"Skies" Picture thread.

[toothybugs]

This is some great advice here. The wider your lens, the longer time you'll get to exposure without trails. Also, you want to be as wide open as possible aperture wise, or if you do go to a higher ISO, you may want to be a stop or two narrower than your largest aperture to gain a bit of sharpness, if that type of thing effects your lens. Looks like your focus is on as the stars appear sharp. I'd try going to 30 seconds at 3200 or even 6400 just to see what is there - usually a good way to find the exact location of the milky way even if you can't see it with the naked eye. A FF body will really help with this type of photography to reduce noise.

Here are a couple of recent composite shots stitched together in PS using the 6D and Samyang 14mm 1.8. Not perfect and there is noise pollution but I've been trying to improve this type of photography on the limited times I've been getting out! Basically 20 second exposures at 3200, f1.8, focused to infinity, then stitched.

Geez Jordan, the bar has been set

Jay, thanks for the commentary and hints. I have plans to go through a couple batteries this weekend if the skies are more or less clear, and certainly the following weekend (new moon).

I bought a UWA specifically for landscapes and skies (thanks for picking the Skies topic Jay), so far >98% of the shots taken with it have had no roof over it and it's barely a week old! The aperture is a little tight on it though, which is my main complaint. Very fun lens. I shot these wide open (10mm @ 4.5) for 22 seconds and ISO 800. Didn't think to go higher due to moon interference. However, I learned an AWFUL lot since I did these, to the point of skipping lunch at work. I had a thing, for some reason, about layering photos and hoped I could just "do it" but no such luck. In hindsight I probably would have been okay taking 20 shots of one spot instead of all over! Oh well. All good things will come in time.

 

[IPT]

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanroovers/14824187797" title="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way by Jordan Roovers, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3862/14824187797_26b8d23414_c.jpg" width="800" height="640" alt="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way"></a>

That's awesome. Very cool.

 

[xtm]

This is some great advice here. The wider your lens, the longer time you'll get to exposure without trails. Also, you want to be as wide open as possible aperture wise, or if you do go to a higher ISO, you may want to be a stop or two narrower than your largest aperture to gain a bit of sharpness, if that type of thing effects your lens. Looks like your focus is on as the stars appear sharp. I'd try going to 30 seconds at 3200 or even 6400 just to see what is there - usually a good way to find the exact location of the milky way even if you can't see it with the naked eye. A FF body will really help with this type of photography to reduce noise.

Here are a couple of recent composite shots stitched together in PS using the 6D and Samyang 14mm 1.8. Not perfect and there is noise pollution but I've been trying to improve this type of photography on the limited times I've been getting out! Basically 20 second exposures at 3200, f1.8, focused to infinity, then stitched.

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanroovers/14307058568" title="PinerySummerSolstice by Jordan Roovers, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2906/14307058568_7ecea0c3a2_b.jpg" width="1024" height="410" alt="PinerySummerSolstice"></a>

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanroovers/14824187797" title="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way by Jordan Roovers, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3862/14824187797_26b8d23414_c.jpg" width="800" height="640" alt="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way"></a>

Good stuff Jordan :thumbsup:

 

[faithenfire]

That is pretty. Use a polarizer on this one? No lens flare despite shooting right into the sun!

nope just a straight shot. i didn't do much but clean up some spots on the lens and add a little contrast.

 

[JaYbIrD1969]

This is some great advice here. The wider your lens, the longer time you'll get to exposure without trails. Also, you want to be as wide open as possible aperture wise, or if you do go to a higher ISO, you may want to be a stop or two narrower than your largest aperture to gain a bit of sharpness, if that type of thing effects your lens. Looks like your focus is on as the stars appear sharp. I'd try going to 30 seconds at 3200 or even 6400 just to see what is there - usually a good way to find the exact location of the milky way even if you can't see it with the naked eye. A FF body will really help with this type of photography to reduce noise.

Here are a couple of recent composite shots stitched together in PS using the 6D and Samyang 14mm 1.8. Not perfect and there is noise pollution but I've been trying to improve this type of photography on the limited times I've been getting out! Basically 20 second exposures at 3200, f1.8, focused to infinity, then stitched.

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanroovers/14307058568" title="PinerySummerSolstice by Jordan Roovers, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2906/14307058568_7ecea0c3a2_b.jpg" width="1024" height="410" alt="PinerySummerSolstice"></a>

<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jordanroovers/14824187797" title="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way by Jordan Roovers, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3862/14824187797_26b8d23414_c.jpg" width="800" height="640" alt="Kawartha Highlands PP Milky Way"></a>

Good Lord this is spectacular! This belongs on Earthshots.org

 

[jroovers]

Geez Jordan, the bar has been set

Jay, thanks for the commentary and hints. I have plans to go through a couple batteries this weekend if the skies are more or less clear, and certainly the following weekend (new moon).

I bought a UWA specifically for landscapes and skies (thanks for picking the Skies topic Jay), so far >98% of the shots taken with it have had no roof over it and it's barely a week old! The aperture is a little tight on it though, which is my main complaint. Very fun lens. I shot these wide open (10mm @ 4.5) for 22 seconds and ISO 800. Didn't think to go higher due to moon interference. However, I learned an AWFUL lot since I did these, to the point of skipping lunch at work. I had a thing, for some reason, about layering photos and hoped I could just "do it" but no such luck. In hindsight I probably would have been okay taking 20 shots of one spot instead of all over! Oh well. All good things will come in time.

Thanks for the compliments - I love this type of photography when out camping, cottaging, etc... the main thing is to be patient and hope for good conditions - no to little moon, and clear skies, and if you do get good conditions, take a ton of shots! I used to have the Canon 10-22 f3.5-4.5 and it really struggled for this type of photography. You may find that f4.5 at even 3200 or 6400 doesn't get you the results you are hoping for. That said, worth trying. As you noted you can stack photos, but that is a lot of work in post. I toyed around with getting deep sky stacker, but that type of program is for primarily all sky shots with no foreground objects. Also, you can stack in PS, but that too is difficult to get great results, especially with foreground subjects (I like foreground subjects, gives the scene perspective as to where the stars were shot from). If you can afford it, I'd look at picking up a prime lens with a low aperture. I bought the Samyang 14 2.8 (also under the brand Rokinon and Bower) new for $400 for this type of photography. I used to use a Sigma 30 mm prime with my 7D, and it was infinitely better than the Canon 10-22. You can probably get a used Samyang or similar (even a 24 mm Samyang would be good) for $200 to $300 for this type of shooting. Only downfall is that it is manual focus and manual aperture, which isn't a big deal because even with a lens with AF you turn it off anyway.

Anyhow, consider taking some more shots and starting a new thread when you do, and we can discuss it further!

 

[jroovers]

nope just a straight shot. i didn't do much but clean up some spots on the lens and add a little contrast.

Nice :thumbsup:

 

[andrewkw]

From my parents house in Northern Ontario. I hope to move up there in a couple of years. Primarily due to low light pollution.

 

[Omie]

<a href="http://s1014.photobucket.com/user/omie11/media/Canon%20T5i/IMG_1180.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1014.photobucket.com/albums/af269/omie11/Canon%20T5i/IMG_1180.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo IMG_1180.jpg"/></a>

 

[IPT]

From my parents house in Northern Ontario. I hope to move up there in a couple of years. Primarily due to low light pollution.

Amazing. What gear and settings?

 

[andrewkw]

IPT that's just a cheapo 8mm fisheye lens at F3.5 30 second exposure either iso 3200 or 6400 canon ti3

I do most of my imaging through telescopes (these are equivalent to f6 300mm fl lens)

Also yesterdays partial solar eclipse

 

[Misled]

Nice stuff Andrew!!!

 

[ReeferKimberly]

Coolest picture I have ever seen that I 'knew' who took it.

 

[hobbzz]

 

[andrewkw]

Coolest picture I have ever seen that I 'knew' who took it.

Thanks for the kind words. While I have not being doing astrophotography as long as reefing. I take it just as seriously.

 

[jroovers]

IPT that's just a cheapo 8mm fisheye lens at F3.5 30 second exposure either iso 3200 or 6400 canon ti3

I do most of my imaging through telescopes (these are equivalent to f6 300mm fl lens)

These are fantastic! :thumbsup: Tell us more about how they were taken... mounting the camera and lens to the telescope, or just using a long lens and mounting to the tracker mount? How many images stacked, or one single long exposure? Also, what are we looking at - guessing first is a galaxy and second is a nebula?

 

[andrewkw]

The first picture is M31 The andromeda galaxy. The second picture is IC 434 The Horsehead Nebula. There are various other objects in the field of view, to the left is the flame nebula.

An astronomy CCD camera is attached to the telescope. This is a cooled CCD which cools to -30c ambient temp. The colder the chip the less noise produced. These were taken in the winter but even in summer it is possible for the camera to freeze over if moisture gets in. Each picture is several hours of exposure time, however the images are made up of 10 minute exposures stacked with software. This is due to several reasons, primarily because the telescope mount is not capable of tracking for much longer. If you spend big it is possible to do 30 or even 60 minute exposures with almost any focal length. These are "wide field" shots, really not any longer FL then a telephoto lens. I also shoot higher focal length but that is primarily planetary images up to 5600mm

Planetary imaging is a whole different ballgame. The objects are very bright compared to the deep space objects. They are also very small. If you could see M31 naked eye (you can actually see it as a faint smudge in a dark sky), but the entire object in the sky is more then 3 times the size of a full moon. Where as if you've ever seen Venus or Jupiter in the sky or Mars when it's extremely close they are just slightly bigger then the largest star (but brighter).

Another reason not to go too long with exposure times is satellites you can see one in the m31 image. They leave trails and if you're taking a 30 minute exposure several can pass in the time. The software does remove them most of the time but for some reason that one remained. Since these were taken from a dark sky there really isn't too much issues as far as light pollution but from my home location you need to use different filters, gradient removals ect. Also dark frames, and flat frames are added to further reduce noise and vignetting. It's really a complicated process comparable to trying to explain an SPS reef to someone in a few paragraphs. For several years I was out imaging every clear night from my light polluted skies, but after my parents moved up north I just want to image there and focus on planetary from here. What takes 1hour of exposure time in dark sky I cannot reproduce here in 10 hours. That being said there are plenty of long long exposure images that are taken over several nights. I have seen people take pictures that were taken over several YEARS!

Only problem out there is its a 7hr drive to the reef shop, but regardless I do plan on moving out there to further pursue astrophotography and also enjoy a quiet nature filled life, vs the go go lifestyle of suburbs / city.

A few more points for people who don't live in big cities. You can do a lot with just a camera and a tripod. Regular SLRS are not as sensitive to the red spectrum as astronomy cameras. It's common practice for people to remove the IR filter from Canon slr's to make them more sensitive. For a few hundred dollars you can buy a small tracking mount that weighs a few pounds and really opens up the possibilities just be warned this can be more addicting then the reefs.

Here is one more simple picture showing various objects you can pick up on a camera in a shoot 30 second exposure. ISO 6400 so lots of noise but it really is that easy capture these things from a dark sky.