Which Lens and more help

Peter69

Peter69

Messages
1,013
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys

I'm of to Yorkshire Moors this week and thought I'd give night sky photography another go. So far I have failed miserably.

First thing is what lens do I use? I have 35 f1.8, a 10-20 f3.5, or the standard 18-55VR kit lens

Secondly after looking at the images here it looks like you stack them or does 3x 20s etc etc mean something different.
I would post some of my attempts but I'd die of embarrassment.

I've read threads and how tos but I'm still missing something
 
All I did when practicing first was 30 second shutter times... and then open manually for a certain time.. All different, ranging from 30 seconds to 2 minutes..

Some people stack and for me I think that's the best option..

Out of them lenses I think you 'may' struggle.. Unless you have a big landscape area, go for the 10-20, but if your doing a big landscape shot, go for the 35..



Are you using a remote digital trigger with tone of setting for increments of shots..?

If so the best thing to do would be set up the 35 do a load of shots for stacking, then do the same for the 10-20.

Shoot wide open and use your lcd screen and zoom in on that to focus on a star, I only focused right out to infinity and back a slight notch but it was fine for my practice :)
 
Thanks, I have a d5100 (unless I can get a D7100 tomorrow). I use the live mode zoomed in for focus.

I do use a remote trigger or the shutter timer. I can also use my smart phone or the inbuilt incremental settings. But what do I do with these?
The art of stacking is lost on me (I have LR5.6 & PS CS6).

What lens would you recommend?
 
Aye, you'd stack them in CS6 if thats the version of PS you have, check out the ton of "How to stack" vids on youtube :)

As for lenses.. it depends..

If you're going for a stacked shot with something in the frame, like a house or monument, something wide and wide.. I use a 17-35 2.8 at 17mm and 2.8

If your just shooting the sky, you can use anything I suppose.. but need it large apatured.. Ive always thought to never go lower than 2.8... In theory I don't see why you can't shoot a good bunch of stars using a 70-200 2.8..
 
Youd get star trails after only a few secs @200mm

If your only after stars then my 50 1.8 got this in 15 secs.

092 by mpg Photo's, on Flickr

However it looks like someone splashed paint on a wall, as there is no foreground interest

This is a little better as you have something to scale with
Straight up trees by mpg Photo's, on Flickr

I'm happier with this one although I've not processed it yet
DSC_0348 by mpg Photo's, on Flickr
 
cool. just watched a stacking vid they use grip to align images and remove noise? It saves with layers for PS import later if needed.

No another dumb question foreground focus, how is that achieved? Do I just try and find Hyper focus point i.e my 35 f1.8 @ 34.5m = 17.2m near focus or at infinity I get 34.5m

Is it worth borrowing a Samyang 14mm 2.8? Looking at Matts photos both my lenses should be OK as f3.5 is only 2/3 a stop slower then 2.8 or is that massive when dealing with this type of photography?
 
Just to add the first was a 50mm @1.8
2nd was a 12-24 @12 f4
3rd was my new 14-24 @2.8 on a D810
 
I like the 3rd. If only I could achieve something similar
 
Peter, if you want star trails then Matthew's guide in the link above post has all you need.


If you want the stars to be points rather than trails then, for a single shot, then the 600 rule is useful -

Maximum exposure in seconds before the stars start to form trails = 600/(focal length of the lens x the crop factor of your camera).

As shown in Matt's post you can get some goo shots from a single image.

If you want to stack shots and still have the stars as points then have a look at Deep Sky Stacker - http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html

Dave
 
Whichever you choose, open the lens wide and pump the ISO up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top