky imaging and is usually applied by taking an uncompressed video with a special type of camera.

I think on an R6 / R5 you are better off just using the electronic shutter 20 FPS burst mode until the buffer is full. That saves you from any forms of compression, or overheating and requires a little less processing power on the computer compared to the RAW video options.

Free software that does this is Autostakkert or Registax, for example.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 11, 2020)

As I recall, the planets and moon were fairly high in the sky that night, and it was a clear fall evening. They are bright enough for light pollution not to be a factor, even from the large city to my south.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 11, 2020)

Joules said:


> There is more than gear and settings to shooting the moon and planets. Another common and very impactful source of blur are disturbances in the atmosphere. Especially if the object you are shooting isn't right above you, you're looking through a lot of air that can wobble and distort the image in the process. It what maker's stars twinkle. If you observe the moon through LiveView it will be easy to judge how the 'seeing' is in a given night.
> 
> Ideally, you get lucky and just image on a very still night and wait until the moon / planet has risen sufficiently far above the horizon. Another strategy to combat this has already been described.
> 
> ...





Joules said:


> I think on an R6 / R5 you are better off just using the electronic shutter 20 FPS burst mode until the buffer is full. That saves you from any forms of compression, or overheating and requires a little less processing power on the computer compared to the RAW video options.
> 
> Free software that does this is Autostakkert or Registax, for example.



Perhaps someone can compare night sky photos of planets and post. If I could see the sky, I would. Noise might be lower in the 20FPS mode.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 11, 2020)

Joules said:


> There is more than gear and settings to shooting the moon and planets. Another common and very impactful source of blur are disturbances in the atmosphere. Especially if the object you are shooting isn't right above you, you're looking through a lot of air that can wobble and distort the image in the process. It what maker's stars twinkle. If you observe the moon through LiveView it will be easy to judge how the 'seeing' is in a given night.
> 
> Ideally, you get lucky and just image on a very still night and wait until the moon / planet has risen sufficiently far above the horizon. Another strategy to combat this has already been described.
> 
> ...



Unfortunately the Jupiter Saturn conjunction will not be directly overhead...but it's important to take the pictures as early as possible, before they get even closer to the horizon and MUCH more air comes between us and them.

On the other hand later at night is likely to be better because it's cooler and less thermal convection.

The idea of just filling the buffer in electronic shutter mode sounds promising, because any one shot is liable to be blurry thanks to our atmosphere, but there are occasional instants of clarity. (It's going to take a lot of work to step through and magnify each shot to look for the best ones, though!) I generally keep almost everything I shoot but in this case I'll be trashcanning a lot of shots; I do NOT want this to become the first >100GB shooting session on my NAS.


----------



## Joules (Dec 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> It's going to take a lot of work to step through and magnify each shot to look for the best ones, though!


Actually, that's not something you have to do manually. That's why I mentioned the software Autostakkert and Registax. They are free applications that ingest a series of frames or a video and analyse them for common features used in alignment. They also evaluate the sharpness of these features and allow you to use only the sharpest sections in your frame stack to compose a final image with both less athmospheric distortion and noise (you're doing stacking after all).

If you aren't using any form of tracking for the camera, the subjects will of course move between shots. And that can make the alignment process fail, at least in Autostakkert (I haven't really used Registax). What I did once to compensate was open my images as layers in PS and roughly align them manually using the difference layer blend mode. Really just quickly eyeballing it and then exporting the layers for Autostakkert (2 or 3, both work well mostly) for the rest.

It also begins to struggle if you use pictures taken across a long period of time. The reason for this is the rotation of the planets, which unlike the apparent motion across out sky, can't be compensated for in post. But with 20 FPS (or higher if you take a video) I think that should not be a major concern.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 11, 2020)

Joules said:


> Actually, that's not something you have to do manually. That's why I mentioned the software Autostakkert and Registax. They are free applications that ingest a series of frames or a video and analyse them for common features used in alignment. They also evaluate the sharpness of these features and allow you to use only the sharpest sections in your frame stack to compose a final image with both less athmospheric distortion and noise (you're doing stacking after all).
> 
> If you aren't using any form of tracking for the camera, the subjects will of course move between shots. And that can make the alignment process fail, at least in Autostakkert (I haven't really used Registax). What I did once to compensate was open my images as layers in PS and roughly align them manually using the difference layer blend mode. Really just quickly eyeballing it and then exporting the layers for Autostakkert (2 or 3, both work well mostly) for the rest.
> 
> It also begins to struggle if you use pictures taken across a long period of time. The reason for this is the rotation of the planets, which unlike the apparent motion across out sky, can't be compensated for in post. But with 20 FPS (or higher if you take a video) I think that should not be a major concern.



I don't want a movie, I just want one good clear shot, and to determine which one shows detail, I *must* magnify them.


----------



## Joules (Dec 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I don't want a movie, I just want one good clear shot, and to determine which one shows detail, I *must* magnify them.


I know. I just wanted to point out to you that there is free software available that allows you to extract the most detailed image possible from a set of images without every manually looking at the detail in the shot.

You can of course just go through them yourself (using the magnify view on a second screen in Lr is really nice for that, for example) and pick a single one that you like. I was just trying to provide an alternative. 

The programs I named can take a video as one possible input format, but the output is going to be a single image regardless of what you put in.

I just mentioned videos because they are a convinient way of capturing many images over a short amount of time, which is why that's what's being used in very serious planetary imaging setups. But with an R6 or R5 (or 1DX III), taking 20 FPS is basically just as good as capturing a video in terms of frame rate, and better in terms of bit depth and compression. 

Here's a good article on Lucky imaging if you want to look into it: https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-blogs/imaging-foundations-richard-wright/lucky-imaging/


----------



## stevelee (Dec 19, 2020)

I wanted to take a picture last night when the crescent moon would have been in the frame with the planets, but it was cloudy. Tonight was clear earlier, so I went out and had the camera set for bracketing exposures more as a test than anything else. So I did some handheld spraying to see what I could get. I used the 100–400mm lens, but oddly, when I got a decent exposure, I had it zoomed out to 100mm. Even so I got something a bit interesting enough to post here. But I've enlarged it 300%, and of course cropped. ISO 6400 f/5.6 at 1/100 sec. handheld. If weather cooperates for the next few nights maybe I'll get something decent, using the tripod and zoomed in to 400mm. I don't own a TC.


----------



## Czardoom (Dec 19, 2020)

Taken tonight from New York state. Olympus e-m1 II with 75-300 lens. Can't see Saturn's rings, of course, at this magnification, but somewhat surprised to see what seems like some of Jupiter's moons. Saturn is a nice oblong shape. Seriously cropped, somewhere around 100%.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 19, 2020)

As I recall, the pattern looks right for where those moons were last night.


----------



## zim (Dec 19, 2020)

Wall to wall total cloud cover here, jealous!
@czarzoom great image with the moons pity you don't have an exposure for the planets you could sub out. Maybe you do though?


----------



## jprusa (Dec 19, 2020)

This site may help give you an idea of weather and a clear view for your area . https://www.cleardarksky.com/csk/faq/1.html


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 19, 2020)

whats the farthest i can zoom in with EF extenders until it becomes too dark?

im renting a 800mm f5.6


----------



## stevelee (Dec 20, 2020)

Tonight I had presence of mind to shoot at 400mm, but there were wispy clouds in the southwest. By 6:20 pm the planets had dropped down into the haze. The best picture I got was taken at 6:09 pm EST (5:53 pm local time), one minute before Nautical Twilight. With camera on a tripod, the shot was made with ISO 3200 at f/8 for 1/160 sec. Unlike last night, Saturn looks like Saturn with a hint of the rings. This JPEG is cropped and saved at 200% magnification. My calculations suggest that the apparent distance between the planets tonight was 65% of the distance last night. It is supposed to be cloudy tomorrow night, but Monday, at their closest approach, it is supposed to be clear here. I'll have just a few minutes between when it gets dark and when they are too low in the sky to get a clear picture. Weather permitting, I'll give it a shot.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 20, 2020)

I saw the sky yesterday morning for the first time in weeks, but it was overcast and raining by evening. The weather report shows patches of sky this morning but its overcast, rain tonight and for 2 days. The day of clear weather has been moving out in the forecast every day, it moves out. I think I'm going to miss seeing it. There is no place within reasonable driving distance with better weather.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 20, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I saw the sky yesterday morning for the first time in weeks, but it was overcast and raining by evening. The weather report shows patches of sky this morning but its overcast, rain tonight and for 2 days. The day of clear weather has been moving out in the forecast every day, it moves out. I think I'm going to miss seeing it. There is no place within reasonable driving distance with better weather.



Same boat.

Yesterday, today was supposed to be clear for the first time in days.

Today I look out and it's clouds. Enough for the sun to blast through, but not Jupiter and Saturn.

Yesterday I had clouds but only to the southwest. So I headed northeast right after sunset, finally did get to see them, but couldn't get the camera set up, focused, etc (I want a tripod that lets me adjust without having to twiddle two knobs, then just have the thing droop and offscreen what I'm trying to photograph as soon as I tighten up) in time, it went behind the clouds.

I can't win for losing.


----------



## Czardoom (Dec 20, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Tonight I had presence of mind to shoot at 400mm, but there were wispy clouds in the southwest. By 6:20 pm the planets had dropped down into the haze. The best picture I got was taken at 6:09 pm EST (5:53 pm local time), one minute before Nautical Twilight. With camera on a tripod, the shot was made with ISO 3200 at f/8 for 1/160 sec. Unlike last night, Saturn looks like Saturn with a hint of the rings. This JPEG is cropped and saved at 200% magnification. My calculations suggest that the apparent distance between the planets tonight was 65% of the distance last night. It is supposed to be cloudy tomorrow night, but Monday, at their closest approach, it is supposed to be clear here. I'll have just a few minutes between when it gets dark and when they are too low in the sky to get a clear picture. Weather permitting, I'll give it a shot.
> 
> View attachment 194649


Steve, Great shot! What camera and lens are you using? Everything I have have read on the topic says that you can't see Saturn's rings with a camera lens! That you need a telescope. Saw a video where someone was using an 800mm lens and they couldn't discern the rings. Wondering how you did it!


----------



## Joules (Dec 20, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Steve, Great shot! What camera and lens are you using? Everything I have have read on the topic says that you can't see Saturn's rings with a camera lens! That you need a telescope. Saw a video where someone was using an 800mm lens and they couldn't discern the rings. Wondering how you did it!


You might have read about actually seeing the planets, as in, seeing with your own eyes. It is far easier for digital cameras with their sensitivity and the possibility to crop to make out certain details in the night sky.


----------



## Czardoom (Dec 21, 2020)

Joules said:


> You might have read about actually seeing the planets, as in, seeing with your own eyes. It is far easier for digital cameras with their sensitivity and the possibility to crop to make out certain details in the night sky.


Yes, you might be correct, it might have been seeing, although a quick search of taking photos of Saturn's rings without a telescope gives my varying answers - from "no way", "not likely", maybe if you have a 1200mm lens with extenders", "with a 400mm lens it will just be a blob", "Yes, with my 600mm lens", and another "Yes, with my 500mm lens." Just looked at a video of a guy with a Sigma 150-600 on a Canon M6 II and he's got the rings showing up pretty clearly at maximum magnification. Silly me for believing the first few answers I found on the internet!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 21, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Yes, you might be correct, it might have been seeing, although a quick search of taking photos of Saturn's rings without a telescope gives my varying answers - from "no way", "not likely", maybe if you have a 1200mm lens with extenders", "with a 400mm lens it will just be a blob", "Yes, with my 600mm lens", and another "Yes, with my 500mm lens." Just looked at a video of a guy with a Sigma 150-600 on a Canon M6 II and he's got the rings showing up pretty clearly at maximum magnification. Silly me for believing the first few answers I found on the internet!


You can indeed get a 600mm photo of Saturn showing its rings. Often, its not a single shot but 20 or more that are stacked. But, if you want to fill a 35mm frame with Saturn, that's a different story as compared to having a super severe crop into a few pixels.

In any event, the atmospherics becomes a limiting factor to obtaining fine detail, so our photos are for our personal satisfaction but will never compare to those taken from space. I hope we can get some of the Grand conjunction images taken from Hubble


----------



## SteveC (Dec 21, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> You can indeed get a 600mm photo of Saturn showing its rings. Often, its not a single shot but 20 or more that are stacked. But, if you want to fill a 35mm frame with Saturn, that's a different story as compared to having a super severe crop into a few pixels.
> 
> In any event, the atmospherics becomes a limiting factor to obtaining fine detail, so our photos are for our personal satisfaction but will never compare to those taken from space. I hope we can get some of the Grand conjunction images taken from Hubble



Hubble, I would imagine, won't be covering it. After all, it's two frequently imaged planets that just happen to be near each other right now; they could get the same result photoshopping other images. In fact, we have gonzo images of both planets from up close.

Of course I could be wrong. The guy in charge of scheduling gets to do what he wants with it ten percent of the time.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 21, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Steve, Great shot! What camera and lens are you using? Everything I have have read on the topic says that you can't see Saturn's rings with a camera lens! That you need a telescope. Saw a video where someone was using an 800mm lens and they couldn't discern the rings. Wondering how you did it!


I was using my 6D2 with the EF 100-400mm II lens at 400mm. The picture posted is 200% enlargement cropped from the original Raw file. Otherwise I did very little to it in ACR, maybe +5 clarity, -5 black, +5 white. I could show some stars with tweaking a bit more, but noise pops out very fast. The rings and their orientation are in the same position in other shots, so they are not just an artifact.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 21, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Hubble, I would imagine, won't be covering it. After all, it's two frequently imaged planets that just happen to be near each other right now; they could get the same result photoshopping other images. In fact, we have gonzo images of both planets from up close.
> 
> Of course I could be wrong. The guy in charge of scheduling gets to do what he wants with it ten percent of the time.


I could find nothing indicating it was going to happen. The brightness is likely different for the two, I don't know if they handle that by stacking photographs or what, but I'd think it was a once in a lifetime photo.

Home (hubblesite.org)


----------



## nc0b (Dec 21, 2020)

In Colorado I had to wait for clouds to move out of the way. 
My best shot was about 1 hour after sunset. 
5DsR, 100-400mm II L, 1/200, f/8, ISO 1600. I tried a 1.4X TC III, but all it did was make CA worse.
Hand held, manually focused.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 21, 2020)

Does anybody know the exact real focal length of the 100-400mm II zoomed to nominal 400mm and focused at infinity? (I realize it is somewhat less than 400mm when focused close.) I’m unsure how to go about it anyway, but I would need to know that to figure the angular distance between the planets give the distance in the image. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 21, 2020)

I found this charting page: https://in-the-sky.org/graphs.php?g...e=0&obj1txt=Jupiter&obj2type=0&obj2txt=Saturn


----------



## stevelee (Dec 21, 2020)

So it looks like they were about 0.225° apart when I took the second picture.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 21, 2020)

And about 0.35° when I took the first one on Friday. That’s still very close by historical standards, but nothing like the 0.06° in a few hours from now.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 21, 2020)

nc0b said:


> In Colorado I had to wait for clouds to move out of the way.
> My best shot was about 1 hour after sunset.
> 5DsR, 100-400mm II L, 1/200, f/8, ISO 1600. I tried a 1.4X TC III, but all it did was make CA worse.
> Hand held, manually focused.
> ...



This is about as good as I got.


----------



## Joules (Dec 21, 2020)

I would love to give it a try with my 150-600 C, 80D and Fornax tracker. Unfortunately, the weather forecast looks like bad news for me.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 22, 2020)

I haven't gone through my pictures from this evening yet. I think this one might be the most interesting if not as good technically as some (I hope). Saturn doesn't look as good as in my pictures from Saturday night. I bracketed exposures, so maybe my best version will be a composite. The plane flying through makes it interesting. In the Raw file you can see three moons of Jupiter clearly. You can probably make them out in the JPEG. 5:56pm EST. 6D2 EF 100–400mm II at 400mm f/8 ISO 3200 for 1/15 sec. I didn't do much in ACR to enhance, mostly darkened the sky a bit. It was about 15 minutes before nautical twilight.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I haven't gone through my pictures from this evening yet. I think this one might be the most interesting if not as good technically as some (I hope). Saturn doesn't look as good as in my pictures from Saturday night. I bracketed exposures, so maybe my best version will be a composite. The plane flying through makes it interesting. In the Raw file you can see three moons of Jupiter clearly. You can probably make them out in the JPEG. 5:56pm EST. 6D2 EF 100–400mm II at 400mm f/8 ISO 3200 for 1/15 sec. I didn't do much in ACR to enhance, mostly darkened the sky a bit. It was about 15 minutes before nautical twilight.
> 
> View attachment 194713


Really nice image Steve!

Unfortunately I had cloudy and unclear atmospheric conditions so took two blobs of nothingness!


----------



## stevelee (Dec 22, 2020)

With greater exposure and magnification, you can see four moons, with Ganymede looking almost like a bump on the end of Jupiter. I confirmed the positions from _Sky and Telescope_'s web site.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 22, 2020)

stevelee said:


> With greater exposure and magnification, you can see four moons, with Ganymede looking almost like a bump on the end of Jupiter. I confirmed the positions from _Sky and Telescope_'s web site.
> 
> View attachment 194715



It's one of the perversities of the universe that in order to get the Galileans (kudos by the way!) you have to blow out Jupiter (and in this case Saturn is along for the ride and gets blown out too).

What I would do to focus is flip the screen out, dial up the ISO to max, magnify and use the Galileans to focus with; when they became points, I was focused (and yes, I was manually focusing). I'd then dial the ISO back to what I was using (roughly 1000, depending on the extender I had on if any), and the Galileans would of course disappear, but I could take the shot. I was more interested in the planets themselves, since that was what was unusual at the time.

I expect I'll someday do a composite of Jupiter plus Galileans.


----------



## SumanV (Dec 22, 2020)

Hello everyone!

Yesterday was an awesome day to witness and photograph Saturn and Jupiter conjunction with a super-tele lens. I was worried that the clouds may roll in but gods were kind! It was also the first time that I shot with a super tele (Canon 600 mm F4 IS + 1.4xTC) and I can now understand the efforts put by wildlife photographers. I am pleased with my entire experience although in hindsight I should have used a crop sensor camera instead of EOS RP. I have also shot the moon as I had the opportunity to do it.

The Saturn-Jupiter conjunction image is heavily cropped while the moon image is cropped to taste. Posted photos are SOOC and I am impressed with the details resolved by the equipment.

Comments and feedback are welcome.

Gear used: Canon EOS RP, Canon 600 mm F4 IS, 1.4xTC (II?)

Jupiter-Saturn Conjunction: ISO 3200, 1/30 s, f5.6
Moon: ISO 1600, 1/500 s, f5.7








Regards
Suman


----------



## gruhl28 (Dec 22, 2020)

nc0b said:


> In Colorado I had to wait for clouds to move out of the way.
> My best shot was about 1 hour after sunset.
> 5DsR, 100-400mm II L, 1/200, f/8, ISO 1600. I tried a 1.4X TC III, but all it did was make CA worse.
> Hand held, manually focused.
> ...


That's phenomenal for a hand-held image!


----------



## stevelee (Dec 22, 2020)

gruhl28 said:


> That's phenomenal for a hand-held image!


I used a tripod on Saturday and last night. But my Friday night tests were handheld. I was using the same lens as he did. It does an amazing job of IS even at 400mm.


----------



## stevelee (Dec 22, 2020)

SteveC said:


> It's one of the perversities of the universe that in order to get the Galileans (kudos by the way!) you have to blow out Jupiter (and in this case Saturn is along for the ride and gets blown out too).
> 
> What I would do to focus is flip the screen out, dial up the ISO to max, magnify and use the Galileans to focus with; when they became points, I was focused (and yes, I was manually focusing). I'd then dial the ISO back to what I was using (roughly 1000, depending on the extender I had on if any), and the Galileans would of course disappear, but I could take the shot. I was more interested in the planets themselves, since that was what was unusual at the time.
> 
> I expect I'll someday do a composite of Jupiter plus Galileans.


Last night I kept the aperture and ISO the same and kept changing the shutter speed to bracket. I hope to have a good exposure of Saturn in there somewhere. I would refocus occasionally on the screen at 10X. All the while I was chatting with neighbors who had come out to the same spot to view the conjunction. There is an open area three houses away from mine, so it was like an unplanned viewing party. I let folks look at the 10X screen. Focusing on the moons worked great. If I can do a decent composite, I’ll post here.


----------



## SumanV (Dec 23, 2020)

SteveC said:


> It's one of the perversities of the universe that in order to get the Galileans (kudos by the way!) you have to blow out Jupiter (and in this case Saturn is along for the ride and gets blown out too).
> 
> What I would do to focus is flip the screen out, dial up the ISO to max, magnify and use the Galileans to focus with; when they became points, I was focused (and yes, I was manually focusing). I'd then dial the ISO back to what I was using (roughly 1000, depending on the extender I had on if any), and the Galileans would of course disappear, but I could take the shot. I was more interested in the planets themselves, since that was what was unusual at the time.
> 
> I expect I'll someday do a composite of Jupiter plus Galileans.



Jupiter is brighter than Saturn and so, a composite would help (https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/great-jupiter-saturn-conjunction-dec-21-2020). I too have noted this while photographing the conjunction. The small dots are Jupiter's moons.



Regards
Suman


----------



## Click (Dec 23, 2020)

Very nice pictures. Well done, Suman.


----------



## SumanV (Dec 23, 2020)

Click said:


> Very nice pictures. Well done, Suman.


Thank you @Click.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Dec 25, 2020)

Jupiter and Saturn shot with the R5, 100-400L V III and 2X extender.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 26, 2020)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Jupiter and Saturn shot with the R5, 100-400L V III and 2X extender.
> View attachment 194764
> View attachment 194765



I got nearly identical results with just about the same gear (no grip). That is, after I fired probably a hundred shots, in quick bursts (using electronic shutter and a whatchumacallit, the cable release), and rejecting all but five of them. I also tried no extender and a 1.4x.


----------

