3 ms·
I have a Pentax camera (it's great -- they're undervalued by the market). The astrotracer uses GPS lookups and needs either a K-1 or a (very overpriced) GPS don
by azalemeth 5y ago
I have a Pentax camera (it's great -- they're undervalued by the market). The astrotracer uses GPS lookups and needs either a K-1 or a (very overpriced) GPS dongle that plugs in via the flash hotshoe.
It gets an accurate lock and moves the sensor about its 5 axes of magnetohydrodynamically-controlled freedom in order to emulate, to some degree, an equatorial mount. No image-domain tracking required -- purely physics. The things people get are insanely good (c.f. [1])
[1] https://www.flickr.com/groups/2598208@N22/ https://www.flickr.com/groups/2598208@N22/
- formerly_proven 5y agoMechanically there's only three degrees of freedom (translation in the plane and rotation about the optical axis), the cameras just calculate an approximately correct translation for pitch/yaw movements. Pitching or yawing the sensor itself would take it immediately out of the depth of focus (the image side equivalent of depth of field) and the image would be a blurry mess.