Taking photos of stars

[NTP66]

It was finally a clear night out here, so I figured I'd try and get a few shots of the stars. This was my first time ever attempting anything like this, and as such, a lot of photos were scrapped. The shot below is probably my favorite, which may or may not tell you how bad the rest were.



I took this with my D5200 using my Nikkor 16-85 lens (16mm, f/11 , ISO 800, @20 seconds). Any tips for the future?

 

[IPT]

good start. There's someone on here really good at astrophotography so I'm sure he'll chime in. Any reason you got the house in it? I like to silhouette the trees against the sky as they provide a deep black and nice contrast. Can't be certain but it also looks like there might be some light pollution around there. For stars you really want to be far from any lights. Looks like you got a light cloud layer coming in from the bottom left. That creates that softness and ghostly look but it robs the image of the deep contrast you're shooting for.

I usually shoot the aurora and stars are incidental. However, they're there so if I can make use of a constellation I will . Note the big dipper. Something you might consider. Lastly, post processing. Sometimes a little boost in contrast can help the stars pop a little more.



It usually requires a double exposure, but a house can give a sense of warmth. Especially at night with the warm glow of the lights illuminating against the dark background of a night sky.

 

[NTP66]

The only reason I got the house in the photo is because it was the only one I actually liked. I didn't even realize it until I woke up this morning, but I had VR turned in while using a tripod, which would explain the shakiness of the other photos (no idea why this one turned out okay).

And you're right, there's a bit of light pollution in the photo. The orange glow you can see on the left side of the house and the tree in the right is from streetlights. In some of the other shots, I took them at 24-30mm to get beyond the trees and such in hopes of avoiding that.

I wouldn't be able to escape lights near my house, but turning off VR might have helped some of the shots that I took of the tree line in my yard where the moon was set between branches. I'll have to give that another try soon if another opportunity presents itself. It sounds like it'll be pretty difficult to get anything good in my areas because all of the sources of light.

Your shots, BTW, are magnificent. Those are the kind of shots that made me put down my P&S and buy a DSLR to grow with.

 

[reepher315]

Gotta love some stars thanks for sharing

 

[IPT]

Your shots, BTW, are magnificent. Those are the kind of shots that made me put down my P&S and buy a DSLR to grow with.

You'd be amazed at what a P&S can do. In fact I think that second pic is with a P&S while I was out on a bike ride. I used my handlebars as a tripod (I think, though it might not be this exact shot I know I've done it successfully before). There are limitations of course like the noise and being stuck with whatever focal length and aperature is on the camera

Yes, as you mentioned shooting with IS or VR when tripod mounted especially with a long exposure is generally not recommended. If a lot of you images where blurry also consider vibration from shutter release. Did you press it like you normally would, or use a timer or remote release? I found using the timer or a remote release significantly increase the number of sharp images I got.

Light pollution is difficult to deal with. Not only the ambient light on the tress, but if you're close to a lot of light it lowers the punch ofthe sky. Especially if there's any sort of atmospheric stuff going on to reflect that light back at you. Sadly the only was (I know of) to deal with it is get away from it. I don;t know if you've ever seen a sky without light pollution in the area but it'll blow your mind.I'm originally from NY and the first time I was in the backcountry of Utah and saw the night sky I was stunned. It looked like a planetarium! I had no idea the sky could actually look like that in the "real world". Same down in Fiji, it was amazing. Still, plenty of good photos have been taken in less then ideal locations so shoot and learn, shoot and learn!

 

[NTP66]

I was using a remote release for the shots. My camera has no mirror lock up mode that's useable when shooting, but again, I forgot about another setting that might have helped - exposure delay, where the camera waits an extra second for the mirror to flip up. I'm not sure if this would have helped, but you never know.

I live in the Philly area, and we don't get those clear skies like you get the further west you go. I'm going to try and take advantage of the advice and see if I can get better shots, even if I have to deal with ambient light.

I don't know why I didn't do this the last few times I went, but seeing the stars from Maui nearly blew my mind. I had never seen the sky so clear, and that many stars out and about. I'm definitely going to spend some time taking night shots the next time we go, since the conditions will be optimal (the resort we stay at shuts off all lights at night because of the sea turtles).

 

[jroovers]

That is good for a first go, nice and sharp. I'm no pro but I enjoy this type of shooting, my advice would be to stay at 16mm, but shoot as wide open as you'll lens will allow (i.e. f11 is way to small an aperture, you need to allow way more light into the lens). Similarly, jack the ISO up to 3200 or even 6400, and then try again at 16mm and 20 seconds. You'll see a ton more. The longer the focal length, the greater the effect of the moving earth will be (i.e. you'll need a shorter shutter duration to keep the image sharp). Use a tripod, and self timer of 2 to 10 seconds is usually good enough, just avoid shaking the camera or the surface you are standing on (decks will have some give if you move around).

I like images with something in the foreground. A pure night shot of the milky way is kinda cool, but nothing to give it perspective. Unless you are shooting specific object or constellation, nice to have something there. These are a couple of single exposures with the Canon 6D and Samyang 14mm 2.8, wide open, ISO - 3200 to 6400, exposure ~20 seconds.

Light pollution is sometimes unavoidable, like when trying to shoot due south with the milky way in the summertime in Ontario. Sometimes though it adds interesting colour. Occasionally, you get lucky and capture shooting stars.

 

[jroovers]

That is unreal! Reminds me of interstellar when they're going through the wormhole. I've never even seen the northern lights - one day hoping to get far enough north to both see and photograph them

 

[IPT]

That is unreal! Reminds me of interstellar when they're going through the wormhole. I've never even seen the northern lights - one day hoping to get far enough north to both see and photograph them

Thanks, you should come up. Seeing them dance in real life can never be conveyed in a photograph. They'll blow our mind!

Great advice for the OP. Stuff I guess I do automatically and forgot to mention. I usually shoot at 24mm sometimes 15mm. My 24 mm is the F1.4 I bought specifically for the aurora to shorten my exposure time. I remembered someone posting some killer star photos lately and it was you . Great stuff.

I recently got the 6D but we've had no aurora to shoot (or it's been cloudy so I couldn't!). Did you do much post processing or did they come out that clean with the high ISO?

 

[jroovers]

Thanks, you should come up. Seeing them dance in real life can never be conveyed in a photograph. They'll blow our mind!

Great advice for the OP. Stuff I guess I do automatically and forgot to mention. I usually shoot at 24mm sometimes 15mm. My 24 mm is the F1.4 I bought specifically for the aurora to shorten my exposure time. I remembered someone posting some killer star photos lately and it was you . Great stuff.

I recently got the 6D but we've had no aurora to shoot (or it's been cloudy so I couldn't!). Did you do much post processing or did they come out that clean with the high ISO?

I've yet to convince my wife to go north with me for even a weekend to see them . I'd like to go to Churchill in the next couple of years for both bears and northern lights, and Alaska is high on that list too!

You'll love the 6d for this type of shooting. The comparison noise wise at higher ISOs is crazy compared to my 7D. I don't do much in PP, the best shots look great right out of the body. I do use LR for some colour and luminance NR. Also, using the contrast, highlights, blacks, saturation, and vibrance sliders allows you to bring out the stars and make the MW pop. Depending on the lens, I do use a correction profile sometimes. All that only takes a couple of minutes in post.

Another thing to the OP, turn your lens to manual, and focus to infinity

 

[Reef Bass]

The comparison noise wise at higher ISOs is crazy compared to my 7D.

I can also attest to the terrific high iso handling of the 6D.

 

[Misled]

My wife took this with a cheepo P&S. If you're from da berg, you should know her. I'm the guy with my back towards the camera.

Not too bad for a P&S.

Oh wait, you meant the stars in the sky. Nevermind.

 

[NTP66]

I appreciate all of the advice. I'm glad I asked, because in the searches I was doing before I went out to take some shots, a lot of the advice was completely different and didn't make sense to me. It's actually pretty clear outside right now, and given that I'm going to be up all night because of the prime time game (Steelers), I might give it another shot tonight.

Jesse, I recognize the face, but couldn't tell you her name. I would have just posted a pic of my father if we were talking about local "stars", since he covers hockey in the area (the enemy) and is on CSN Philly.

 

[IPT]

I've yet to convince my wife to go north with me for even a weekend to see them . I'd like to go to Churchill in the next couple of years for both bears and northern lights, and Alaska is high on that list too!

Did someone say Churchill?! That was one of the most amazing trips I've ever done! Very expensive, but worth every dime.



OP you should check your lens. Focusing at infinity might work, but my lens is a hair off. If I can I focus on the moon because I've found that if I just set to infinity on my lens and body I'm a tad off tack sharp. I'll use the moon, or shine a powerful headlamp on a tree more than 30' away and focus on that. Another thing I've used are city lights off in the distance. You'll need to experiment with your gear to see what method will work best.

 

[IPT]

My wife took this with a cheepo P&S.

Not too bad for a P&S.

It's not bad at all. Of course she probably uses a Canon .

 

[jroovers]

Did someone say Churchill?! That was one of the most amazing trips I've ever done! Very expensive, but worth every dime.

That's awesome! I'll have to shoot you a PM when I get serious about doing this and get some tips from you

 

[faithenfire]

It's not bad at all. Of course she probably uses a Canon .

only because canon is superior :frog:

 

[Misled]

It's not bad at all. Of course she probably uses a Canon .

only because canon is superior :frog:

Sorry, it was a Nikon.

 

[Philly_Reefer]

I always loved the stars shots, my favorite are long exposure and have the whole star sweeping threw the sky. They are amazing.

 

[MargyKing]

good start. There's someone on here really good at astrophotography so I'm sure he'll chime in. Any reason you got the house in it? I like to silhouette the trees against the sky as they provide a deep black and nice contrast. Can't be certain but it also looks like there might be some light pollution around there. For stars you really want to be far from any lights. Looks like you got a light cloud layer coming in from the bottom left. That creates that softness and ghostly look but it robs the image of the deep contrast you're shooting for.

I usually shoot the aurora and stars are incidental. However, they're there so if I can make use of a constellation I will . Note the big dipper. Something you might consider. Lastly, post processing. Sometimes a little boost in contrast can help the stars pop a little more.



It usually requires a double exposure, but a house can give a sense of warmth. Especially at night with the warm glow of the lights illuminating against the dark background of a night sky.

Nice! the second photo is amazing. I like the mountain on the pic as well as the stars