Aurora Borealis in Southeast Alaska

[JBPhoto]

Here are a few shots I got on Monday night that you all might like. We don't get to see them very often this far south so this was kinda fun to get out at night and shot. These were all taken with my 5dmkiii with the 24-70 2.8L at 24mm iso640. Please post some more Aurora shots to share.

30 sec, f11

16 sec, f2.8

10 sec, f2.8

 

[pj1974]

Great photos, JBPhoto... and welcome to the forum!

I particularly like the colours in photo #1 and the wavy feeling / repeating theme in photo #3. 8)

Thanks for sharing your settings too. Great shots. As I live in Australia, I can't provide any Aurora shots for you.

Regards

Paul

 

[JBPhoto]

Paul-
Thanks for the welcome. Hopefully I will be posting more of my stuff here later on.
-Justin

 

[Kernuak]

It was quite a bit dimmer in Scotland, but this was with the 5D MkIII and 24mm f/1.4 MkII at f/2, 5 sec, ISO 3200.

 

[rpt]

Great photos, JBPhoto... and welcome to the forum!

I particularly like the colours in photo #1 and the wavy feeling / repeating theme in photo #3. 8)

Thanks for sharing your settings too. Great shots. As I live in Australia, I can't provide any Aurora shots for you.

Regards

Paul

Yes, they are lovely. I like #3. More stars and hints of other colors.

I don't believe this. My iPad does not like my spelling of colors! LOL!

 

[Gino]

Great photos! I would like to start doing this type of night photography....I'm trying to decide between purchasing the 24L II or the 24-70L II. Obviously, the 24L II is going to be better in low light, but I like the flexibility of the 24-70L II for my overall photography needs.

I have the 5D MarkIII....Can anyone share their thoughts between the 24-70L II and the 24L II for night sky photography?
Thanks

 

[DB]

JBPhoto - really like the 1st photo, the long exposure really worked for you, great colour. That's a magazine quality shot.

Kernuak - your pic is great too, it has a Sci-Fi feel to it (like a UFO was about to land over the next ridge). Wonderful photo.

 

[sanfranchristo]

Great photos! I would like to start doing this type of night photography....I'm trying to decide between purchasing the 24L II or the 24-70L II. Obviously, the 24L II is going to be better in low light, but I like the flexibility of the 24-70L II for my overall photography needs.

I have the 5D MarkIII....Can anyone share their thoughts between the 24-70L II and the 24L II for night sky photography?
Thanks

When you say "this type" of night photography, meaning landscape/sky, where long exposures and tripods can be used, then I think the choice seems pretty clear, go with the 24-70L II. The presumptive low-light superiority of the fast prime is effectively negated if you have a still subject or the ability to use a tripod, and the 24-70L II is a wildly versatile lens otherwise (that is reputed to be plenty sharp at 24mm if you are set on using the wide end).

 

[Kernuak]

JBPhoto - really like the 1st photo, the long exposure really worked for you, great colour. That's a magazine quality shot.

Kernuak - your pic is great too, it has a Sci-Fi feel to it (like a UFO was about to land over the next ridge). Wonderful photo.

Thanks DB. It's the first time I've seen them in the UK and only the second attempt at photographing them, but I learnt from my first attempt. I have to say as well, that the 5D MkIII is cleaner for aurora at ISO 3200, than the MkII at ISO 1600.

Great photos! I would like to start doing this type of night photography....I'm trying to decide between purchasing the 24L II or the 24-70L II. Obviously, the 24L II is going to be better in low light, but I like the flexibility of the 24-70L II for my overall photography needs.

I have the 5D MarkIII....Can anyone share their thoughts between the 24-70L II and the 24L II for night sky photography?
Thanks

When you say "this type" of night photography, meaning landscape/sky, where long exposures and tripods can be used, then I think the choice seems pretty clear, go with the 24-70L II. The presumptive low-light superiority of the fast prime is effectively negated if you have a still subject or the ability to use a tripod, and the 24-70L II is a wildly versatile lens otherwise (that is reputed to be plenty sharp at 24mm if you are set on using the wide end).

Actually, aurora are far from being static objects and fast lenses are imperative.Also, if you have too long an exposure, you start getting star trails, which often isn't what you want when shooting aurora. Lenses with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 are the minimum and the faster the better. Ideally you need exposures around 3-5 seconds to get the structure of the aurora. For dimmer ones, such as the one I posted, the structure isn't evident, but for the ones like JBPhoto's, the bands you can see slowly move and you lose some of the impact with longer exposures, so 20 seconds is about the maximum ideally, unless you do timelapse, where the loger shutterspeeds create a smoother transition. While you can get good aurora images with the 24-70 and slower lenses, if you want to concentrate on aurora more specifically, then the 24 f/1.4 is better. It will also produce much higher image quality for more standard landscapes, but you do of course lose the flexibility of a zoom. Ultmately, it comes down to how important overall IQ is to you and how often you want to shoot aurora.

 

[DB]

JBPhoto - really like the 1st photo, the long exposure really worked for you, great colour. That's a magazine quality shot.

Kernuak - your pic is great too, it has a Sci-Fi feel to it (like a UFO was about to land over the next ridge). Wonderful photo.

Thanks DB. It's the first time I've seen them in the UK and only the second attempt at photographing them, but I learnt from my first attempt. I have to say as well, that the 5D MkIII is cleaner for aurora at ISO 3200, than the MkII at ISO 1600.

Just read 'Poplar Photography' Nov-12 issue review of 1DX compared to the Nikon D4 and they said that from ISO 50 to 1600 results were categorized as 'Excellent' for both cameras, but that the 1DX had a 1-stop advantage over the D4 (especially in resolution > 2500 lines per picture height), however neither compared to the 5D3 which they say is 'Excellent' all the way up ISO=12,800. So despite all the whining and complaining about 'price' or the Sony Exmor sensor in the D800 etc., the 5D3 is the new master of low-light and of course 'night' photography.

 

[Kernuak]

JBPhoto - really like the 1st photo, the long exposure really worked for you, great colour. That's a magazine quality shot.

Kernuak - your pic is great too, it has a Sci-Fi feel to it (like a UFO was about to land over the next ridge). Wonderful photo.

Thanks DB. It's the first time I've seen them in the UK and only the second attempt at photographing them, but I learnt from my first attempt. I have to say as well, that the 5D MkIII is cleaner for aurora at ISO 3200, than the MkII at ISO 1600.

Just read 'Poplar Photography' Nov-12 issue review of 1DX compared to the Nikon D4 and they said that from ISO 50 to 1600 results were categorized as 'Excellent' for both cameras, but that the 1DX had a 1-stop advantage over the D4 (especially in resolution > 2500 lines per picture height), however neither compared to the 5D3 which they say is 'Excellent' all the way up ISO=12,800. So despite all the whining and complaining about 'price' or the Sony Exmor sensor in the D800 etc., the 5D3 is the new master of low-light and of course 'night' photography.

One thing about the MkIII noise characteristics, it cleans up very well, especially for something where there isn't much fine detail. It is of course more difficult to clean up for fur or feathers.

 

[JBPhoto]

Thanks DB and others for the kind words. This was the first time that I have had the mk3 out at night, and it won't be the last now I’m looking at telescopes to attach the camera to and start trying astrophotography. Its just more money right???? ;D

 

[optikus]

Hi,

saw this today in the morning frist. Heavy voodoo ... Very fine pictures of the aurora borealis, though the sun isn't at maximum activity we have no chance to see something in germany ...

Jörg