Milky way photo settings

Question... Is it even worth trying to shoot night sky shots with a slower lens? My wide angle lens only opens up to f4.

And am I understanding this "rule of 600" thing correctly that if I shoot 10mm on my crop sensor camera that exposures under 40 seconds won't show any motion blur? (600/(10*1.5))=40?

Considering I'd have to jump on a plane or drive over a few State lines to escape light pollution I don't think it's worth it for me to buy a second wide angle lens with a wider aperture just for night skies.
 
Vegan.Hiker said:
Question... Is it even worth trying to shoot night sky shots with a slower lens? My wide angle lens only opens up to f4.
Click to expand...

Totally! The vast majority of what I've done at night has been at f3.5. Even now I usually leave my 16-35 on which only goes to f4. Even when I had the 16-35 f2.8 I still bumped it up a couple stops because opening it up made it look kind of soft. I still have the 14mm Rokinon mentioned in this thread, but I pretty much never use it.

Vegan.Hiker said:
And am I understanding this "rule of 600" thing correctly that if I shoot 10mm on my crop sensor camera that exposures under 40 seconds won't show any motion blur? (600/(10*1.5))=40?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure on that rule of 600 thing, but it also depends on where in the sky you shoot. Stars will blur faster closer to the equator and less so closer to the north star. 30 seconds is a safe exposure at 10mm on a 1.6 crop with minimal star blur. Much beyond that and I think you'll start to see it.
 
That's great news.. Thanks Nick. Now I just need to get away from these city lights.
 
I'm not sure on that rule of 600 thing...
Click to expand...

What's about the rules of 500 or 300?
Some photographer use that on their systems.
An astro tracer is maybe another helpful thing on slow lenses.


Gesendet via iPhone 6S mit TapaTalk
 
I use the rule of 500 to calculate the length I can open my shutter before the stars begin to blur related to the focal length of my lens.
Anyway, for most wide angle lenses no wider than 16mm you are good with a 25-30 second exposure.
 
Vegan.Hiker said:
Question... Is it even worth trying to shoot night sky shots with a slower lens? My wide angle lens only opens up to f4.
Click to expand...

This was shot at f4

25189943040_b4f070ec60_c.jpg
 
Regarding the "Rule of 500/600". That only applies to the resolution of older 6-8 MP cameras. With many of the newer cameras now having 24MP+, you need to use the Rule of 300 (or less).
 
Michael said:
An astro tracker is maybe another helpful thing on slow lenses.
Click to expand...

+1 and then some !!

While many people spend exorbitant amounts of money for the fastest lens' money can buy, a simple tracker like the iOptron SkyTracker only costs $299.00 and will allow you to shoot for minutes, instead of seconds, using your existing lens', if you want.

25735685836_3062cc70b8_b.jpg



Which also gives you opportunities for shots like this, with just a short 85mm lens.

24751549601_00857cc234_b.jpg
 
Hey guys...sorry to revive an old thread but I've got a question:

I read @Nick's resource on star trails and decided to give it a try last night. I was doing 30 second exposures, then using Starstax to stack the photos. When I got back to my computer and downloaded the shots, I noticed I have a bunch of red and blue spots in the darker foreground of my pictures. I read up on it a little today and found one suggestion to get rid of them is to turn on the Long Exposure noise reduction on my Canon, but if I do that I will have 30-second gaps in my star trails, and I don't want that obviously. Has anyone else dealt with this, and how did you fix it? I am using the kit lens, 18-55mm on a Canon T3. Not sure if I just need to upgrade the equipment altogether, or is this something that can be fixed?

ETA: Please feel free to move this to another thread if it belongs somewhere else...
 
Last edited:
@Nick I'll have to verify this, but I believe it was 30 seconds, F/3.5, ISO 800. I'm on my work computer right now and don't have the pictures on here, when I get home I'll post a sample of what I've got and I'll verify those settings.
 
MikeM said:
Hey guys...sorry to revive an old thread but I've got a question:

I read @Nick's resource on star trails and decided to give it a try last night. I was doing 30 second exposures, then using Starstax to stack the photos. When I got back to my computer and downloaded the shots, I noticed I have a bunch of red and blue spots in the darker foreground of my pictures. I read up on it a little today and found one suggestion to get rid of them is to turn on the Long Exposure noise reduction on my Canon, but if I do that I will have 30-second gaps in my star trails, and I don't want that obviously. Has anyone else dealt with this, and how did you fix it? I am using the kit lens, 18-55mm on a Canon T3. Not sure if I just need to upgrade the equipment altogether, or is this something that can be fixed?

ETA: Please feel free to move this to another thread if it belongs somewhere else...
Click to expand...


Sounds like hot pixels. Usually Lightroom or Adobe CameraRAW automatically fixes those if you open the RAW files in there first.
 
Thanks for the info @IntrepidXJ

So, I have not used Lightroom yet, as I am still getting into this and have just been using the software that came with my camera, Canon Digital Photo Professional. Is it a process that you run in Lightroom, or does it automatically make the adjustments for you when you open the Raw files? I wonder, if it is a process to run, if I can run the same thing in Canon DPP? If not, then I guess I should just bite the bullet and make the purchase of Lightroom (which I've been wanting to do for a while now anyway).
 
MikeM said:
Thanks for the info @IntrepidXJ

So, I have not used Lightroom yet, as I am still getting into this and have just been using the software that came with my camera, Canon Digital Photo Professional. Is it a process that you run in Lightroom, or does it automatically make the adjustments for you when you open the Raw files? I wonder, if it is a process to run, if I can run the same thing in Canon DPP? If not, then I guess I should just bite the bullet and make the purchase of Lightroom (which I've been wanting to do for a while now anyway).
Click to expand...

The second you use lightroom you will wish you did all along.
 
MikeM said:
Thanks for the info @IntrepidXJ

So, I have not used Lightroom yet, as I am still getting into this and have just been using the software that came with my camera, Canon Digital Photo Professional. Is it a process that you run in Lightroom, or does it automatically make the adjustments for you when you open the Raw files? I wonder, if it is a process to run, if I can run the same thing in Canon DPP? If not, then I guess I should just bite the bullet and make the purchase of Lightroom (which I've been wanting to do for a while now anyway).
Click to expand...


slc_dan said:
The second you use lightroom you will wish you did all along.
Click to expand...

What Dan said! It's not even worth messing with that other stuff. If you're going to put effort into getting a good shot, it's worth getting Lightroom immediately.
 
MikeM said:
Thanks for the info @IntrepidXJ

So, I have not used Lightroom yet, as I am still getting into this and have just been using the software that came with my camera, Canon Digital Photo Professional. Is it a process that you run in Lightroom, or does it automatically make the adjustments for you when you open the Raw files?
Click to expand...

Lightroom usually fixes hot pixels automatically when you first open the file. You don;t have to run anything. If it does miss any, you can always clone those out in Lightroom pretty easily, too.
 
OK, twist my arm! :)

So, one more dumb question... does everyone just use the cloud-based software, Lightroom CC, where you just pay the $9.99/month (and I believe it includes Photoshop CC, too)? Or can you still just pay one time and get the software download on your PC?
 
MikeM said:
OK, twist my arm! :)

So, one more dumb question... does everyone just use the cloud-based software, Lightroom CC, where you just pay the $9.99/month (and I believe it includes Photoshop CC, too)? Or can you still just pay one time and get the software download on your PC?
Click to expand...

Cloud. Do they even still offer the packaged version?
 
Nick said:
Cloud. Do they even still offer the packaged version?
Click to expand...

Haha, not sure, but thought I'd at least ask.

Turns out, as an adjunct at the local college, I might get a discount on Adobe products... woohoo! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top