Hi everyone,
last weekend I took a picture of the stars. It's a stack of 16 photos taken with the GF1 and P20mm at 15", f1.8, ISO 800. with 16 Darks, Flats and Bias, using Deep Sky Stacker.
16 stacks of 15", f1.8, ISO 800
Compared with another one I took 2 years ago, 256" long exposure taken with a hand made non-motorized equatorial mount,
256", f2, ISO 400
I have to admit that the stack provides better results in terms of sharpness, but long exposure provides a greater number and variety of stars shine and a richest histogram. Here a crop comparison of the Pleiades (levels adjusted):
I assume the risk of errors caused by the manual equatorial mount, maybe a motorized will offer optimal comparison with better sharpness. The next test will be a stacking of 16 long exposure pictures taken with the eq mount
Advice are really welcome
Regards
last weekend I took a picture of the stars. It's a stack of 16 photos taken with the GF1 and P20mm at 15", f1.8, ISO 800. with 16 Darks, Flats and Bias, using Deep Sky Stacker.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
16 stacks of 15", f1.8, ISO 800
Compared with another one I took 2 years ago, 256" long exposure taken with a hand made non-motorized equatorial mount,
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
256", f2, ISO 400
I have to admit that the stack provides better results in terms of sharpness, but long exposure provides a greater number and variety of stars shine and a richest histogram. Here a crop comparison of the Pleiades (levels adjusted):
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
I assume the risk of errors caused by the manual equatorial mount, maybe a motorized will offer optimal comparison with better sharpness. The next test will be a stacking of 16 long exposure pictures taken with the eq mount

Advice are really welcome
Regards