So after my failed attempts at the Lunar Eclipse the other night, I thought I would try again 24 hours later. Of course the skys were completely clear last night over my house and full moon. So I thought I'd mess around a bit.
I learned a few more things, that's good I guess. But I'm very unhappy with the noise in several images. I know that digital cameras have some issues with long exposures much like color neg film has issues with color shift during long exposures. So how can it be remedied?

These two shots where taken with my Canon Digi Rebel (I know, not the best body) with the Canon 18-55 EFS lens (I know not the best lens either) so I could include some foreground.

Exposure: F22 @ 920 seconds ISO 100.
<a href="http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj277/ChasWG/?action=view¤t=Starstreaks1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj277/ChasWG/Starstreaks1.jpg" border="0" alt="Star Streaks & noise"></a>

I did do some noise reduction.

This one I complete forgot about and let it go way too long. Wife started talking... blah, blah, blah... I forgot te camera on the rear deck for a while.

Exposure: F22 @ 6553 seconds ISO 100(I didn't do the math, but that's several hours I'm sure)
<a href="http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj277/ChasWG/?action=view¤t=MoonFlaresmaller.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj277/ChasWG/MoonFlaresmaller.jpg" border="0" alt="Moon Flare"></a>

I messed with it because other wise it was totally strange and odd looking. The color shift was unique to say it nicely.

So is there anything that can be done short of buying a new body or is that common with digi cams?

I've found a huge sat dish not far from home and I want to do a long exposure with star trails rotating around the dish.

basically, after taking a picture, the camera will make another exposure without opening the shutter and subtract the resulting noise from the original picture

after long exposures...this explains a lot :P

The noise reduction in ACR and others like Noise Ninja are great too..

I really don't think this camera has that feature. Unless it's in some super, double secret, hidden menu that I'm not awear of (possible I guess).

Anyone know for sure?

F22 really lets a small amount of light hence much longer... I think if you used F8, the time could have been reduced by a factor of four at least (or is it five, can't remember the stops off the top of my head). So shorter exposure time, less hot pixels.

Also, if you have the CS3 RAW converter I noticed that it cleans out most hot pixels automatically.

That's a good idea for something that doesn't need a long exposure.

Example is this one...

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tanm/1353800210/"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1331/1353800210_5972f18e75.jpg" alt="20070908-213529" /></a>

The settings were ISO 100, F4, 1212 seconds.

You can also do multiple shots. I have one somewhere where I think the exposure was 10 minutes controlled via a timer and took three shots. Layered them together afterwards in Photoshop.

Using anything longer personally for me leads to a lot more hot pixels

as long as you have light

I have learned a while ago that there are a coupleof things that you should never get rid of. 1) Never sell off any good German microphone, they are ar always good and hold their value, no matter what the next video format will be. And 2) Canon EOS Lenses are prety much the same. They my not be you favorite one, but it doesn't hurt to hang on to them.