Deep Sky Astrophotography Without a Tracker – Can You Do It with Just a Camera and Tripod?
Have you ever wondered what you could capture in the night sky using just a regular camera, a lens and a tripod, without an astro tracker?
Is it even possible to photograph deep sky objects this way?
The answer is yes! And honestly, the results can be pretty surprising, even to yourself.
Recently, I started wondering whether it was possible to photograph deep sky objects without all the specialist astrophotography gear. No equatorial mount, no tracking system, just a camera, a fast lens, a tripod and a bit of patience.
After watching a few YouTube tutorials, particularly those by Nebula Photos, I felt inspired to give it a go myself. I wanted to see what I could achieve with the equipment I already had, without spending money on additional gear.
I'm still very much a beginner when it comes to the night sky. I don't know my way around all the constellations and deep sky objects just yet, so some of my targets were chosen almost at random. I also used Stellarium to help me find objects in the sky, with a little help from ChatGPT when I needed ideas on what to photograph and where to look.
Sometimes, you just have to give something a go and see what happens!
My Setup – Nothing Fancy
For my first experiments, I used the following equipment:
Camera: Sony A7S II
Lens: Samyang 135mm f/1.8
Tripod: A standard photography tripod, with no tracking mount
Intervalometer: An external intervalometer to automate the shooting process
At first, you might think that 135mm isn't enough to capture interesting deep sky objects. I wasn't entirely sure what to expect either, but I was genuinely surprised by how much I could capture with this setup.
Of course, it's not going to compete with a dedicated astrophotography rig, but that's not really the point. I wanted to see what was possible with relatively simple equipment.
And as it turns out, there's quite a lot you can do!
Camera Settings
I kept things simple and started with the following settings:
Shooting mode: Manual
ISO: 6400 or higher, where needed
Aperture: f/1.8
Exposure time: 1 second per frame
Interval: 1 second between shots
Because I wasn't using a tracker, I needed to keep the exposures short to avoid star trails caused by the Earth's rotation.
Instead of taking a few long exposures, I decided to capture lots of short ones and combine them later using a technique called stacking.
This is where things started to get interesting.
First Target: The Pleiades (M45)
I decided to start with the Pleiades, one of the most recognisable objects in the night sky.
I set up the camera on the tripod, framed the target as best I could and started shooting using the intervalometer.
For this first test, I captured around 140 frames. I wasn't expecting anything spectacular. I simply wanted to see whether the whole process would work.
Once the shooting was finished, it was time to process the images.
And that's when I realised I had another thing to learn: astrophotography software!
Stacking the Images – This Is Where the Magic Happens
I started looking for software that could combine my images and help bring out the details hidden in the data.
My first attempt was with Siril, but I have to admit that I found it a little overwhelming as a beginner. I'm sure it's a very capable piece of software, but at that stage, I was looking for something a bit more straightforward.
After some searching, I came across Stacker Wizard and Astro Wizard. Both seemed much more intuitive to use, and the fact that they were free was another big plus.
So, I gave them a try.
When I first opened a single RAW file of the Pleiades, there wasn't much to get excited about. I could see the stars, along with some very faint details around them, but the image looked fairly unimpressive.
 |
| The Pleiades (M45) 140 frames vs 1 |
It was hard to imagine that anything particularly interesting could come out of it.
Then I stacked all 140 images into a single image.
And that's when I was genuinely surprised!
After stacking and processing the images, details started to emerge that I could barely see in the individual frames.
It was a great reminder of just how much information can be hidden in what initially looks like a rather ordinary photograph.
Stacking works by combining multiple images of the same target, helping to improve the signal-to-noise ratio and reveal faint details that would otherwise be difficult to see.
And the best part? You don't necessarily need an expensive astrophotography setup to get started.
 |
| The Pleiades (M45) |
Sometimes, you just need to learn how to make the most of the equipment you already own.
Moving On to More Targets
Encouraged by the results from the Pleiades, I decided to try a few more objects.
My next targets included:
The Andromeda Galaxy (M31) – one of the most famous galaxies in the night sky.
The Flaming Star Nebula (IC 405) – a beautiful emission and reflection nebula in the constellation Auriga.
M38 – an open star cluster, also located in Auriga.
NGC 1893 – an open star cluster associated with the IC 410 nebula region.
This time, I increased the number of frames to around 300 images per target, keeping the camera settings fairly similar.
The Andromeda Galaxy (M31)
One important thing to mention is that I didn't move the tripod or reposition the camera during each shooting session. I wanted to keep everything as simple as possible and see what I could achieve without tracking.
Naturally, there are limitations to this approach. With such short exposures, each individual frame collects relatively little light, which can make faint objects particularly challenging to capture.
Even so, I found the whole process incredibly satisfying.
The images weren't perfect, and I certainly wasn't expecting professional results. My main goal was to experiment, learn something new and see how far I could push this simple setup.
And I'm glad I did!
Is Deep Sky Photography Without a Tracker Worth Trying?
Personally, I think it's absolutely worth a go.
Of course, there are limitations. Without a tracker, you can't use longer exposures without the stars starting to trail, and capturing faint nebulae and galaxies can be challenging.
But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
NGC 185
In fact, I think this is a great way for beginners to get into astrophotography. You can learn to identify objects in the night sky, experiment with stacking and processing, and gradually understand how the whole process works.
What surprised me most was how much detail could be extracted from images that initially looked almost empty.
It really changes the way you think about photography.
Instead of relying on a single long exposure, you can capture hundreds of short frames and combine them afterwards.
It's amazing what you can achieve when you start experimenting with the gear you already have.
What Have I Learned So Far?
After taking and processing several hundred images, I've come away with a few thoughts.
1. More Frames Could Make a Difference
Based on my initial experiments, I think aiming for at least 500 frames per target could be worth trying.
However, this is still just my initial impression rather than the result of a controlled comparison.
I'd love to compare a stack of 300 frames with one made from 500 frames, using similar conditions, to see how much difference the extra images actually make.
It would be interesting to see whether the improvement is clearly visible in the final image.
2. A Fast Lens Is a Big Advantage
The Samyang 135mm f/1.8 has been a great choice for these experiments.
The wide aperture allows me to capture as much light as possible while keeping the exposure time short enough to avoid noticeable star trails.
When you're shooting without a tracker, every little advantage helps.
3. You Don't Need Expensive Equipment to Get Started
A camera, a fast lens, a tripod and some free software can be enough to get your first taste of deep sky astrophotography.
You might not get the same results as someone using a dedicated tracking mount, but that doesn't mean you can't capture some interesting images.
For me, that's one of the most exciting things about this experiment.
4. Processing Is Just as Important as Taking the Photos
Taking the pictures is only half the job.
Stacking and processing the images can make a huge difference to the final result, especially when you're working with faint objects and very short exposures.
I'm still learning this part of the process, but it's already clear that there's a lot more to astrophotography than simply pointing a camera at the sky.
5. Don't Be Afraid to Experiment
This is probably the most important lesson I've learned so far.
You don't need to know everything before you start, and you certainly don't need the perfect equipment.
Sometimes, the best way to learn is simply to try something new, make a few mistakes and see what you can achieve.
That's exactly what I did, and the results have encouraged me to keep going.
What's Next? More Experiments Under the Stars
This is only the beginning of my deep sky astrophotography journey.
IC 405 Flaming Star Nebula
For my next experiments, I'd like to increase the number of frames to 500 per target and see whether this produces a noticeable improvement in image quality.
I'm also thinking about trying a 200mm f/2.8 lens.
The longer focal length would give me a tighter field of view, allowing me to frame some objects more closely and explore what else I can capture without using a tracker.
I'm particularly interested to see how it performs on some of the fainter nebulae and galaxies.
Perhaps I'll eventually invest in a tracker, but for now, I'm happy to keep experimenting with what I have.
After all, the whole point of this project was to find out how much could be achieved without specialist equipment.
And so far, it's been a lot more rewarding than I expected!
Final Thoughts
My first attempts at deep sky astrophotography without a tracker have shown me that you don't always need an expensive, complicated setup to get started.
Sometimes, all you need is a camera, a fast lens, a tripod and the willingness to try something different.
My images might not have the quality or detail of those produced by experienced astrophotographers, but that was never the goal.
I simply wanted to find out whether it was possible to photograph deep sky objects without a tracking mount.
And the answer is yes!
There's still a lot for me to learn, and plenty of room for improvement, but that's part of the fun.
M42 Orion Nebula/ IC 434 Flame Nebula/ NGC 207/ M78
I'm looking forward to seeing what I can achieve with more frames, different lenses and a bit more experience.
If there's one thing I've learned from this experiment, it's that you shouldn't be afraid to try something just because you don't have all the recommended equipment.
You might be surprised by what you can achieve.
Have you ever tried deep sky astrophotography without a tracker?
I'd love to hear about your experiences, the equipment you've used and any tips you might have for getting the most out of short exposures.
Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!
Clear skies, and happy shooting! 🌌
.jpg "Back to 2018 – Analog Dublin on Fuji Acros 100 Film")
