Night Sky

[jeffdo]

Hi, I have done a bit of research on taking night sky pictures. I want to take some shots of the Milky Way near a couple of landmarks in New Hampshire. Being a bit of a novice here, I have read a few blogs where people are saying Canon lenses don't cut it because of bad coma. Is that accurate? and recommendations as an example for a Rokinon 24 over the 24L that canon makes.

I only have 3 lenses at the moment with my 5d3. I've got a 24-105L, 100macroL and the 70-300L.

My results with the 24-105L weren't impressive. I'm going to try the macro lens this weekend if I get a clear night, with the assumption that being a prime its light gathering will be significantly better? but I'm not adverse to picking up the Rokinon 24 if it is actually good for this type of shot. The problem is I understand it can be soft, and I'm not sure what use I would have for it besides night shots, where the 24L I could see myself using more.

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[nonac]

Check out Jennifer Wu Photography. She is one of Canon's "Explorers of Light," and has a book out on night sky photography that is really good. I saw her speak last year and her favorite night sky lens is the canon 24L 1.4.

 

[risc32]

I think you are going to have to figure out what focal length is going to give you what you want in your photos, framing wise. I'm pretty new at this also, but i've been able to gleam a few things. If you are going to be using a 100mm instead of say 24mm you are going to have to make adjustments for star trails by using a shorter exposure time. And while your 100mm will go to f2.8, you will find that you can get more light(exposure) from your 24mm f4 due to the ability to keep the exposure time longer. that is, 2.8 is 2x light as f4, but 100mm needs about 4x less exposure time than 24mm before you start to get star trails, so you've given up that 2.8 advantage plus some.
please excuse me if you know all this. We get all kinds in here, and i for one sure don't know everything, and i don't expect others to either, so ... so there you go i guess.

 

[preppyak]

I'm not adverse to picking up the Rokinon 24 if it is actually good for this type of shot. The problem is I understand it can be soft, and I'm not sure what use I would have for it besides night shots, where the 24L I could see myself using more.

Thanks,
Jeff

Wrong Rokinon lens. Get the 14mm f/2.8, generally considered one of the best astro lenses out there. It's got a hard-stop for infinity, and the f/2.8 is plenty at that focal length. Honest truth is many lenses are not great for night work, as they are designed for other purposes. There's only a small handful of lenses that are ideal, and that Rokinon is the cheapest.

Night photography needs 3 key things

1. Dark skies (way away from cities, you can see here: http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/). No combo of high ISO and f/1.4 will make up for light pollution.

2. High ISO/large aperture (5D3 is a good option)

3. Wide angle (allows you to take slower shutter speeds)

The difference between your 24-105 at 24mm f/4 vs 14mm f/2.8 in night photography is pretty big, and in many cases, will be the difference between an ok night shot, and a great one with the milky way clear.

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

Not a novice, and I hate to jump into an existing forum, but I believe the answer may also help the OP.

I shoot weddings, but I live way out in the boondocks (though orange on the map that was linked).

For astro work, I was thinking the 5Diii and 24 1.4L, but I have no idea what to do for settings. When shooting at the moon, I did fast shutter work, but what about the Milky Way like the OP was asking about. Is it something I should attack wide open, stopped down, quickly, open shutter? I do not need exact specs, just a quick response, but I do believe I should turn it on its side and aim South, yes?

Anyway, I hope the answers help the OP as well as myself. It's not too often I am in the dark in photography, but astro work would definitely be one of those areas.

Thank you all greatly for your help!

Cheers,
-Tabor

 

[kkelis]

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8


These 2 are the best lenses you can buy for wide angle astrophoto. Forget the canon 1.4. Also a good tripod is recommended and timer release.
Also getting away from city lights as far away possible is very important, maybe the most important.

Here is a link to my 500px profile if you are interested. You might find the exif data useful.

https://500px.com/alexander_d

Here is another link to a timelapse video i made with some milky way scenes ( skip to 4:00 )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDv7laP1G54

I hope this helps a bit

 

[mb]

Hi Alexander / xxelis,

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8

These 2 are the best lenses you can buy for wide angle astrophoto. Forget the canon 1.4.

what is so bad about the Canon 24mm f/1.4? The price tag, or more?

Regards,
Mattias

 

[lintoni]

I found this link useful. One of the reasons I bought the Samyang 14mm was for night skies:

http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/

 

[tron]

Hi Alexander / xxelis,

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8

These 2 are the best lenses you can buy for wide angle astrophoto. Forget the canon 1.4.

what is so bad about the Canon 24mm f/1.4? The price tag, or more?

Regards,
Mattias

This is wrong about the Canon 24 1/4

http://www.lenstip.com/245.7-Lens_review-Canon_EF_24_mm_f_1.4L_II_USM_Coma_and_astigmatism.html

COMA!

 

[janmaxim]

Hi Alexander / xxelis,

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8

These 2 are the best lenses you can buy for wide angle astrophoto. Forget the canon 1.4.

That, and you don't need AF for this.

what is so bad about the Canon 24mm f/1.4? The price tag, or more?

Regards,
Mattias

This is wrong about the Canon 24 1/4

http://www.lenstip.com/245.7-Lens_review-Canon_EF_24_mm_f_1.4L_II_USM_Coma_and_astigmatism.html

COMA!

 

[Djaaf]

Yep, as the previous posters said : for wide-field astro photo, you'll need a Samyang lens. They're pretty much the only ones to do wide aperture with almost no coma (maybe Zeiss too, but i've yet to see a test for coma with the 18/21mm Zeiss lenses).
The Canon 16-35 f/4L is mostly comma-free, but F/4 is really not ideal.

Now, let's talk about parameters.
Two things to remember :
the Earth is spinning. That means that the stars are moving relative to you. That in turns means that if you take too long an exposure, stars won't be points but little arcs. The rule of thumbs on that is that you should'nt take an exposure longer than 400/focal. That means do not go higher than 28s with a 14mm and no more than 4s with a 100mm. Longer than that, and you'll need a specialized mount (Astrotrac or equivalent)
(Funny thing about that rule is that the more you look to the north, the longer the exposure can be... So, just take it as a baseline and adjust as needed)

Next thing to remember : the widest opening the better. Even if you got coma in the corners at f/2.8 and no comma at f/4. To get the same amount of light, you'll need to double the exposure time. And doubling the time generally means getting little arcs instead of stars. So... crop the corners, but stay wide open.

Now, to the last parameter of our trinity : Isos.
Not sure how the 5D3 compares to the 6D on that front, but you'll need to go as high as possible.
With the 6D, it means you can go for at least 6400Isos and even 12800.
It may depends on the temperature. The colder the better (for the sensor. If it's really cold, keep a few batteries in your pockets, they'll drain really fast...). You may get better results at 12800Isos on a cold january night than at 3200Isos in July. So... take your ski gear and get out in the winter.

Sample shot with the 6D and the 14mm f/2.8 Samyang at 12800Isos :


Same shot but at 6400 Isos :


Good Luck !

Djaaf.

 

[jeffdo]

Wrong Rokinon lens. Get the 14mm f/2.8, generally considered one of the best astro lenses out there. It's got a hard-stop for infinity, and the f/2.8 is plenty at that focal length. Honest truth is many lenses are not great for night work, as they are designed for other purposes. There's only a small handful of lenses that are ideal, and that Rokinon is the cheapest.

Thanks, I think I am going to grab the 14mm. Appreciate the help.

 

[jeffdo]

Yep, as the previous posters said : for wide-field astro photo, you'll need a Samyang lens. They're pretty much the only ones to do wide aperture with almost no coma (maybe Zeiss too, but i've yet to see a test for coma with the 18/21mm Zeiss lenses).
The Canon 16-35 f/4L is mostly comma-free, but F/4 is really not ideal.
Djaaf.

Thanks, this is great advice. Your sample pictures were amazing.

Is Samyang just making another version of the Rokinon lens or vice versa?

If I am going to buy another L, I'd rather get something I'll use more than the 24L at that cost.

 

[jeffdo]

Rokinon 24 f/1.4
Rokinon 14 f/2.8

Here is a link to my 500px profile if you are interested. You might find the exif data useful.

https://500px.com/alexander_d

You have some amazing shots there as well, thanks I am definitely decided on the Rokinon.

 

[Djaaf]

Samyang is the lens maker.
The lenses are then sold under quite a few brand names (Rokinon, Samyang, Bower, etc...)
Depends on where you live, mostly. In France, there's only Samyang. In the US, it's mostly Rokinon from what i see on these forums.

Djaaf.

 

[lintoni]

Yep, as the previous posters said : for wide-field astro photo, you'll need a Samyang lens. They're pretty much the only ones to do wide aperture with almost no coma (maybe Zeiss too, but i've yet to see a test for coma with the 18/21mm Zeiss lenses).
The Canon 16-35 f/4L is mostly comma-free, but F/4 is really not ideal.
Djaaf.

Thanks, this is great advice. Your sample pictures were amazing.

Is Samyang just making another version of the Rokinon lens or vice versa?

If I am going to buy another L, I'd rather get something I'll use more than the 24L at that cost.

Made by Samyang, also sold under the Rokinon, Bower and other names.

@ Djaff - wonderful photos!