Fellow stargazers & nighttime landscape loners!

[GoodVendettaPhotography]

i used the tokina 11-16 on a crop body - works quite fine, 30sec/f2.8/ISO400 gives decent images.
took some 400 shots (last half hour clouds came in ) and merged all together:


Sternenhimmel über dem Zwüschbi by SwissBear85, on Flickr

On a crop, i would suggest the tokina 11-16 II - should have better flare-controll and other benefits

Great shot! Just out of curiosity, do you take one image with the lens cap on for canceling out noise?

[Axilrod]

Oh, wow, nice! I'd be very interested in this

I just ordered this one:http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=1287-14905

Heard nothing but good things.

[GoodVendettaPhotography]

Oh, wow, nice! I'd be very interested in this

I just ordered this one:http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=1287-14905

Heard nothing but good things.

I would love too see some of your test shots once you've familiarized yourself with it! I'm sure it'll be awesome!

[SwissBear]

i used the tokina 11-16 on a crop body - works quite fine, 30sec/f2.8/ISO400 gives decent images.
took some 400 shots (last half hour clouds came in ) and merged all together:

[...]

On a crop, i would suggest the tokina 11-16 II - should have better flare-controll and other benefits

Great shot! Just out of curiosity, do you take one image with the lens cap on for canceling out noise?

Nope, i exposed a few hundred times 30sec and did some miraculous postproduction with GIOTTO

[Mr Bean]

Any tips on focusing to infinity - I can't see anything on the screen at 10X at these wide angles (except maybe the moon - which I would focus on if it's out).

I have a 5D m3 and I use a laptop, connected via cable to the camera, to focus. The EOS Utility software that comes with the camera allows you to drive the camera via the computer. One of the options is Live View, which can zoom an image on the laptop screen. Much easier than doing it on the back of the camera    (hope that makes sense)

I hired a Zeiss 21mm f2.8 a few weeks back. It uses manual focus, and it does have an infinity stop, like lenses used to have before auto focus. So, that was an easy one to use for night shots. A beautiful lens for such work. I'd like to compare it with the Canon 24mm f1.4, which is a great lens from all accounts. However, I hear there is an element of coma (at the extreme edges) of the 24. The Zeiss had very little coma.

[Don Haines]

Oh, wow, nice! I'd be very interested in this

I just ordered this one:http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=1287-14905

Heard nothing but good things.

I use my telescope mount...Ask at any decent camera store or preferably, astronomy shop.... You are looking for a tracking or a "go to" mount... When I want to see something small I use a T-mount adaptor and shoot through the telescope.... great for things like Jupiter and Saturn... when I am after wider angles I mount the camera on the mount and can shoot time exposures with no motion trails.

BTW, as they come, a Canon shoots 30 sec max exposure... to get a longer exposure you can use a remote control and bulb mode..... you can use a rubber band and a stub of pencil over the shutter release, or you can go full hog and use ipods and apps to really get flexibility. You can also set the camera for "long exposure noise cancellation".

[extremeinstability]

Zeiss 21mm might be my fave now.  The Canon 24L II proved pretty pointless for night sky more open than F2.8 anyway.  Coma extends well into the photo, bad coma, so it tends to make it a little pointless for that added F1.4 to F2.8 range it would allow at night.  Unless one likes big ol wings off their stars I guess.  Samyang 24 F1.4 had less coma and might be interesting.  Canon 14L had plenty of that too. 

[Mr Bean]

Zeiss 21mm might be my fave now.  The Canon 24L II proved pretty pointless for night sky more open than F2.8 anyway.  Coma extends well into the photo, bad coma, so it tends to make it a little pointless for that added F1.4 to F2.8 range it would allow at night.  Unless one likes big ol wings off their stars I guess.  Samyang 24 F1.4 had less coma and might be interesting.  Canon 14L had plenty of that too.

I noticed bad coma in my Canon 35mm f2, which I initially used for testing the 5D m3 with star shots. The 40mm pancake is better (less coma), but not wide enough. IMO, the ultimate test for a lens is to try it with star images, as they really show any flaws (stars should be points of light, not flared out, like coma). And to a large extent, stopping down will minimise coma, but not eliminate it.

[risc32]

please let us know how that tracking mount works out for you. I'd love to play with one, but if i bought one more photography related item, my wife..... it wouldn't be pretty.

 i had a 17-40mm that i used for many things including star shots. it was okay. then i replaced it with a 16-35mmv2. it was better only because of now i was at f2.8, and it was noticeably(just) wider. i've since sold it and now have a pro-optic 14mm. I haven't gotten a chance to do much of anything with it yet, but i'm hoping to give it a go with the night sky over the christmas holiday.

[@!ex]

A "Star Tracker"? I've never heard of that. Is it software or a device?

A device. You put it on top of a tripod, and it is kinda like a wedge whose angle must be set to an angle corresponding to your latitude. A motor on the wedge then drives the camera/telescope mounted to it at 1 rev per 24 hours, thereby "despinning" the Earth. Or to put it another way, it compensates for the rotation of the Earth when you take long exposures, so you don't get star trails. So you can expose for very long times.

Martin

Oh, wow, nice! I'd be very interested in this

This is the star tracker I am drooling over right now.  I imagine it very portable so it wouldn't be a bitch to carry around.  I could take a long exposure with a low ISO of the foreground first, then turn this badboy on and take a long exposure of the stars (low ISO, relatively).  then blend the two images in post.  I know it would be awesome....

http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html

[wickidwombat]

A "Star Tracker"? I've never heard of that. Is it software or a device?

A device. You put it on top of a tripod, and it is kinda like a wedge whose angle must be set to an angle corresponding to your latitude. A motor on the wedge then drives the camera/telescope mounted to it at 1 rev per 24 hours, thereby "despinning" the Earth. Or to put it another way, it compensates for the rotation of the Earth when you take long exposures, so you don't get star trails. So you can expose for very long times.

Martin

Oh, wow, nice! I'd be very interested in this

This is the star tracker I am drooling over right now.  I imagine it very portable so it wouldn't be a bitch to carry around.  I could take a long exposure with a low ISO of the foreground first, then turn this badboy on and take a long exposure of the stars (low ISO, relatively).  then blend the two images in post.  I know it would be awesome....

http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html

nice! do you know if that will work in the southern hemisphere? how do you align in the southern hemisphere anyway?

[dswtan]

[http://www.vixenoptics.com/mounts/polarie.html

nice! do you know if that will work in the southern hemisphere? how do you align in the southern hemisphere anyway?

Works in both hemispheres. To read more, the user manual is online: http://www.vixenoptics.com/PDF/POLARIE%20Manual.pdf

The Polarie is an attractive device, but personally I needed more load-carrying capacity for the Venus transit earlier this year, so I have the AstroTrac TT320X AG as mentioned earlier from Optcorp and other dealers. (Optcorp is good.)

[dswtan]

Zeiss 21mm might be my fave now.  The Canon 24L II proved pretty pointless for night sky more open than F2.8 anyway.  Coma extends well into the photo, bad coma, so it tends to make it a little pointless for that added F1.4 to F2.8 range it would allow at night.

I agree. Same experience with the 24L II, even though I call it my "astronomy lens", which was its original justification. The coma on stars is very disappointing, especially below f/2.8. My checkbook cries to hear the Zeiss is better!

[dswtan]

People may be interested in another example of what the AstroTrac TT320X AG (or any decent tracker) can do once you have aligned it reasonably well, using regular DSLR equipment (ok, quite good equipment).

Here's an example on a 5D2 with 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II at 200mm, 30% crop -- the Andromeda galaxy.
http://500px.com/photo/13988281

The processing story for this is here: http://500px.com/dswtan/stories/63249/andromeda-story

[pedro]

 i had a 17-40mm that i used for many things including star shots. it was okay. then i replaced it with a 16-35mmv2. it was better only because of now i was at f2.8, and it was noticeably(just) wider. i've since sold it and now have a pro-optic 14mm. I haven't gotten a chance to do much of anything with it yet, but i'm hoping to give it a go with the night sky over the christmas holiday.

@risc32: Thanks for sharing your experience with the 17-40. I am pondering on the Sigma 12-24 F/4.5-5.6. I know it is very slow but it seems attractive by its lenght (24mm, good for 500/600 rule photography 600:24 yields 25 seconds of exposure, and at the wide end you are at F/4.5). Can it compensate a 16-35 2.8 wide open? My current 28 F/2.8 does pretty well, although it is quite narrow. As I have never stopped it down to 4.5 I am asking a kinda silly question...Sorry. I'll try to test it out during christmas holidays to get to a better conclusion, but your comment would be welcome anyway. Thanks and cheers, Pedro.

Here's a sample of my Canon 28 F/2.8 with the 5D3 @ISO 10.000 F/3.2 25s exposure

Z96A0762aALTxMasterKLEINDEF by Peter Hauri, on Flickr